4 ms·

Is that the general consensus now? I've not really paid attention to the discussion around him as much as the discussion he generates which mostly seems to be i

by xrd 8y ago

Is that the general consensus now? I've not really paid attention to the discussion around him as much as the discussion he generates which mostly seems to be incredibly independent (or indignant or simply contrarian). Are there some people who were proponents of his in particular who have abandoned him? The article seems to suggest his former colleagues still think he is a powerful intellect

pstuart 8y ago
I'm really bothered by his "Russia is innocent" stance.
- Sideloader 8y ago
  Does it also bother you that the hysteria over Russia’s “guilt” is shamefully hypocritical and misleading? Are you aware, for example, of the role the Clinton administration played in 1996 to get their man Boris Yeltsin re-elected? One reason for Putin’s popularity is he put a stop to the Yeltsin facilitated post-communist era plundering of Russia’s wealth and resources by scruple less Russians and foreigners alike, and Americans were heavily involved in that avaricious free for all. The United States not only interferes in other countries’ elections, it also regularly orchestrates coups, finances and arms violent insurgent groups and has a history of invading and destroying countries based on false pretexts. The United States and its NATO vassals pushed their militaries right up to the Russian border, which is like Russia, China and Iran sending their armies to the border regions of Mexico and Canada while their navies patrol the Gulf (of Mexico). Need I say more? Even if Russia is guilty of everything the hysterical and disingenuous Russiagate crowd alleges, it is still a lightweight when it comes to messing around in other countries’ affairs. The mythology, and ideology, of American exceptionalism says the United States has a divine right to subject the entire planet to its will. World domination has been an explicit American political goal since the 1930s. It’s a matter of public record. Russia with Putin as its leader stands in the way of American domination of Eurasia. Hence, the military encirclement of Russia and the belligerent anti-Russian rhetoric from American leaders. If there is one thing American exceptionalists can’t abide, it is a country that wants to chart its own path free of American domination. The United States is threatening Russia, not the other way around, and the Russian state’s alleged actions are a response to that. Really, Americans don’t have a leg to stand on here. The 24/7 nonstop anti-Russian hysteria whipped up by the media and Democrats who can’t accept they lost an election is overloading the emotional circuits of millions of Americans and shorting out their critical thinking abilities. It’s rather disconcerting.
  - redisman 8y ago
    > One reason for Putin’s popularity is he put a stop to the Yeltsin facilitated post-communist era plundering of Russia’s wealth and resources by scruple less Russians and foreigners alike What an absurd claim. That is exactly what Putin is doing. He's just better at messaging to hide his kleptocracy.
  - cafard 8y ago
    Did Putin "post-communist era plundering of Russia’s wealth and resources" or simply rationalize it, in such a fashion that those doing the plundering were under his thumb, and could not challenge the state?
  - xigma 8y ago
    > Russia with Putin as its leader stands in the way of American domination of Eurasia. Hence, the military encirclement of Russia and the belligerent anti-Russian rhetoric from American leaders. Is the US really dominating Europe and if so, is that not better than being dominated by Russia? Why did the Ukrainian civil war break out, wasn't it the desire of ethnic Ukrainians to break away from Russia? "Greater Russia" is a thing that many ethnic Russians want and Putin would take it if he believed he could get away with it. Historically, if your nation bets against the US, you end up on the losing side. We're not going to be ever living in a world without major superpowers and the US - imperfect as it may be - is by far the best such "regime" that has ever existed in history. I'm worried about a world where the US retreats from that position, leaving it up to autocrats to divide the spoils among them. Of course, if you're an international leftist, you're knee-deep in denial and resentment about the abject failure of every regime that ever challenged US hegemony. You crave some sort of justice that history will never deliver to you, defending some of the most oppressive countries in the world while maximizing and exaggerating the oppression at home. Cognitive Dissonance at work! Having said that, the Democrats really need to move on from whining about the Russians interfering in the elections, it's just not effective.
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    > Even if Russia is guilty of everything the hysterical and disingenuous Russiagate crowd alleges, it is still a lightweight when it comes to messing around in other countries’ affairs. Oh really? Let's see: The Warsaw Pact. Crushing the uprisings in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. Even after the fall of Communism, there was Georgia and the Ukraine. That's just off the top of my head. No, Russia is not a lightweight at foreign interference.
- rdtsc 8y ago
  Can you expand some why that is bothering? Though not sure that is his stance even. It seems it is more about it being a wasted opportunity cost. That is, it was a good PR campaign, but it ran out of steam and contuing to invest time and money into it does pay off anymore.
  - pstuart 8y ago
    It bothers me because, from my armchair view, Russia had the motives and means to do exactly what they are being accused of. To dismiss that as "just the DNC looking for excuses" seems disingenuous at best coming from such an "independent thinker"
    - rdtsc 8y ago
      > seems disingenuous at best coming from such an "independent thinker" But he wouldn't be an independent thinker if he just reiterated and nodded to everything every other media outlet prints or shows? I am not sure on the "disingenuous" part, do you think he is somehow has an ulterior motive to ignore it despite the evidence? > It bothers me because, from my armchair view, Russia had the motives and means to do exactly what they are being accused of They have a motive and means, I agree. But so does any advanced country. Anyone affected and influenced by the power structure in Washington would be interested in affecting that structure somehow. Why isn't anyone talking much about China hacking, or Iran or any other advanced enough country? Why focus on Russia so much. That's what bothering me. Compare how much coverage there was about Russian hacking vs the OPM hack. OPM is probably the most significant intelligence failure in history. What Greenwald is saying, and I in large agree, is for the amount of time and money spent talking about it, there would have to be a lot more evidence that any of the stuff the Russians did made any difference. > To dismiss that as "just the DNC looking for excuses" I see them having a motive to look for excuses. Their excuse for losing is "Russians hacked us". I don't really believe that. I think there wasn't enough introspecting and self analysis on why they failed. And as such, I think they'll fail again, precisely because they put all their eggs into one, not very sturdy, basket. Anyway, thanks for the reply and sorry for getting carried away with the prose a bit.

by xrd 8y ago

pstuart 8y ago

I'm really bothered by his "Russia is innocent" stance.

Sideloader 8y ago
Does it also bother you that the hysteria over Russia’s “guilt” is shamefully hypocritical and misleading? Are you aware, for example, of the role the Clinton administration played in 1996 to get their man Boris Yeltsin re-elected? One reason for Putin’s popularity is he put a stop to the Yeltsin facilitated post-communist era plundering of Russia’s wealth and resources by scruple less Russians and foreigners alike, and Americans were heavily involved in that avaricious free for all. The United States not only interferes in other countries’ elections, it also regularly orchestrates coups, finances and arms violent insurgent groups and has a history of invading and destroying countries based on false pretexts. The United States and its NATO vassals pushed their militaries right up to the Russian border, which is like Russia, China and Iran sending their armies to the border regions of Mexico and Canada while their navies patrol the Gulf (of Mexico). Need I say more? Even if Russia is guilty of everything the hysterical and disingenuous Russiagate crowd alleges, it is still a lightweight when it comes to messing around in other countries’ affairs. The mythology, and ideology, of American exceptionalism says the United States has a divine right to subject the entire planet to its will. World domination has been an explicit American political goal since the 1930s. It’s a matter of public record. Russia with Putin as its leader stands in the way of American domination of Eurasia. Hence, the military encirclement of Russia and the belligerent anti-Russian rhetoric from American leaders. If there is one thing American exceptionalists can’t abide, it is a country that wants to chart its own path free of American domination. The United States is threatening Russia, not the other way around, and the Russian state’s alleged actions are a response to that. Really, Americans don’t have a leg to stand on here. The 24/7 nonstop anti-Russian hysteria whipped up by the media and Democrats who can’t accept they lost an election is overloading the emotional circuits of millions of Americans and shorting out their critical thinking abilities. It’s rather disconcerting.
- redisman 8y ago
  > One reason for Putin’s popularity is he put a stop to the Yeltsin facilitated post-communist era plundering of Russia’s wealth and resources by scruple less Russians and foreigners alike What an absurd claim. That is exactly what Putin is doing. He's just better at messaging to hide his kleptocracy.
- cafard 8y ago
  Did Putin "post-communist era plundering of Russia’s wealth and resources" or simply rationalize it, in such a fashion that those doing the plundering were under his thumb, and could not challenge the state?
- xigma 8y ago
  > Russia with Putin as its leader stands in the way of American domination of Eurasia. Hence, the military encirclement of Russia and the belligerent anti-Russian rhetoric from American leaders. Is the US really dominating Europe and if so, is that not better than being dominated by Russia? Why did the Ukrainian civil war break out, wasn't it the desire of ethnic Ukrainians to break away from Russia? "Greater Russia" is a thing that many ethnic Russians want and Putin would take it if he believed he could get away with it. Historically, if your nation bets against the US, you end up on the losing side. We're not going to be ever living in a world without major superpowers and the US - imperfect as it may be - is by far the best such "regime" that has ever existed in history. I'm worried about a world where the US retreats from that position, leaving it up to autocrats to divide the spoils among them. Of course, if you're an international leftist, you're knee-deep in denial and resentment about the abject failure of every regime that ever challenged US hegemony. You crave some sort of justice that history will never deliver to you, defending some of the most oppressive countries in the world while maximizing and exaggerating the oppression at home. Cognitive Dissonance at work! Having said that, the Democrats really need to move on from whining about the Russians interfering in the elections, it's just not effective.
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  > Even if Russia is guilty of everything the hysterical and disingenuous Russiagate crowd alleges, it is still a lightweight when it comes to messing around in other countries’ affairs. Oh really? Let's see: The Warsaw Pact. Crushing the uprisings in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. Even after the fall of Communism, there was Georgia and the Ukraine. That's just off the top of my head. No, Russia is not a lightweight at foreign interference.
rdtsc 8y ago
Can you expand some why that is bothering? Though not sure that is his stance even. It seems it is more about it being a wasted opportunity cost. That is, it was a good PR campaign, but it ran out of steam and contuing to invest time and money into it does pay off anymore.
- pstuart 8y ago
  It bothers me because, from my armchair view, Russia had the motives and means to do exactly what they are being accused of. To dismiss that as "just the DNC looking for excuses" seems disingenuous at best coming from such an "independent thinker"
  - rdtsc 8y ago
    > seems disingenuous at best coming from such an "independent thinker" But he wouldn't be an independent thinker if he just reiterated and nodded to everything every other media outlet prints or shows? I am not sure on the "disingenuous" part, do you think he is somehow has an ulterior motive to ignore it despite the evidence? > It bothers me because, from my armchair view, Russia had the motives and means to do exactly what they are being accused of They have a motive and means, I agree. But so does any advanced country. Anyone affected and influenced by the power structure in Washington would be interested in affecting that structure somehow. Why isn't anyone talking much about China hacking, or Iran or any other advanced enough country? Why focus on Russia so much. That's what bothering me. Compare how much coverage there was about Russian hacking vs the OPM hack. OPM is probably the most significant intelligence failure in history. What Greenwald is saying, and I in large agree, is for the amount of time and money spent talking about it, there would have to be a lot more evidence that any of the stuff the Russians did made any difference. > To dismiss that as "just the DNC looking for excuses" I see them having a motive to look for excuses. Their excuse for losing is "Russians hacked us". I don't really believe that. I think there wasn't enough introspecting and self analysis on why they failed. And as such, I think they'll fail again, precisely because they put all their eggs into one, not very sturdy, basket. Anyway, thanks for the reply and sorry for getting carried away with the prose a bit.