4 ms·

If I make a button that says (without lying) "IF YOU PUSH THIS YOU DIE", only clueless people will ever push it. You saying > as soon as there emerge a politi

by croon 6y ago

If I make a button that says (without lying) "IF YOU PUSH THIS YOU DIE", only clueless people will ever push it. You saying > as soon as there emerge a political forse which will feel like they may fix them we'll definitely vote for it is waiting for a scenario that can't happen, by Putins/Kremlins design.

shashurup 6y ago
So, you state that: 1. My approach is not pragmatic, but rather naive. 2. You seem to be a defeatist :-) I don't agree with 1 - people die, Putin's no exception. People in ruling party rotate, change etc. The design you are talking about is, imo, overrated.
- croon 6y ago
  I stated none of those things, and you responded to none of what I actually wrote.
  - shashurup 6y ago
    > "Putin will kill or jail anyone who opposes him, but they sucked anyways. As soon as a good challenger comes along we'll for sure vote them in!" No, the reason I mentioned "they sucked" is that for an experienced politician killing his less dangerous opponent is a very stupid move. It wouldn't give any profit but will definitely harm the reputation. Сui bono tells us to search for another beneficiar. > I wasn't even trying to be snide, but actually writing out this scenario made it too absurd to signal any other sentiment. > is waiting for a scenario that can't happen, by Putins/Kremlins design. I see only two options: waiting and starting your own party. I don't feel qualified for the second option. > It's not that a bipartisan system fixes any and all problems, it's that a system where any opposition doesn't fear for their life at least opens up the possibility of viable alternatives. This sounds reasonable. But it is in case a panacea.
    - croon 6y ago
      > No, the reason I mentioned "they sucked" is that for an experienced politician killing his less dangerous opponent is a very stupid move. It wouldn't give any profit but will definitely harm the reputation. Сui bono tells us to search for another beneficiar. Yet he spends 0 effort on finding the guilty parties when journalists/political opponents die. That you actually attempt mental gymnastics trying to explain it in more convoluted ways tells me that the Kremlin propaganda machine works.
      - shashurup 6y ago
        > Yet he spends 0 effort on finding the guilty parties when journalists/political opponents die. Yes, you are right this is very disturbing and needs to be dealt with. > That you actually attempt mental gymnastics trying to explain it in more convoluted ways tells me that the Kremlin propaganda machine works. This is not a "convoluted mental gymnastics", this is a necessary exercise to resist the very propaganda. Talking about propaganda - could you come up with some particular example of it which makes me perform all these mental gymnastics attempt? I'm honestly curious whether I would be able to distinguish it.

by croon 6y ago

shashurup 6y ago

So, you state that: 1. My approach is not pragmatic, but rather naive. 2. You seem to be a defeatist :-) I don't agree with 1 - people die, Putin's no exception. People in ruling party rotate, change etc. The design you are talking about is, imo, overrated.

croon 6y ago
I stated none of those things, and you responded to none of what I actually wrote.
- shashurup 6y ago
  > "Putin will kill or jail anyone who opposes him, but they sucked anyways. As soon as a good challenger comes along we'll for sure vote them in!" No, the reason I mentioned "they sucked" is that for an experienced politician killing his less dangerous opponent is a very stupid move. It wouldn't give any profit but will definitely harm the reputation. Сui bono tells us to search for another beneficiar. > I wasn't even trying to be snide, but actually writing out this scenario made it too absurd to signal any other sentiment. > is waiting for a scenario that can't happen, by Putins/Kremlins design. I see only two options: waiting and starting your own party. I don't feel qualified for the second option. > It's not that a bipartisan system fixes any and all problems, it's that a system where any opposition doesn't fear for their life at least opens up the possibility of viable alternatives. This sounds reasonable. But it is in case a panacea.
  - croon 6y ago
    > No, the reason I mentioned "they sucked" is that for an experienced politician killing his less dangerous opponent is a very stupid move. It wouldn't give any profit but will definitely harm the reputation. Сui bono tells us to search for another beneficiar. Yet he spends 0 effort on finding the guilty parties when journalists/political opponents die. That you actually attempt mental gymnastics trying to explain it in more convoluted ways tells me that the Kremlin propaganda machine works.
    - shashurup 6y ago
      > Yet he spends 0 effort on finding the guilty parties when journalists/political opponents die. Yes, you are right this is very disturbing and needs to be dealt with. > That you actually attempt mental gymnastics trying to explain it in more convoluted ways tells me that the Kremlin propaganda machine works. This is not a "convoluted mental gymnastics", this is a necessary exercise to resist the very propaganda. Talking about propaganda - could you come up with some particular example of it which makes me perform all these mental gymnastics attempt? I'm honestly curious whether I would be able to distinguish it.