5 ms·

I couldn't get through this. Dunking on Star Wars, LOTR, and NATO strategy all at once. Someone hire this guy immediately and make him executive director at t

by mrkeen 2y ago

I couldn't get through this. Dunking on Star Wars, LOTR, and NATO strategy all at once. Someone hire this guy immediately and make him executive director at the ministry of creative arts and war! I thought I was going into a piece of writing that would be critical of drawing comparisons between fantasy and the real world, but the author did the exact opposite. He drew the comparison between the Ukraine counter-offensive and magic swords, and put those words into NATO's mouth.

lukan 2y ago
No, he made the theory, that too many in NATO believed their own sides fiction. (And orcs for russian soldiers is a literal slang) As someone who followed all of that quite extensivly, I tend to confirm this. Otherwise that disastrous offensive last year never would have happened at all. As it was quite clear from the beginning, that it was bound to fail - but the imagination that the glorious win of the righteous forces of history is about to happen. So it needed to happen, despite objections from reality seeing people on the ground. Because the russian minefields and fortifications and russian artillery supperiority turned out to be very real. And they were real before.
- rebolek 2y ago
  He made a theory that Russia is not the bad guy. They invaded a country without a reason. They literally are the bad guy. Some random percent of Russians believe that Putin is great? Of course they say that, otherwise they would be in prison. He has a point about West sending trash to Ukraine. But saying it's somehow Anduril? You have to be quiet open minded to accept his associations. The guy makes some good points but buries them in a ton of his opinions that it's hard to find the points he makes.
  - A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
    > They invaded a country without a reason. They had their reasons or at least rationalizations, though you don't see them and they might not make sense to you. > They literally are the bad guy. Maybe. I agree that the invasion was a very grave evil. Even so, it doesn't mean that they're destined to lose, and we shouldn't think that way. Mongols were bad guys but won so much that they got tired of winning. It's a very grave fallacy to believe that the Good Guys always prevail. And, besides, the Russians you ask would surely say, "Wait, you think those Banderite Ukrainians are the GOOD Guys?! And here I thought we were the Good Guys! Throughout its entire history, Russia has always fought and always conquered evil." > Of course they say that, otherwise they would be in prison. You can't seriously believe this. I'd invite you to hang out on the Russian internet (or Russian Telegram) for a different view. Have a look at what they write in their own language, when talking between themselves.
    - mrkeen 2y ago
      > You can't seriously believe this. You don't need to say that Putin isn't great to get arrested. Holding up a blank piece of paper is enough.
      - lukan 2y ago
        It can be enough. Not at all everyone who expressed opposition to the war is in prison. I did not looked too much into it, but can you name anyone at all, who is in a russian prison now, simply for verbally opposing the war? (There surely are plenty of political prisoners in russia, but I believe they were more vocal and organised in their opposition)
        amenhotep 2y ago
        If you'd asked this two weeks ago it would've been pretty easy for me. Alexei Moskalev has only just been released from a penal colony. I suppose you can dismiss that because social media posts and having a daughter with a brain and a heart don't count as "verbal", but I don't think that would be very reasonable.
        lukan 2y ago
        Well, I would consider his actions quite vocal. (And the article in the realm of propaganda, because they made it look like he was jailed just for the picture, when he also made uncited posts on social media.) But nevertheless, it is another good example to save, for my debates with certain people of other opinion. (Nato aggression)
    - benterix 2y ago
      > They had their reasons or at least rationalizations, though you don't see them and they might not make sense to you. I read Putin's rationalization that was published just after the war broke off and retracted soon after but you can still read it.[0] He basically claims that Russia has to be great again and it is his historical role to conquer it so that Ukrainians are his slaves just like Belorussians are. So yes, they have their reasons and realizations, just like another ruler in 1938 and 1939, the problem is that nobody else agreed with them. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefrontierpost.com/the-new-world-order/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefronti...
  - otabdeveloper4 2y ago
    > invaded a country without a reason Yeah, I'm sure that's exactly why. WW3 happened for no reason at all.
    - benterix 2y ago
      First, it is not WW3 but Russian aggression on Ukraine. Second, they had very clear reasons: Putin always considered Ukraine his property and when he realized he can lose it, he decided to use force. He elaborated on it in a longer piece[0] and in the Carlson show. https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefrontierpost.com/the-new-world-order/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefronti...
      - otabdeveloper4 2y ago
        > it is not WW3 Of course it is.
  - lukan 2y ago
    "He made a theory that Russia is not the bad guy." I did not see that. I did see the opinion, that they do not represent the ultimate evil, like the orcs do. The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia, that is the point being made - and if this already qualifies to you as saying they are not the bad guys, then I recommend reading a bit more carefully, as it is exactly this black and white thinking, that is in the realm of fantasy.
    - libertine 2y ago
      > The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia This is a very bold claim, can you back this up? Because we won't see massive lines of Russian men trying to join the army to defend the homeland. In fact, the moment a general mobilization was announced you had hundreds of thousands (if not million+?) fleeing Russia. The main motivations we've seen for the Russians joining are: - entrepreneurship - going to war became an entrepreneurial endeavor to get paid a large sum of money (if I recall correctly Russians are now being paid more than US soldiers if you factor in their sign-in bonus); - getting out of jail - to the point of seeing violent criminals commit crimes again; I'm not saying they see themselves as representations of evil; I'm saying they don't seem to care whether they represent it or not.
      - lukan 2y ago
        Since I was talking about russian soldiers, I did talk about their motivation. Not about russian people who are not soldiers and don't want to become soldiers. Because the russian army still largely consists of voluntarily soldiers. And as far as I know, defending mother russia from NATO aggression is a major motivator, as well as money is. But also the Nazis did not view themself as evil - but rather as powerful because of lack of restraint. And protecting the poor suppressed aryan people. So my point was not at all, that the russian soldiers are somehow nice - just that the world is not as black and white as fantasy often is - but people like the fantasy approach of black and white - and the proplem starts when they apply this thinking to the real world.
        2y ago
  - defrost 2y ago
    I've seen a lot of politicised "reasons". I rarely see resource based reasons .. which are more than likely the undercurrent. Putin et al truly believe in a "Greater Russia" and that Ukraine is part of that. First (2014) they wanted agricultural resources, better sea access, etc. and they took Crimea. That provided some reason for a more recent invasion, after almost a decade of blocked water supply Russia needed a land corridor and a secure water supply o/wise Crimea was a hollow gain. Still not going well with that: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-dam-blast-could-threaten-crimean-water-supply-says-top-russian-official-2023-06-06/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-dam-blast-could... Next to grain and water the other complaints seem small petty namecalling with little justification.
    - lukan 2y ago
      "First (2014) they wanted agricultural resources, better sea access, etc. and they took Crimea." No, they already had it de facto, just not de jure. But with the shift in power in Kiew they were afraid of loosing it.
      - defrost 2y ago
        Either way, they (Russia) lost the water supply.
- rightbyte 2y ago
  I think the fundamental concept is that organisations or movement etc can't lie without the organization starting to believe its own lies. Members acts as if the fiction was real. They have to or are labeled traitors, non team players etc. Those who get it either play along or stay silent.
  - jumping_frog 2y ago
    Uncle Sam blew up Nord Steam 2 pipeline so that Germany won't hesitate in its support against Russia. Imagine Germans believing lies that hurt themselves.
    - lukan 2y ago
      It likely was rather a ukrainian-polish joint venture. And the opinion in germany is mixed about the incident, only very few believe it was Putin. Some say, who cares for russian gas anyway, good that it ended - others are indeed very pissed about the whole thing (Scholz does not seem to like Selensky).
      - jumping_frog 2y ago
        Russia has no reason to blow it up because they can turn off the pipe on their own end. Even Germany can turn off the pipe at their end. So that future is open to normalcy if required.
        beretguy 2y ago
        Don't try to apply reason to anything russia.
        jumping_frog 2y ago
        To be honest I got these talking points through youtube comments. It is so obvious for anyone who pays little attention. Not that difficult.
        2y ago
corimaith 2y ago
Yeah it's the author pathologizing that the influence of LOTR is somehow a major factor, if a factor at all in influencing NATO/Ukranian military strategy with no real proof? It looks more a leftist who is mad that their realist socialist fiction didn't become popular and influential and instead the "conservative" fantasy of good and evil somehow came to define Western Liberal thinking, nevermind the sheer diversity of works that do confront moral grayness, or that cultures outside of the West (including Russia) do very much enjoy Fantasy as well.
- maxerickson 2y ago
  The author is obviously a conservative! (note the praise for the virtuously conservative Tolkien and Herbert at the beginning)
  - from-nibly 2y ago
    Secretly sussing out which team someone is on is part of the issue of turning things into fandoms. > the author is obviously a conservative! Why not just say he's the villain of the story you are in?
- red-iron-pine 2y ago
  Russian anti-NATO efforts know no bounds. that's not sarcasm, I mean that literally: they are pulling out all of the stops and abusing the hell out of GPT. Like, they used to have a 50 person team pushing JFK, Area 51, and Moon landing conspiracies, and that was in the 90s.
  - aguaviva 2y ago
    Like, they used to have a 50 person team pushing JFK, Area 51, and Moon landing conspiracies, and that was in the 90s. Wouldn't surprise me, but do you have more background on this "team"?

by mrkeen 2y ago

lukan 2y ago

No, he made the theory, that too many in NATO believed their own sides fiction. (And orcs for russian soldiers is a literal slang) As someone who followed all of that quite extensivly, I tend to confirm this. Otherwise that disastrous offensive last year never would have happened at all. As it was quite clear from the beginning, that it was bound to fail - but the imagination that the glorious win of the righteous forces of history is about to happen. So it needed to happen, despite objections from reality seeing people on the ground. Because the russian minefields and fortifications and russian artillery supperiority turned out to be very real. And they were real before.

rebolek 2y ago
He made a theory that Russia is not the bad guy. They invaded a country without a reason. They literally are the bad guy. Some random percent of Russians believe that Putin is great? Of course they say that, otherwise they would be in prison. He has a point about West sending trash to Ukraine. But saying it's somehow Anduril? You have to be quiet open minded to accept his associations. The guy makes some good points but buries them in a ton of his opinions that it's hard to find the points he makes.
- A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
  > They invaded a country without a reason. They had their reasons or at least rationalizations, though you don't see them and they might not make sense to you. > They literally are the bad guy. Maybe. I agree that the invasion was a very grave evil. Even so, it doesn't mean that they're destined to lose, and we shouldn't think that way. Mongols were bad guys but won so much that they got tired of winning. It's a very grave fallacy to believe that the Good Guys always prevail. And, besides, the Russians you ask would surely say, "Wait, you think those Banderite Ukrainians are the GOOD Guys?! And here I thought we were the Good Guys! Throughout its entire history, Russia has always fought and always conquered evil." > Of course they say that, otherwise they would be in prison. You can't seriously believe this. I'd invite you to hang out on the Russian internet (or Russian Telegram) for a different view. Have a look at what they write in their own language, when talking between themselves.
  - mrkeen 2y ago
    > You can't seriously believe this. You don't need to say that Putin isn't great to get arrested. Holding up a blank piece of paper is enough.
    - lukan 2y ago
      It can be enough. Not at all everyone who expressed opposition to the war is in prison. I did not looked too much into it, but can you name anyone at all, who is in a russian prison now, simply for verbally opposing the war? (There surely are plenty of political prisoners in russia, but I believe they were more vocal and organised in their opposition)
      - amenhotep 2y ago
        If you'd asked this two weeks ago it would've been pretty easy for me. Alexei Moskalev has only just been released from a penal colony. I suppose you can dismiss that because social media posts and having a daughter with a brain and a heart don't count as "verbal", but I don't think that would be very reasonable.
        lukan 2y ago
        Well, I would consider his actions quite vocal. (And the article in the realm of propaganda, because they made it look like he was jailed just for the picture, when he also made uncited posts on social media.) But nevertheless, it is another good example to save, for my debates with certain people of other opinion. (Nato aggression)
  - benterix 2y ago
    > They had their reasons or at least rationalizations, though you don't see them and they might not make sense to you. I read Putin's rationalization that was published just after the war broke off and retracted soon after but you can still read it.[0] He basically claims that Russia has to be great again and it is his historical role to conquer it so that Ukrainians are his slaves just like Belorussians are. So yes, they have their reasons and realizations, just like another ruler in 1938 and 1939, the problem is that nobody else agreed with them. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefrontierpost.com/the-new-world-order/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefronti...
- otabdeveloper4 2y ago
  > invaded a country without a reason Yeah, I'm sure that's exactly why. WW3 happened for no reason at all.
  - benterix 2y ago
    First, it is not WW3 but Russian aggression on Ukraine. Second, they had very clear reasons: Putin always considered Ukraine his property and when he realized he can lose it, he decided to use force. He elaborated on it in a longer piece[0] and in the Carlson show. https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefrontierpost.com/the-new-world-order/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefronti...
    - otabdeveloper4 2y ago
      > it is not WW3 Of course it is.
- lukan 2y ago
  "He made a theory that Russia is not the bad guy." I did not see that. I did see the opinion, that they do not represent the ultimate evil, like the orcs do. The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia, that is the point being made - and if this already qualifies to you as saying they are not the bad guys, then I recommend reading a bit more carefully, as it is exactly this black and white thinking, that is in the realm of fantasy.
  - libertine 2y ago
    > The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia This is a very bold claim, can you back this up? Because we won't see massive lines of Russian men trying to join the army to defend the homeland. In fact, the moment a general mobilization was announced you had hundreds of thousands (if not million+?) fleeing Russia. The main motivations we've seen for the Russians joining are: - entrepreneurship - going to war became an entrepreneurial endeavor to get paid a large sum of money (if I recall correctly Russians are now being paid more than US soldiers if you factor in their sign-in bonus); - getting out of jail - to the point of seeing violent criminals commit crimes again; I'm not saying they see themselves as representations of evil; I'm saying they don't seem to care whether they represent it or not.
    - lukan 2y ago
      Since I was talking about russian soldiers, I did talk about their motivation. Not about russian people who are not soldiers and don't want to become soldiers. Because the russian army still largely consists of voluntarily soldiers. And as far as I know, defending mother russia from NATO aggression is a major motivator, as well as money is. But also the Nazis did not view themself as evil - but rather as powerful because of lack of restraint. And protecting the poor suppressed aryan people. So my point was not at all, that the russian soldiers are somehow nice - just that the world is not as black and white as fantasy often is - but people like the fantasy approach of black and white - and the proplem starts when they apply this thinking to the real world.
      - 2y ago
- defrost 2y ago
  I've seen a lot of politicised "reasons". I rarely see resource based reasons .. which are more than likely the undercurrent. Putin et al truly believe in a "Greater Russia" and that Ukraine is part of that. First (2014) they wanted agricultural resources, better sea access, etc. and they took Crimea. That provided some reason for a more recent invasion, after almost a decade of blocked water supply Russia needed a land corridor and a secure water supply o/wise Crimea was a hollow gain. Still not going well with that: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-dam-blast-could-threaten-crimean-water-supply-says-top-russian-official-2023-06-06/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-dam-blast-could... Next to grain and water the other complaints seem small petty namecalling with little justification.
  - lukan 2y ago
    "First (2014) they wanted agricultural resources, better sea access, etc. and they took Crimea." No, they already had it de facto, just not de jure. But with the shift in power in Kiew they were afraid of loosing it.
    - defrost 2y ago
      Either way, they (Russia) lost the water supply.
rightbyte 2y ago
I think the fundamental concept is that organisations or movement etc can't lie without the organization starting to believe its own lies. Members acts as if the fiction was real. They have to or are labeled traitors, non team players etc. Those who get it either play along or stay silent.
- jumping_frog 2y ago
  Uncle Sam blew up Nord Steam 2 pipeline so that Germany won't hesitate in its support against Russia. Imagine Germans believing lies that hurt themselves.
  - lukan 2y ago
    It likely was rather a ukrainian-polish joint venture. And the opinion in germany is mixed about the incident, only very few believe it was Putin. Some say, who cares for russian gas anyway, good that it ended - others are indeed very pissed about the whole thing (Scholz does not seem to like Selensky).
    - jumping_frog 2y ago
      Russia has no reason to blow it up because they can turn off the pipe on their own end. Even Germany can turn off the pipe at their end. So that future is open to normalcy if required.
      - beretguy 2y ago
        Don't try to apply reason to anything russia.
        jumping_frog 2y ago
        To be honest I got these talking points through youtube comments. It is so obvious for anyone who pays little attention. Not that difficult.
        2y ago

corimaith 2y ago

Yeah it's the author pathologizing that the influence of LOTR is somehow a major factor, if a factor at all in influencing NATO/Ukranian military strategy with no real proof? It looks more a leftist who is mad that their realist socialist fiction didn't become popular and influential and instead the "conservative" fantasy of good and evil somehow came to define Western Liberal thinking, nevermind the sheer diversity of works that do confront moral grayness, or that cultures outside of the West (including Russia) do very much enjoy Fantasy as well.

maxerickson 2y ago
The author is obviously a conservative! (note the praise for the virtuously conservative Tolkien and Herbert at the beginning)
- from-nibly 2y ago
  Secretly sussing out which team someone is on is part of the issue of turning things into fandoms. > the author is obviously a conservative! Why not just say he's the villain of the story you are in?
red-iron-pine 2y ago
Russian anti-NATO efforts know no bounds. that's not sarcasm, I mean that literally: they are pulling out all of the stops and abusing the hell out of GPT. Like, they used to have a 50 person team pushing JFK, Area 51, and Moon landing conspiracies, and that was in the 90s.
- aguaviva 2y ago
  Like, they used to have a 50 person team pushing JFK, Area 51, and Moon landing conspiracies, and that was in the 90s. Wouldn't surprise me, but do you have more background on this "team"?