41–50 of 411 posts
A lot of current news feels very biased, even from sources I previously found unbiased. Fortunately I was recently shared a link to John Mearsheimers 2015 YT video where he very clearly explains what has led to the current situation. In that light I now feel it's a lot easier to filter the news.
The journalist, Isaac Chotiner, thinks he's a lot smarter and in better command of history than John Mearsheimer. That's really annoying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This seems too forgiving of Russia and also the US re: Central and South America. He seems to be saying that Russia/the US reaction is probably morally wrong, but completely expected behavior. And the moral aspect isn't worth considering as history has shown that great powers usually act out of strategic interest not moral consideration. Yeah, it'd be great if great power politics ended. Ukraine trying to change to…
"Blame"/"responsibility"/"at fault" all seem like questions with a certain natural moral slant to them. He's putting moral fault onto the US for failing to properly respect the likely immoral acts of Putin? That's ludicrous.
/sarc
As a Lithuanian... All the „It's the West fault“ crowd is missing the elephant in the room. What is the alternative if West did what Russia want? De-facto Iron curtain still up with tens of millions of people living under authoritarian regimes similar to Belarus and, well, Russia. Yes, it's completely „West fault“ since they could have left us for Russia to eat for lunch. More „West faults“ please.
> Right, but saying that America will not allow countries in the Western hemisphere, most of them democracies, to decide what kind of foreign policy they have—you can say that’s good or bad, but that is imperialism, right? We’re essentially saying that we have some sort of say over how democratic countries run their business.
> We do have that say, and, in fact, we overthrew democratically elected leaders in the Western hemisphere during the Cold War because we were unhappy with their policies. This is the way great powers behave.
> Of course we did, but I’m wondering if we should be behaving that way. When we’re thinking about foreign policies, should we be thinking about trying to create a world where neither the U.S. nor Russia is behaving that way?
> That’s not the way the world works.
What is unsaid is does the world HAVE to behave this way? Are humans capable of cooperation beyond petty short-sighted resource grabs? If the US ceased it's imperial ambitions, and all discrimination and capitalist exploitation ended, would we be able to build a harmonious society where we cooperate on prosperity?
Up until the COVID pandemic, I would have said yes. In spite of religion, capitalism, communism, genocide, or the entire history of the world, the human capacity for empathy and adaptability is strong enough that we could build a utopia.
I genuinely believed this until I saw 21st century internet-connected individuals politicize the science of virology, immunology, and epidemiology. When I realized people - MANY people - genuinely valued their own discomfort of wearing a mask over the safety and LIVES of others. When I realized that Alan Moore was actually too optimistic during the ending of The Watchmen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm Canadian. As a Canadian I am fully aware that my country exists strictly at the whim of the US. If we were to decide to form a military alliance with Russia, hosting Russian troops on our soil, Canada would be invaded by the US in a New York minute. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. It sucks of course but it is what it is. That is all he is saying.
So if that happened... who would you blame? Russia?
[Removed]
Russia has just invaded, where is the US? Certainly not protecting Ukraine.
Pretty clear the US has no desired to protect Ukraine. They certainly could if they wanted to, right now.
What the US and her allies do have is a strong desire to hurt Russia, and they're doing a great job at that since the conflict began. But actually protecting Ukraine? No.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This seems too forgiving of Russia and also the US re: Central and South America. He seems to be saying that Russia/the US reaction is probably morally wrong, but completely expected behavior. And the moral aspect isn't worth considering as history has shown that great powers usually act out of strategic interest not moral consideration. Yeah, it'd be great if great power politics ended. Ukraine trying to change to…
"Blame"/"responsibility"/"at fault" all seem like questions with a certain natural moral slant to them. He's putting moral fault onto the US for failing to properly respect the likely immoral acts of Putin? That's ludicrous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really. He lets Mearsheimer himself get into a knot where he rebrands imperialism into “great power politics”.
Mearsheimer and other geopolitical overthinkers are in a fantasy where small countries should have or have no will of their own and would never choose to reorient to liberal democracy without USA forcing it on them no matter how much more attractive EU is than being a Russian vassal
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe Russia should just join NATO. This would require Russia to change in a lot of ways from how Putin runs things, but who would that be bad for, really?
> Maybe Russia should just join NATO. Putin asked Bill Clinton about this in 2000; was rebuffed.
"Keeping the US in, the Russia out and the Germany down"