4 ms·

> they aren't a criminal class, in the UK. Well, they _are_ a criminal class here. It's just they've been getting away with it for some time because they're un

> they aren't a criminal class, in the UK. Well, they _are_ a criminal class here. It's just they've been getting away with it for some time because they're under the protection of another criminal class - our leaders. With any luck the ramifications of this Russia/Ukraine business will cause the unravelling of much more than that little squirt Putin.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago
I see your point (and upvoted it). It depends how you see it, I suppose. What I mean is this: Basically all of these oligarchs come here to do legitimate business, just with unexplained wealth. And that's the loophole; unexplained wealth. You have to spend it in a way that brings you attention, before anyone even asks. So here they are not acting criminally; their wealth is only criminal if someone can prove it was illegally obtained in Russia, and that is quite a high bar, considering the source of the wealth and the system in which it was created. It's not just for Russian oligarchs, either; unexplained wealth is at least as big a problem from the middle east. And as you likely know, campaigners even tried to get Donald Trump to explain how he bought a golf course with cash using an unexplained wealth order. I do wonder if that will get revisited, since it was almost certainly cash of dubious, and quite likely Russian, origin.
- nonrandomstring 5y ago
  Appreciated, thank you. As I see it, It's not "unexplained wealth" per se that's at issue. I find that concept (the assumption that having money you can't account for is _alone_ automatic grounds for suspicion) quite despotic and authoritarian. In the US it's become a means by which police can just "legally" confiscate someone's savings. That can only go to dark places for ordinary people who have some luck with their speculations. It's not the money, it's what they do with it and the sort of behaviour they "buy". There's a litany of serious crime (SOCA) and actions by NCA or local police that mysteriously dead-end. Intimidation of judges, police and journalists, bribery, legal threats designed to silence investigations (SLAPP) has multiplied within Britain thanks to "oligarchs". For years our own leaders have allowed this to fester, turned a blind eye, or been involved more closely - a connection between Peter Mandelson and Oleg Deripaska is just one of the few exposed. Earlier economic crime bills have stalled, and existing "investigatory powers" legislation has rarely, if ever, been used successfully against these people. This has led to new intelligence groups, think-tanks and university research departments set up around countering "Lawfare". Corruption is global, as you say. But let's be honest here; just because someone is not a _technically_ convicted criminal it doesn't mean they not de-facto criminals to a standard most ordinary people would accept. The problem is getting anything through a courts system so underfunded, amidst a society so corrupted by money. What I said is that I hope this Russo-Ukraine war has side effects (far beyond ousting Putin) that blow-back on our own corrupt officials.
  - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
    > That can only go to dark places for ordinary people who have some luck with their speculations. I'm unconcerned about this with respect to UWOs. They don't seem to be too difficult to fight off with documentation, for one thing. > Intimidation of judges, police and journalists, bribery, legal threats designed to silence investigations (SLAPP) has multiplied within Britain thanks to "oligarchs". This is true, but it's far from uniquely the work of the wealthier end of the Russian diaspora. There are other examples wherein all the money has been made in the UK. The difference with the oligarch money is that everyone knows it is stolen wealth and pretends not to see it. You can take a donation from some hedge fund viper and hold your head up that it's just business. When you accept donations without due diligence that you know would fail due diligence, you've been suborned. It's a double victory: the oligarch both pays for the legislation (or non-legislation) he wants, and also envelops the politician in the stink that he himself is used to. But the true corrupting power gained from getting someone to turn a blind eye is in getting them to do it more than once, because then they are compromised without deniability; that's why you make the big donations, over a long period of time.
    - nonrandomstring 5y ago
      > But the true corrupting power gained from getting someone to turn a blind eye is in getting them to do it more than once, because then they are compromised without deniability; Insightful observation. I am reminded of the Bluttkit (Blood cement?) treatement used by SS officers on new recruits.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago

I see your point (and upvoted it). It depends how you see it, I suppose. What I mean is this: Basically all of these oligarchs come here to do legitimate business, just with unexplained wealth. And that's the loophole; unexplained wealth. You have to spend it in a way that brings you attention, before anyone even asks. So here they are not acting criminally; their wealth is only criminal if someone can prove it was illegally obtained in Russia, and that is quite a high bar, considering the source of the wealth and the system in which it was created. It's not just for Russian oligarchs, either; unexplained wealth is at least as big a problem from the middle east. And as you likely know, campaigners even tried to get Donald Trump to explain how he bought a golf course with cash using an unexplained wealth order. I do wonder if that will get revisited, since it was almost certainly cash of dubious, and quite likely Russian, origin.

nonrandomstring 5y ago
Appreciated, thank you. As I see it, It's not "unexplained wealth" per se that's at issue. I find that concept (the assumption that having money you can't account for is _alone_ automatic grounds for suspicion) quite despotic and authoritarian. In the US it's become a means by which police can just "legally" confiscate someone's savings. That can only go to dark places for ordinary people who have some luck with their speculations. It's not the money, it's what they do with it and the sort of behaviour they "buy". There's a litany of serious crime (SOCA) and actions by NCA or local police that mysteriously dead-end. Intimidation of judges, police and journalists, bribery, legal threats designed to silence investigations (SLAPP) has multiplied within Britain thanks to "oligarchs". For years our own leaders have allowed this to fester, turned a blind eye, or been involved more closely - a connection between Peter Mandelson and Oleg Deripaska is just one of the few exposed. Earlier economic crime bills have stalled, and existing "investigatory powers" legislation has rarely, if ever, been used successfully against these people. This has led to new intelligence groups, think-tanks and university research departments set up around countering "Lawfare". Corruption is global, as you say. But let's be honest here; just because someone is not a _technically_ convicted criminal it doesn't mean they not de-facto criminals to a standard most ordinary people would accept. The problem is getting anything through a courts system so underfunded, amidst a society so corrupted by money. What I said is that I hope this Russo-Ukraine war has side effects (far beyond ousting Putin) that blow-back on our own corrupt officials.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  > That can only go to dark places for ordinary people who have some luck with their speculations. I'm unconcerned about this with respect to UWOs. They don't seem to be too difficult to fight off with documentation, for one thing. > Intimidation of judges, police and journalists, bribery, legal threats designed to silence investigations (SLAPP) has multiplied within Britain thanks to "oligarchs". This is true, but it's far from uniquely the work of the wealthier end of the Russian diaspora. There are other examples wherein all the money has been made in the UK. The difference with the oligarch money is that everyone knows it is stolen wealth and pretends not to see it. You can take a donation from some hedge fund viper and hold your head up that it's just business. When you accept donations without due diligence that you know would fail due diligence, you've been suborned. It's a double victory: the oligarch both pays for the legislation (or non-legislation) he wants, and also envelops the politician in the stink that he himself is used to. But the true corrupting power gained from getting someone to turn a blind eye is in getting them to do it more than once, because then they are compromised without deniability; that's why you make the big donations, over a long period of time.
  - nonrandomstring 5y ago
    > But the true corrupting power gained from getting someone to turn a blind eye is in getting them to do it more than once, because then they are compromised without deniability; Insightful observation. I am reminded of the Bluttkit (Blood cement?) treatement used by SS officers on new recruits.