5 ms·

The problem here is Gessen uses Zhukov's words to bash Donald Trump, but neglects to mention that Zhukov is a right-winger who supports Trump, and the Tea Party

The problem here is Gessen uses Zhukov's words to bash Donald Trump, but neglects to mention that Zhukov is a right-winger who supports Trump, and the Tea Party. He's also anti-feminist & new yorker readers would feel differently if they knew these things. It's disingenuous. https://twitter.com/27khv/status/1203785706860109830 https://twitter.com/27khv/status/1203785706860109830

baybal2 7y ago
Tell me what is your political position
- microcolonel 7y ago
  Probably in the broad category of “feminism is untouchable, even when it is inconsistent with women's rights”. It's a direct copy of a tweet though, so maybe a different person.
scandox 7y ago
If you're quoting someone you should indicate that. If you're quoting Bryan MacDonald well I think you should validate it pretty carefully. And if you are Bryan MacDonald...well I'm not surprised how you turned out Bryan.
- nopriorarrests 7y ago
  Yes, I'am quoting Bryan MacDonald, sorry if it wasn't clear. And since I speak russian, I can attest that his tweet is factually correct.
  - scandox 7y ago
    Well even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day.
  - kelvich 7y ago
    Well, there is a video where Zhukov tells that he doesn't agree with principle of collective responsibility advocated by _some_ feminists. Calling him anti-feminist after that is kind of big jump, isn't it?
    - nopriorarrests 7y ago
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILuxlimdWoc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILuxlimdWoc this is a part of his interview called "there is no such thing as patriarchy". He says following things: -- Jordan Peterson is essentially correct in most of things he says. -- Current left wing is all about collective identity (such as "straight white man"), and there is no such thing as "collective identity". -- This is absolutely unacceptable for me, and I do not believe in patriarchy at all. Basically, he is your run of the mill right-winger with libertarian bent, nothing special about him, but his anti-feminist stance is pretty clear. I think that he and Ben Shapiro will find common ground in a minute.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - Supermancho 7y ago
        I'm not sure how you get "right winger" out of someone who doesn't believe in identity politics. I'm basically a socialist christian who voted for Trump (but will go Bernie next time), but I'm not into equality of outcome between social segments. Am I supposed to be right wing because I don't subscribe to liberal attempts at equality of outcome (between socially delineated groups)?
        krastanov 7y ago
        I have never seen a mainstream liberal to push "equality of outcome" ideas. I have seen liberals push for detailed understanding of what leads to different outcomes and for "equality of opportunity". And I have seen only far right people bring up the notion of "equality of outcome", usually as a strawman as above. And yes, being against the government helping with upward social mobility (the only way I can rephrase what you described, but I sincerely hope you will correct me if I misunderstood) is certainly part of modern American right wing politics.
- 80386 7y ago
  The BBC describes Zhukov as a "libertarian activist": https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50684676 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50684676
kelvich 7y ago
But note that journalist who wrote that tweet is actually works for Russia Today -- russian state propaganda outlet. So don't take that seriously.
- AndrewBissell 7y ago
  Is the tweet correct or not? Is your point here that - Zhukov is not actually a Tea Party Trump supporter and the tweet is made up, or - Zhukov is all these things but it would not in fact be relevant to New Yorker readers, or - Zhukov is all these things, but the facts should be ignored because they are coming from an unapproved source?
  - kelvich 7y ago
    I was just saying that collaboration with RT is a big red flag. Talking about tweet itself it's definitely not correct at least in anti-feminist part. Also whole tweet intention is kind of ad hominem, original article discussed Zhukov's speech and his sentence, not his personality.
    - jsnk 7y ago
      > I was just saying that collaboration with RT is a big red flag How come?
      - nirv 7y ago
        It comes from the consistent history of the factually incorrect propaganda reporting, with direct funding from the state budget. The very same state that dictates convictions to judges for political prisoners upon a phone call from the state administration.
- chr1 7y ago
  Turns out even people who work for Russia Today tell the truth sometimes (if they were consistently lying they would be telling the truth after all:). I have watched Zhukovs videos before he got arrested, he self identifies as a libertarian, supports Trump as a lesser evil compared to Sanders and Warren, and likes Jordan Peterson. Because of this Russian twitter was abuzz today with feminists arguing whether it was ok to support him. So the article indeed misrepresents his views.
m0zg 7y ago
It's also par for the course for Gessen. She's extremely biased, and she doesn't even try to hide it. There's no nuance whatsoever in what she writes, it's all black and white for her. I'm not sure why she still calls herself a "jornalist". His statement, however, looks like something a US conservative would largely agree with: decries identity (in his words "atomization") politics (which Gessen largely supports), calls to strengthen traditional families (which Gessen opposes), calls for individual responsibility, etc. For the record: I don't know about his "anti-feminist" views, but I agree with what he says in that particular statement. It's directly applicable to the US as well - people are pretty much at war with each other here, and at least half the population is quite willing to give up their liberty for taxpayer funded government handouts. Having grown up in the USSR, I know where this particular road ends. There's one bit of context that people in the US will miss: the Soviet legacy. Back then people relied on the government for _everything_ and had little to no individual responsibility for anything. You worked for peanuts and by Western standards lived in poverty, but a lot of the stuff was "free" and you didn't have to worry about your future - it was largely predetermined. A large, older chunk of Russian population still lives like that and has futile expectations that the government will solve whatever problems they might have. The government stopped doing that some 30 years ago, but they don't know any better. I think this, and the extreme level of corruption, is why the GDP of Russia is less than that of Texas. IMO for a country with such insane wealth of natural resources, and a pretty decent education system this is shameful.
- notfromhere 7y ago
  The whole 'government doing anything is a slippery slope to socialism' is such a worn cliche. It's much more likely that having a large, disadvantaged population thats cut off from class mobility or basic life necessities is what encourages people to start dragging landowners into the streets. There's a reason why the Great Depression led to a number of relief programs - the threat of a soviet-style communist uprising was pretty high.
  - m0zg 7y ago
    There also were some pretty great "relief programs" in the USSR at the time, where millions of people were relieved of their food and left to die of starvation. A government powerful enough to give you everything is also necessarily powerful enough to take everything. And "class mobility" is a 100% capitalist concept. Under communism there's no "upper class" to be mobile to. As of 2018, the US is experiencing the lowest poverty rate in history (considerably lower than e.g. UK, Germany, and France), and record low unemployment as well. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/09/10/us-poverty-rate-fell-lowest-since-while-uninsured-rate-rose-census-says/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/09/10/us-povert...
woodandsteel 7y ago
So are you saying that because Zhukov is, you claim, a right-winger, that means that his criticisms of Russia are wrong, and that Russia is actually a pretty good place? Oh, and by the way, I don't know if Zhukov actually is a right winger, but Putin definitely is.
- nopriorarrests 7y ago
  No, I just find it amusing that Masha Gessen is praising some person, who, if relocated to USA while keeping his political views intact, will instantly become alt-right monster and God knows what else (see Covington kids case). Funny how these things work.
  - woodandsteel 7y ago
    The question of how good or bad Russia is, is a million times more important than an amusing observation about a particular journalist. So let me ask you again, what do you think of it?
- nirv 7y ago
  > So are you saying that because Zhukov is, you claim, a right-winger, that means that his criticisms of Russia are wrong, and that Russia is actually a pretty good place? There is no causal connection between the OP's message and this assumption. The initial argument is that the journalist interpreted the Zhukov’s letter and his (right-wing libertarian) views in accordance with her political (left-wing and anti-Trump) views. edit: Putin is authoritarian right-wing, which has nothing to do with Zhukov's libertarianism. As follows at least from his indictment.
qxnqd 7y ago
Sad that someone who is so pro-liberty thinks that Zhukov doesn't deserve liberty because he's a right-winger. I don't know what to make of something like that.

baybal2 7y ago

Tell me what is your political position

microcolonel 7y ago
Probably in the broad category of “feminism is untouchable, even when it is inconsistent with women's rights”. It's a direct copy of a tweet though, so maybe a different person.

scandox 7y ago

If you're quoting someone you should indicate that. If you're quoting Bryan MacDonald well I think you should validate it pretty carefully. And if you are Bryan MacDonald...well I'm not surprised how you turned out Bryan.

nopriorarrests 7y ago
Yes, I'am quoting Bryan MacDonald, sorry if it wasn't clear. And since I speak russian, I can attest that his tweet is factually correct.
- scandox 7y ago
  Well even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day.
- kelvich 7y ago
  Well, there is a video where Zhukov tells that he doesn't agree with principle of collective responsibility advocated by _some_ feminists. Calling him anti-feminist after that is kind of big jump, isn't it?
  - nopriorarrests 7y ago
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILuxlimdWoc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILuxlimdWoc this is a part of his interview called "there is no such thing as patriarchy". He says following things: -- Jordan Peterson is essentially correct in most of things he says. -- Current left wing is all about collective identity (such as "straight white man"), and there is no such thing as "collective identity". -- This is absolutely unacceptable for me, and I do not believe in patriarchy at all. Basically, he is your run of the mill right-winger with libertarian bent, nothing special about him, but his anti-feminist stance is pretty clear. I think that he and Ben Shapiro will find common ground in a minute.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - Supermancho 7y ago
      I'm not sure how you get "right winger" out of someone who doesn't believe in identity politics. I'm basically a socialist christian who voted for Trump (but will go Bernie next time), but I'm not into equality of outcome between social segments. Am I supposed to be right wing because I don't subscribe to liberal attempts at equality of outcome (between socially delineated groups)?
      - krastanov 7y ago
        I have never seen a mainstream liberal to push "equality of outcome" ideas. I have seen liberals push for detailed understanding of what leads to different outcomes and for "equality of opportunity". And I have seen only far right people bring up the notion of "equality of outcome", usually as a strawman as above. And yes, being against the government helping with upward social mobility (the only way I can rephrase what you described, but I sincerely hope you will correct me if I misunderstood) is certainly part of modern American right wing politics.
80386 7y ago
The BBC describes Zhukov as a "libertarian activist": https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50684676 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50684676

kelvich 7y ago

But note that journalist who wrote that tweet is actually works for Russia Today -- russian state propaganda outlet. So don't take that seriously.

AndrewBissell 7y ago
Is the tweet correct or not? Is your point here that - Zhukov is not actually a Tea Party Trump supporter and the tweet is made up, or - Zhukov is all these things but it would not in fact be relevant to New Yorker readers, or - Zhukov is all these things, but the facts should be ignored because they are coming from an unapproved source?
- kelvich 7y ago
  I was just saying that collaboration with RT is a big red flag. Talking about tweet itself it's definitely not correct at least in anti-feminist part. Also whole tweet intention is kind of ad hominem, original article discussed Zhukov's speech and his sentence, not his personality.
  - jsnk 7y ago
    > I was just saying that collaboration with RT is a big red flag How come?
    - nirv 7y ago
      It comes from the consistent history of the factually incorrect propaganda reporting, with direct funding from the state budget. The very same state that dictates convictions to judges for political prisoners upon a phone call from the state administration.
chr1 7y ago
Turns out even people who work for Russia Today tell the truth sometimes (if they were consistently lying they would be telling the truth after all:). I have watched Zhukovs videos before he got arrested, he self identifies as a libertarian, supports Trump as a lesser evil compared to Sanders and Warren, and likes Jordan Peterson. Because of this Russian twitter was abuzz today with feminists arguing whether it was ok to support him. So the article indeed misrepresents his views.

m0zg 7y ago

It's also par for the course for Gessen. She's extremely biased, and she doesn't even try to hide it. There's no nuance whatsoever in what she writes, it's all black and white for her. I'm not sure why she still calls herself a "jornalist". His statement, however, looks like something a US conservative would largely agree with: decries identity (in his words "atomization") politics (which Gessen largely supports), calls to strengthen traditional families (which Gessen opposes), calls for individual responsibility, etc. For the record: I don't know about his "anti-feminist" views, but I agree with what he says in that particular statement. It's directly applicable to the US as well - people are pretty much at war with each other here, and at least half the population is quite willing to give up their liberty for taxpayer funded government handouts. Having grown up in the USSR, I know where this particular road ends. There's one bit of context that people in the US will miss: the Soviet legacy. Back then people relied on the government for _everything_ and had little to no individual responsibility for anything. You worked for peanuts and by Western standards lived in poverty, but a lot of the stuff was "free" and you didn't have to worry about your future - it was largely predetermined. A large, older chunk of Russian population still lives like that and has futile expectations that the government will solve whatever problems they might have. The government stopped doing that some 30 years ago, but they don't know any better. I think this, and the extreme level of corruption, is why the GDP of Russia is less than that of Texas. IMO for a country with such insane wealth of natural resources, and a pretty decent education system this is shameful.

notfromhere 7y ago
The whole 'government doing anything is a slippery slope to socialism' is such a worn cliche. It's much more likely that having a large, disadvantaged population thats cut off from class mobility or basic life necessities is what encourages people to start dragging landowners into the streets. There's a reason why the Great Depression led to a number of relief programs - the threat of a soviet-style communist uprising was pretty high.
- m0zg 7y ago
  There also were some pretty great "relief programs" in the USSR at the time, where millions of people were relieved of their food and left to die of starvation. A government powerful enough to give you everything is also necessarily powerful enough to take everything. And "class mobility" is a 100% capitalist concept. Under communism there's no "upper class" to be mobile to. As of 2018, the US is experiencing the lowest poverty rate in history (considerably lower than e.g. UK, Germany, and France), and record low unemployment as well. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/09/10/us-poverty-rate-fell-lowest-since-while-uninsured-rate-rose-census-says/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/09/10/us-povert...

woodandsteel 7y ago

So are you saying that because Zhukov is, you claim, a right-winger, that means that his criticisms of Russia are wrong, and that Russia is actually a pretty good place? Oh, and by the way, I don't know if Zhukov actually is a right winger, but Putin definitely is.

nopriorarrests 7y ago
No, I just find it amusing that Masha Gessen is praising some person, who, if relocated to USA while keeping his political views intact, will instantly become alt-right monster and God knows what else (see Covington kids case). Funny how these things work.
- woodandsteel 7y ago
  The question of how good or bad Russia is, is a million times more important than an amusing observation about a particular journalist. So let me ask you again, what do you think of it?
nirv 7y ago
> So are you saying that because Zhukov is, you claim, a right-winger, that means that his criticisms of Russia are wrong, and that Russia is actually a pretty good place? There is no causal connection between the OP's message and this assumption. The initial argument is that the journalist interpreted the Zhukov’s letter and his (right-wing libertarian) views in accordance with her political (left-wing and anti-Trump) views. edit: Putin is authoritarian right-wing, which has nothing to do with Zhukov's libertarianism. As follows at least from his indictment.

qxnqd 7y ago

Sad that someone who is so pro-liberty thinks that Zhukov doesn't deserve liberty because he's a right-winger. I don't know what to make of something like that.