Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Era of total intel agency control (CIA over America)? [schizo warning]
I'm a follower of one Russian youtuber whose ideas are apparently like this. In the feudal age, the elite was changing itself in constantly bloodletting of civil strife. In the absolutist age, the remaining nobility could still kill the king/emperor, and eventually in the French and Russian revolutions the entire class was exterminated. This has led to what is today a democratic system where the president and ministers are superficially interchangeable but decide nothing because they're all controlled by intel services from behind the scenes with pedophile porn blackmail on every statesman.
What would your thoughts be on such a model? For the evidence, he points to how brutal the war in the Ukraine is, but Putin and Trump are both chums with each other. And how Russia could easily destroy the Dnieper bridges in the Ukraine, but chooses not to - apparently forbidden by the CIA/KGB intel service to disarm Russia for a NATO invasion.
Other cases of collusion between different statesmen for the sole purpose of advancing the interests of the compromised and cancer-ridden American state would be:
I'm likely sounding really silly right now, I'm downgrading myself to the Russian parts of my brain when talking about this. In English, it would likely be called "conspiracy theory"? But isn't the role of the CIA kinda common knowledge these days? And my question is about how WIAH never ever mentions it. Of course, there's another question as to how much any elite can control (and/or engineer?) a society without it breaking apart. According to some, the fall of the USSR was a controlled demolition, too.
Another aspect of his ideas is that America infected with the CIA finds China its enemy because China lacks the intelligence agencies and mercilessly culls its elite preventing corruption and is thus impervious to being infected itself. This is why America needs to start a nuclear war with China, but before that destroy the Russian nuclear arsenal - which is exactly what Putin is doing (alongside useless projects such as Poseidon, Avangard and Oreshnik or nuclear icebreakers).
Another blogger whom I follow has said that the Krokus terror attack involved a Russian policeman cutting off a terrorist's ear, and that it happened on Purim where cookies are baked in the form of ears (oznei haman), thus linking to a ritualistic significance. This line of thinking would view the Ukraine war not as disarming Russia but more in the way of religious slaughter (because again, destroying the Dnieper bridges or going around Donbass are never even considered by the Russians).
Again, apologies for copious schizo, but nothing of this can even be found in the Anglosphere. All you have is either the liberals saying Trump is Putin's slave, or the Z-anon bloggers such as MacGregor, Ritter, Napolitano, Mearsheimer or Jeffrey Sachs claiming Putin is playing 4D chess. Russians overall are at least diverse in their views, but I don't see any critique of their models.
Well, Trump actually has pedophile porn blackmail on himself, and everyone knows it, but he seems to be getting along pretty well. I think the truth is a bit more mundane than that- there's simply no pressure to do anything effective outside of the inertia of
conservatismbureaucracy, so it just drifts that way. Even though those in the bureaucracy might be empowered to make decisions, the question of what decisions to make becomes difficult, so "advance the kingdom of Jesus [or his modern equivalent, LGBTesus]" becomes the default.The trick about the American state is that they legitimately are both competent and significant enough on the world stage for that competence to be meaningful, unlike every other state except for maybe Russia, China, and I guess France.
The US doesn't need a service to do this, mostly for HBD reasons. The thing the US population (this is an English heritage thing) is easily corrupted by are the promise of 51% attacks, where half the society + 1 person forces their own corruption on the other half minus one. It's "democracy", you see- and the demos is just as corruptible as the kings and nobles of old (which is why people who know they're doing wrong hide behind "but The People make the rules"). BLM is a particularly salient example of this. So is Brexit, for that matter.
As for 'schizo nonsense', this is the Russian political MO and has been since at least Tsar Alexander, if those Historia Civilis videos are at all accurate. He doesn't actually understand this (due to having a particular/modern political bias), but openly absurd and inconsistent bluster and back-channeling and threats of force and just bog standard J. Jonah Jameson-ing is just kind of how these guys work. It's an unstable stability, if that makes any sense.
The obfuscation the Russians employ is that you can't even figure out what their kind of dishonesty actually is. If you can predict the manner of a man's dishonesty (or more properly, his interests), you can plan for and bargain with and manage him. It makes sense, then, that confusing how others would predict the manner in which you will be dishonest today could be a valid negotiating strategy.
It makes sense that Trump, being accustomed to that style of negotiation, would find it easier to work with a person whose entire concept of statecraft is (by some geographical-social necessity) basically just that, in contrast to his own empire's provinces who negotiate in that stereotypically feminine way where everyone pretends they don't have authority over anything (to say nothing of the Chinese, who have 2000 more years of experience in that negotiation strategy).
More options
Context Copy link
I’ll give you the straight european-liberal view: the diversity of russian views (and your own) is largely schizo nonsense, partly fomented by putin himself , to keep his subjects and potential opponents confused, disunited, apolitical and demoralized.
Putin supports the brutality because he believes what he says he believes – ‘brother peoples’, old historic and not-so old grievances and insults, the necessary greatness of russia, etc – that stuff’s more important to him than countless dead russians, to say nothing of ukrainians.
Trump likes putin personally; in particular, his appearance of strength and his long-held authoritarian power. And, you know, trump’s people aren’t dying in ukraine, he genuinely does not care or need to care all that much about foreigners killing each other.
Even if they could destroy them, they probably think they’ll get them in a settlement, or use them for the big push when the ukrainians collapse, as they were always supposed to.
Russians are a lot weaker than they think they are. At the bottom, their ‘inexplicable’ failure to win manifests in conspiracy theories like yours. At the top, they cling to hope of a total victory long after its potential benefits have been exceeded by the horrendous costs of the war.
? They tried attacking everything at first, no?
OK that's just complete cuckoo.
More options
Context Copy link
One explanation is that destroying them isn't that easy. You need to destroy at least one of the pylons to render them non-operational, fixing the spans is relatively straightforward. Ukraine also has several dams across the Dnieper, which are even harder to damage and would flood several large cities if destroyed. Drowning thousands of civilians is bad optics.
Also if I'm not mistaken, when one is invading a country one desires the bridges in territory that one has not yet conquered to be intact -- not that Russia is probably planning another trans-Dnieper adventure anytime soon, but I'm sure there a war-plan for it somewhere that would be made a lot easier by having some non-blown-up bridges available to supply whatever beachhead they might like to establish.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
A few updates. The bloggers in question are Strateg Divannogo Legiona (aka Sofa Legion Strategist) on YouTube, also NeoFeudal Review and Slavland Chronicles (aka Rolo Slavskiy / Rurik Skywalker) on Substack.
Mind you, what Stateg is saying (Dnieper bridges, Donbass assaults) is overall a widely accepted truth in Russia (judging by such personalities as Igor Strelkov and Maxim Kalashnikov, probably others). But it's completely absent from the Anglosphere because America has a total information blackout, with both parties serving the same centre (liberals saying Putin is satan, and paid CIA shills saying Putin is a Russian patriot angelic Christian warrior). There are some differences with Strelkov conceding that Putin may be a rusty nail - rotten but the only thing keeping Russia from a bloody civil war. Whereas Strateg says Putin is intentionally disarming Russia for a NATO invasion.
All in all, if the war is fake theatrics to a significant extent, it puts in question the entire presuppositions about the currently existing civilisations. Maybe it's being used as a bogeyman to scare the EU into rearming. Maybe it's used to genocide the Slavs. Maybe America intends to capture the Russian nuclear arsenal intact to use against China. Maybe America wants to destroy Russia because Russia is China's nuclear shield (and China for whatever reason isn't increasing its own stockpile).
This is hilarious. But I hope whoever that fine specimen of humanity is, he's not in Russia, or hides well, because Putin's oprichniks does not care which place you criticize it from, be it from the right, from the left or from the depths of derangement only accessible to a devoted Lovecraftian. The mere fact of criticizing the Boss is enough. Girkin got how much, 4 years I think? I am not sure I will be sad when that specimen is declared Foreign Agent and shut down too, but I would probably prefer it to continue to exist - somewhere far, far away from me - as a proof that the Universe is capable of producing more wonders that I would ever be able to comprehend.
Anything can be derived from a false premise.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I'm sorry, is my post breaking any rules? Or is it merely still held for moderation?
The latter, I think.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link