>You seem to dismiss the corruption unless there is some how some grand narrative (some might say "conspiracy"?) that ties it all together and explains why Russ

>You seem to dismiss the corruption unless there is some how some grand narrative (some might say "conspiracy"?) that ties it all together and explains why Russia invaded Ukraine? I prefer to call it a "counter-narrative". Prior to the invasion, a lot of loosely or unrelated bits could be assembled spontaneously by conspiracy-minded people who disliked the US government, NATO, etc. Average people in the US DGAF about Ukraine, and didn't know what was going on with the impeachment and the allegations about Biden. But the invasion provided a unifying element to make it all make sense - as part of a Russian plan. So this sort of thing: "he has explained pretty well how a lot of western neoliberal fuckery in Ukraine led to the recent activity" seems to not be up to providing a good counter-narrative any more. It's weak because the "glue" holding the structure together has dissolved. If there are professionals involved in the campaign against "western neoliberals", I'm curious what they are thinking or whether they are just going through the motions. One more problem, besides not having a unified story, is not having a unified opponent. There is no strongman like Putin on the other side to target.