4 ms·

A lot of comments look at this from a political/party point of view, which is understandable. But could this also be looked at from a group survival point of vi

by V__ 4y ago

A lot of comments look at this from a political/party point of view, which is understandable. But could this also be looked at from a group survival point of view? Let's look at Ukraine right now. In the short-term a deal with Russia might ease the pain of Ukrainians which are troubled by the harsh winter, but by "harming" themselves right now, they might survive better in the long run? Edit: I didn't want to start a political discussion about the war, just ask whether this behaviour might be evolutionary beneficially from a group survival point of view. Since war has been part of human history.

umvi 4y ago
Like settling with a patent troll vs. fighting an expensive and lengthy legal battle. Sometimes people "self harm" on principle...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
rank0 4y ago
That one is a tough calculation imo. My worthless opinion is that Ukraine and the west should’ve negotiated right at the beginning by guaranteeing no NATO membership. Even if Ukraine wins in the end, the country has become a smoldering pile of rubble. There was even such a deal on the table in the early stages that the west pretty much killed… At this point though idk what diplomatic solution exists. Deescalation should be everyone’s #1 goal atm.
- kybernetyk 4y ago
  - ilyt 4y ago
    As is/was most post USRR countries. It's a national disease that's hard to heal, and it was also kept there by the Russian influences
  - rank0 4y ago
    I see what you’re saying but now huge portions of the country and it’s infrastructure are literal rubble atm.
  - roflc0ptic 4y ago
    > So not really different to what it was before. The hyperbole here. Functioning infrastructure + corruption is a lot better than destroyed infrastructure + corruption
- ilyt 4y ago
  There is no honest negotiation with Russia. They have proven it over and over again. Their assumption was that world would just let them do what they want as they did with Crimea, and that previous mistake is direct reason for current situation.
  - rank0 4y ago
    This mentality is was created the Cold War and has cause immense international damage throughout history. I’m no fan of the Russian federation, but they have legitimate security concerns regarding nato expansion. We’ve been actively destabilizing the region for decades so they probably say the same thing about us. Do we really want to go back to perpetual proxy wars with our adversaries?
    - _kbh_ 4y ago
      > This mentality is was created the Cold War and has cause immense international damage throughout history. This mentality is born from reality, Russia has agreed before to never even threaten Ukraines sovereignty, let alone actually invade. Russia does not care about agreements, or treaties, or anything, all Russia cares about is what Russia wants. > I’m no fan of the Russian federation, but they have legitimate security concerns regarding nato expansion. Russia has legitimate security concerns regarding a defensive alliance expanding closer and closer to them?. If thats the case maybe they should stop invading countries, Ukraines not the first, and unfortunately may not be the last. NATO expansion is largely born closer to Russia from Russian imperialism(in the least for the last two members). > Do we really want to go back to perpetual proxy wars with our adversaries? Or Russia could not invade Ukraine and not openly call to end it as a country altogether?.
      - naasking 4y ago
        > NATO expansion is largely born closer to Russia from Russian imperialism(in the least for the last two members). Sure, and before that? NATO has been expanding since the USSR fell.
nerdponx 4y ago
Another commenter made a similar suggestion, that this outcome makes sense when analyzed in a game theory framework where participants play the game repeatedly and seek to maximize their long-run expected value: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33830734 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33830734 This "repeated games" scenario is very common in social science and economics.

by V__ 4y ago

umvi 4y ago

Like settling with a patent troll vs. fighting an expensive and lengthy legal battle. Sometimes people "self harm" on principle...

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

rank0 4y ago

That one is a tough calculation imo. My worthless opinion is that Ukraine and the west should’ve negotiated right at the beginning by guaranteeing no NATO membership. Even if Ukraine wins in the end, the country has become a smoldering pile of rubble. There was even such a deal on the table in the early stages that the west pretty much killed… At this point though idk what diplomatic solution exists. Deescalation should be everyone’s #1 goal atm.

kybernetyk 4y ago
- ilyt 4y ago
  As is/was most post USRR countries. It's a national disease that's hard to heal, and it was also kept there by the Russian influences
- rank0 4y ago
  I see what you’re saying but now huge portions of the country and it’s infrastructure are literal rubble atm.
- roflc0ptic 4y ago
  > So not really different to what it was before. The hyperbole here. Functioning infrastructure + corruption is a lot better than destroyed infrastructure + corruption
ilyt 4y ago
There is no honest negotiation with Russia. They have proven it over and over again. Their assumption was that world would just let them do what they want as they did with Crimea, and that previous mistake is direct reason for current situation.
- rank0 4y ago
  This mentality is was created the Cold War and has cause immense international damage throughout history. I’m no fan of the Russian federation, but they have legitimate security concerns regarding nato expansion. We’ve been actively destabilizing the region for decades so they probably say the same thing about us. Do we really want to go back to perpetual proxy wars with our adversaries?
  - _kbh_ 4y ago
    > This mentality is was created the Cold War and has cause immense international damage throughout history. This mentality is born from reality, Russia has agreed before to never even threaten Ukraines sovereignty, let alone actually invade. Russia does not care about agreements, or treaties, or anything, all Russia cares about is what Russia wants. > I’m no fan of the Russian federation, but they have legitimate security concerns regarding nato expansion. Russia has legitimate security concerns regarding a defensive alliance expanding closer and closer to them?. If thats the case maybe they should stop invading countries, Ukraines not the first, and unfortunately may not be the last. NATO expansion is largely born closer to Russia from Russian imperialism(in the least for the last two members). > Do we really want to go back to perpetual proxy wars with our adversaries? Or Russia could not invade Ukraine and not openly call to end it as a country altogether?.
    - naasking 4y ago
      > NATO expansion is largely born closer to Russia from Russian imperialism(in the least for the last two members). Sure, and before that? NATO has been expanding since the USSR fell.

nerdponx 4y ago

Another commenter made a similar suggestion, that this outcome makes sense when analyzed in a game theory framework where participants play the game repeatedly and seek to maximize their long-run expected value: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33830734 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33830734 This "repeated games" scenario is very common in social science and economics.