I generally like Caspian Report, but that video doesn't really lay out an argument that the geography of Russia determines the nature of the state. It's weird that he even draws that conclusion, because it doesn't derive from the information he provides throughout the video.
It’s explaining american policy of not allowing a major power with a different ideology to exist. It’s goal was not to help Ukraine but to destroy Russia so that there would be less competition for America to gain global domination. Does not matter to the US if that country has over a thousand years of history being intact
__________________
"Half the GM's in the league would trade their roster for our roster right now..." Kevin Lowe in 2013
It’s explaining american policy of not allowing a major power with a different ideology to exist. It’s goal was not to help Ukraine but to destroy Russia so that there would be less competition for America to gain global domination. Does not matter to the US if that country has over a thousand years of history being intact
I didn't get that from the Caspian Report video at all.
They made the case that Russia's geography forced them to dominate minority groups in order to secure its borders and expand. Russia is a state with a core ethnic Russian population that dominates and subjugates surrounding ethnic groups. Many of these groups are not loyal to Russia. This creates a diverse set of competing interests within Russia's boundaries, which prevents Russia from being truly democratic.
Extreme examples are places like Chechnya. Russia wants to hold onto these areas, as their geography means they are strategically important. However, the Chechens are clearly far from loyal to Russia, and Russia has to use heavy military force to keep them part of Russia.
I didn't get that from the Caspian Report video at all.
They made the case that Russia's geography forced them to dominate minority groups in order to secure its borders and expand. Russia is a state with a core ethnic Russian population that dominates and subjugates surrounding ethnic groups. Many of these groups are not loyal to Russia. This creates a diverse set of competing interests within Russia's boundaries, which prevents Russia from being truly democratic.
Extreme examples are places like Chechnya. Russia wants to hold onto these areas, as their geography means they are strategically important. However, the Chechens are clearly far from loyal to Russia, and Russia has to use heavy military force to keep them part of Russia.
The point is subtle but it’s there, it’s saying Russia must cease to exist as a country in order for Russians to be free
I think the Ukraine military will fare just fine during the winter with a constant flow of western materiel.
The worry shifts to Ukraine civilians because of Russia targeting energy infrastructure. I worry about mass casualties of civilians who will literally freeze/starve to death this winter.
The end can't come soon enough for this war and the Russian regime. Cruel people.
The Following User Says Thank You to CroFlames For This Useful Post:
It’s explaining american policy of not allowing a major power with a different ideology to exist. It’s goal was not to help Ukraine but to destroy Russia so that there would be less competition for America to gain global domination. Does not matter to the US if that country has over a thousand years of history being intact
That's an interesting spin on "Russia invaded a sovereign nation and the US and most of the rest of the Western world isn't letting them conquer it uncontested". Note: A geo-politically influential Soviet Union / Russia had, in fact, been allowed to peacefully coexist and even exert global influence for decades previously.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Biff For This Useful Post:
It’s also disingenuous to claim Russia has been intact for 1,000 years. Muscovy only came into existence in the 1,200s and expanded to roughly its current size in the 1,600s.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to burn_this_city For This Useful Post:
I didn't get that from the Caspian Report video at all.
They made the case that Russia's geography forced them to dominate minority groups in order to secure its borders and expand. Russia is a state with a core ethnic Russian population that dominates and subjugates surrounding ethnic groups. Many of these groups are not loyal to Russia. This creates a diverse set of competing interests within Russia's boundaries, which prevents Russia from being truly democratic.
Extreme examples are places like Chechnya. Russia wants to hold onto these areas, as their geography means they are strategically important. However, the Chechens are clearly far from loyal to Russia, and Russia has to use heavy military force to keep them part of Russia.
Russia just pours money into Chechnya to keep them placated. If the Russian economy craters and the gravy train stops, they will probably be back to their separatist ways.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Russia just pours money into Chechnya to keep them placated. If the Russian economy craters and the gravy train stops, they will probably be back to their separatist ways.
By placated, you mean prop up their proxy thugs to maintain order.
I didn't get that from the Caspian Report video at all.
They made the case that Russia's geography forced them to dominate minority groups in order to secure its borders and expand. Russia is a state with a core ethnic Russian population that dominates and subjugates surrounding ethnic groups. Many of these groups are not loyal to Russia. This creates a diverse set of competing interests within Russia's boundaries, which prevents Russia from being truly democratic.
Extreme examples are places like Chechnya. Russia wants to hold onto these areas, as their geography means they are strategically important. However, the Chechens are clearly far from loyal to Russia, and Russia has to use heavy military force to keep them part of Russia.
The problem with this argument is that there's nothing in there that did not apply to most other large countries at some point in time, and many smaller ones. The history of nation states is a history of repressed and outright destroyed minority groups within the borders of each nation.
Right now there are situations like Catalonia, Padania (Northern Italy) and Scotland, where there's an active, fairly popular, and significant movement to declare a part of a country as independent from the larger whole. Yet Spain, Italy and UK are all democratic.
Another problem with the argument is that there's no connection between using state violence to keep a country together and democracy. Northern Ireland was kept as part of UK through (in part) a decades long campaign of violent police and military action, but that did not prevent the UK from being overall democratic. The ETA (violent Basque indepencence movement active from 1960's to 2000's) did not stop Spain from being democratic.
These are just non sequitur arguments.
There's no real connection why the desire for indepencence in Chechnya should stop actual democracy in Russia overall. Ethnic Russians make up almost 80% of Russia's population, so in an actual democracy they would still be the group with all the power, and could easily crush all dissidence if they chose to do so.
No, the reason for lack of democracy is not the ethnic minorities. Actual democracy would not give minorities power to rock the boat. The reason they "can't" have democracy is because too many Russians in general (ethnic Russians and other) aren't that supportive of the way the country is being run and would like to change something about it. Which wouldn't suit the needs of those in power.
And of course, a history of despotism, corruption and lies makes it hard to set up a proper democracy that people would trust.
Just in general, to me the whole "Russia has no history of democracy therefore it can't have democracy" arguments is utter BS.
No country had democracy until they did.
EDIT:
In fact I would argue that the large geographical size of Russia should make it easier to combine brutal repressive state violence with actual democracy. "Out of sight out of mind" works well to separate what goes on in one part of the country from the majority of the population.
Last edited by Itse; 11-26-2022 at 06:06 AM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
I would argue that the problem Russia has with democracy is not that they have "no history with it", but somewhat the opposite.
Russians have a hundred years of history with democracy, which is exactly why they view democracy so suspiciously. They've had all sorts of democracies from local level to national, but at most times the democracy they've had has been dominated/corrupted by either one party rule, by violence or by authoritarian rule putting extreme limits on what can be voted and who can participate.
Everyone in Russia has lived all their life being able to participate in elections that are more or less meaningless and/or scams. This is the Russian experience of democracy. No wonder they don't care for it.
From the Russian point of view, it's a perfectly reasonable to claim that "supposedly" independent and democratic countries like Ukraine are in reality completely controlled from Washington or Brussels, and that Washington in turn is completely dominated by a small group controlling everything. Because that's how "democracy" and "independence" has worked for them and their vassal countries.
(Of course it doesn't simplify the issue that there is some truth to the ultrarich dominating US politics, it's just a much more complicated and generally more indirect system of control than the one Russians are used to.)
I would also like to remind people that "democracy wouldn't work in Russia" is a key part of Putin's propaganda to keep his subjects under control.
This is why I see it as extremely problematic that people in the West just LOVE hammering home the idea that there's NO WAY Russia could have a functioning democracy.
Sure, there's a million problems in the way of that. But the first hurdle to help Russia change is that Russians themselves need to start believing that there IS a better way for Russia, that the only option for Putin isn't just some other dictator. That better options exists and they COULD work in Russia if Russians would fight for them.
You don't have to solve every problem at once. For example India has been a mostly functioning democracy even though it also has massive issues with corruption, and it's geographically large and diverse, with 75% of the population speaking something other than Hindi as their native language, and a caste system which is really problematic for democracy, and religious strife, and massive poverty... just a lot of problems.
(And yes, India's democracy is currently under threat by the Modi Regime, but it's not done yet.)
Point being, democracy can exist in difficult circumstances.
The Following User Says Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
It’s kind of europes fault for blindly following the US and sacrificing its own relationships with Russia and China to appease US leaders that they have no more leverage
__________________
"Half the GM's in the league would trade their roster for our roster right now..." Kevin Lowe in 2013
Ridiculous, in case they haven't noticed, the USA and the whole world is having economy problems and sky rocket energy costs plus the US has given 2X the cost in weapons more than the rest of the world combined.
How is it the USA's fault that the EU sold their soul to Russia in terms of reliance?
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Snuffleupagus For This Useful Post:
Ridiculous, in case they haven't noticed, the USA and the whole world is having economy problems and sky rocket energy costs plus the US has given 2X the cost in weapons more than the rest of the world combined.
How is it the USA's fault that the EU sold their soul to Russia in terms of reliance?
It’s just a trade negotiation trying to leverage the war in Ukraine to stop subsidies of solar panels and other green tech manufacturing.
Europe certainly has themselves to blame for what's happening right now as many have mentioned, but the recent bill that Congress passed also is going to kill much of Europe's green sector with the US protectionist policies within the bill. But again, obviously, the Americans are going to look after themselves first, over their allies. It's just dumb that some European countries were so naive to think their "bestie" would never do this to them.
Kyiv demands apology after PM Orbán wears scarf showing parts of Ukraine as Hungarian
Ukrainian media showed images of Orbán meeting a Hungarian footballer wearing a scarf which the outlet Ukrainska Pravda reported depicted a map of “Greater Hungary” including territory that is now part of the neighbouring states of Ukraine, Austria, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania, Croatia and Serbia.
The two countries have repeatedly clashed in recent years over what Hungary said were curbs on the right of ethnic Hungarians living in Ukraine to use their native tongue, especially in education, after Ukraine passed a law in 2017 restricting the use of minority languages in schools.
Romania’s foreign ministry also responded angrily, saying it had submitted to the Hungarian ambassador in Bucharest its “firm disapproval of the gesture.
Yeah, NATO isn't as unified as they like to promote.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
