3 ms·

> Whether they "should" in any moral sense is not a useful way to think about things because geopolitics isn't a morality play While I personally agree with th

by retrac 5y ago

> Whether they "should" in any moral sense is not a useful way to think about things because geopolitics isn't a morality play While I personally agree with this Realpolitik view, I don't believe it's actually universal among leaders. Many things that have happened historically did because leaders felt some grand moral imperative (national unification, stopping an atrocity, helping one's close ethnic allies in a defensive war, offensive "defences" when the momentum felt like it was being lost -- take your pick). A moral imperative (although one rather out of place in the 21st century) seems to be behind Putin's actions, IMO. Restore the glory of the Russian empire, practical barriers to that will be ignored. It just must be done, for the sake of itself. Righteous causes eventually sort themselves out, right? Which brings me to the sanctions. I've not actually seen much discussion on whether sanctions against Russia will achieve Western geopolitical goals. Much of the discussion is presently framed as a moral imperative. We must act to punish Putin.

cabalamat 5y ago
> Many things that have happened historically did because leaders felt some grand moral imperative I agree, actually. For example, the original Islamic expansion, and later the crusades that were a response to it, were both explained in moral terms. (these demonstrate how manipulating consensus reality is a core competency for rulers). And the people who fought in these wars genuinely honestly believed they were acting morally and serving a higher purpose. Or, a more recent example: part of the reason NATO intervened in Kosovo in 1999 was that they were ashamed they hadn't done so in Bosnia a few years earlier.
cabalamat 5y ago
> Restore the glory of the Russian empire Right now Zelinskyy and Ukraine are covering themselves in a lot more glory than Putin and Russia. > Righteous causes eventually sort themselves out, right? I think Putin psyched himself up into believing his own propaganda. He's probably surrounded by yes-men who tell him what he wants to hear, too. Oops. > Much of the discussion is presently framed as a moral imperative. We must act to punish Putin. Sure. Morality is intuitive game theory, after all.

by retrac 5y ago

cabalamat 5y ago

> Many things that have happened historically did because leaders felt some grand moral imperative I agree, actually. For example, the original Islamic expansion, and later the crusades that were a response to it, were both explained in moral terms. (these demonstrate how manipulating consensus reality is a core competency for rulers). And the people who fought in these wars genuinely honestly believed they were acting morally and serving a higher purpose. Or, a more recent example: part of the reason NATO intervened in Kosovo in 1999 was that they were ashamed they hadn't done so in Bosnia a few years earlier.

cabalamat 5y ago

> Restore the glory of the Russian empire Right now Zelinskyy and Ukraine are covering themselves in a lot more glory than Putin and Russia. > Righteous causes eventually sort themselves out, right? I think Putin psyched himself up into believing his own propaganda. He's probably surrounded by yes-men who tell him what he wants to hear, too. Oops. > Much of the discussion is presently framed as a moral imperative. We must act to punish Putin. Sure. Morality is intuitive game theory, after all.