5 ms·

This is not hypocrisy and has nothing to do with the cold war. Quite to the contrary: we hold Russians to a higher standard than Saudi Arabia. Like we hold the

This is not hypocrisy and has nothing to do with the cold war. Quite to the contrary: we hold Russians to a higher standard than Saudi Arabia. Like we hold the USA to a higher standard than either country in regards to privacy.

berntb 13y ago
If totally different standards for different people/countries regarding intolerance is neither hypocrisy nor racism -- what is it? My theory above is that totally different standards for different parts of the world really is political propaganda to the citizens of the country where the media writes. Do you have another explanation? (To take another example -- even with a Palestinian description of Israel, the Sudan atrocities were a thousand times worse. My local leftwing media (more or less all local media) complained many times more about Israel, anyway. And never about that Israel was criticized every year in UN but Sudan very little. How many thousands of times is reasonable for different standards?) Edit: Note when I wrote that immigrants, even citizens now, in Sweden is criticized much less.. Not even that is neither racism nor double standards?!
- rjd 13y ago
  Its got a mythos as the last frontier of Europe, of hard country and hard men, enduring under dogs ... down trodden but never giving up. Emerging from each massive injustice with a new culture rich from strife, from the cossacks to beauty hidden within the works of the communist era. And the sadness of what totalitarian rule did to a people trying to build an equal and fair society, the people who died for others, and eventually all in vein. It resonates as a country to admire, a people to admire, the mystique of its history and taste of its asian influence. And despite that its a foreign place. London to St Petersburg is closer than LA to New York, at times Russia has been part of Europe. The double standard for me and many of friends (whom I talk history with it) is one of love, sorrow, and admiration. When the illusion of the Russian mythos breaks and the reality of human condition seeps through you get held to that standard. Not one of a distant problem, a stranger in a strange land, one of a friend.
  - berntb 13y ago
    Are you a Turing Test program that misunderstood and went off on a tangent? (That would explain a lot on HN, recently.) Or are you just trying to change the subject?
    - rjd 13y ago
      No Im just jet lagged :/ and gave you another reason for the double standard towards Russia.
      - berntb 13y ago
        On consideration, sorry for being pissy (English slang, iirc). Your comment was relevant to part about what I wrote and very well written. I posted a theory about something I find strange -- and waited with bated breath for either support or to be short down with a good reference that taught me a lot about the world. Sigh, no luck on that part. Maybe no one knows.
    - VLM 13y ago
      So you claim its "political propaganda to the citizens of the country where the media writes" and ask "Do you have another explanation?" and he responds that its "the mystique of its history and taste of its asian influence". Not seeing a problem here?
      - berntb 13y ago
        I gave another example. It is easy to give more examples of the hypocrisy I talked about -- without Russia. Edit: Not that it is relevant, but I've liked most every Russian I've spoken to more than five minutes. And Putin scares me when he limits press freedom and organized crime gets integrated with the police.
- ShardPhoenix 13y ago
  This might be an issue of thinking on the margin - that given their starting points, it's theoretically easier to get Israel or Russia to meet (leftist) American standards than to get Sudan to meet them.
  - berntb 13y ago
    I am far from an expert in either case, but that doesn't seem logical. The Russian government is killing press freedom and stealing the oil income. They need external enemies and blame the west. Any criticism from the Western world seems to be dismissed as anti-Russian hate mongering. Re Israel, good luck influencing them: (1) Consider the US reaction on 9/11. Israel had something like that continuously since long before 1948. (2) I believe most of the Jewish population there aren't descended from European refugees but people kicked out from countries in the Middle East, for having the wrong religion. They think things like "They stole three times the size of Israel from us personally when they forced us out, we're getting back the parts of the West Bank some of us was kicked out from".
    - pipy 13y ago
      I am Russian and live in Russia. I don't usually write comments, but, since I've never seen any reasonable explanation of the Russian homophobia issue on any Western website, I'm going to bite the bullet: First of all, as banal as it may sound, Russian State Duma doesn't represent the interests and wishes of the general public in any meaningful way (at least, if compared to any Western European country or US). The votes are constantly rigged, and even though the Putin is supported by the large majority of population (sad truth), Russian State Duma by the huge part is literally a bunch of degenerates, clowns and Putin's yes-men at best. So, they can pass any insane law that they wish to pass. Secondly, the regime's popularity is monotonically decreasing, albeit slowly. And the reason is that the relative economic prosperity is based only on high oil and natural gas prices (which can still help you during the next couple of decades). The industrial complex is in decline and nothing is able to revive it (because of the fact that any owner of successful company can be stripped of his ownership in any time -- and this is de facto at the core of the regime and cannot be changed). When you begin to understand that your popularity trend wont ever change, you start looking for means for tightening control and providing alternative channels to drain the public discontent. For their main ideology the ruling regime has adopted the "back into the future" style monarchism and religion (which is miserable at best, but is the only choice when the largest opposing part of the public still praises higher standards of living in atheistic USSR). Some jerk has made an arbitrary decision that it is a good idea to also go after gays. The passing of the anti-gay-propaganda law and the half-assed media campaign followed. How does majority of the Russian people really relate to gays: 1) First and foremost, no one even thinks about the issue. When the large part of a population lives below poverty line, when there are significant issues with police misconduct and corruption, etc. etc., you have larger issues to think of. 2) Literally the overwhelming majority of the people I ever new are highly tolerant to gays. I'm speaking this as a person that has contacts within diverse social groups (university dropout, served as a conscript in a military for two years, born in another region, but now a long time Moscow resident). 3) This does not preclude that the Russian people as a whole are probably less fond of gays than Western Europeans, but not even near the scale of the current media hype. This is sad. But there are some orders of magnitude sadder things in Russia for everyone to deal with every day. Now, when US and UK have some relationship issues with Russia, they have decided that this is a good time to raise the issue. Since the Russia is de facto tabula rasa for West and vice versa, the bullshit card has worked really fine. I am personally for allowing gay marriage etc. etc., but we shouldn't even be talking about this, because this "Russian homophobia" is pure propaganda stuff, on both sides. There are huge issues in the West and Russia that are much more important. Slightly offtopic: great lecture about ideology by Slavoj Žižek https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1Kb4JZGpA0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1Kb4JZGpA0
- Amadou 13y ago
  Israel and Russia are considered 1st world countries. That implies a level of social progressivism and standards of living that 3rd world countries don't have. So when a country fails to live up to those standards they get criticism. You might see that as propaganda, I see that as acknowledgement of reality. Everybody expects Israel to behave like the democracy they claim to be, nobody expects the Sudan - with its self-appointed president of nearly 25 years - to behave like a democracy. In other words, Sudan's problems are a symptom of Sudan's level of social progress, while Israel and Russia's problems are seen as an aberration in their level of social progress. You would never see the Olympics hosted in Sudan. As for immigrants being criticized for holding 3rd world views after moving to a 1st world country, they don't have the kind of power that a government does so the harm they can do by acting on their beliefs is significantly less than what the state could do.
  - berntb 13y ago
    >> Israel and Russia are considered 1st world countries. [There are higher standards for them] I acknowledged that when I wrote "How many thousands of times is reasonable for different standards?" So, how many factors of ten higher standards should be held for Israel than for, say, the countries that spend a large part of their GNP on artillery for use on civilians? 3? 4? (I've asked that multiple times and never gotten an answer when people repeat your argument. Including in what you comment on.) >> Sudan's problems are a symptom of Sudan's level of social progress I also brought up that at least Swedish media avoid mentioning that the dictators taking control of the UNHRC and not complaining about each others. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council#Specific_issues http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Cou... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council#Sudan_.26_Ethiopian_candidacy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Cou... That is not explained by you thinking it is OK to have a factor thousands in different standards. >>As for immigrants being criticized for holding 3rd world views after moving to a 1st world country, they don't have the kind of power that a government does You really see no problem having factors of ten different standards for different groups of citizens inside a country? Besides, I think you simplify (on the border of excusing) unpleasant regimes that oppress, mass murder and steal -- when you just describe the reason as "different levels of social progress". Countries today are poor mainly because they are controlled by corrupt juntas (or in a conflict, usually created by juntas). Every country on the planet with population over a few millions can and should have a competent government.

berntb 13y ago

If totally different standards for different people/countries regarding intolerance is neither hypocrisy nor racism -- what is it? My theory above is that totally different standards for different parts of the world really is political propaganda to the citizens of the country where the media writes. Do you have another explanation? (To take another example -- even with a Palestinian description of Israel, the Sudan atrocities were a thousand times worse. My local leftwing media (more or less all local media) complained many times more about Israel, anyway. And never about that Israel was criticized every year in UN but Sudan very little. How many thousands of times is reasonable for different standards?) Edit: Note when I wrote that immigrants, even citizens now, in Sweden is criticized much less.. Not even that is neither racism nor double standards?!

rjd 13y ago
Its got a mythos as the last frontier of Europe, of hard country and hard men, enduring under dogs ... down trodden but never giving up. Emerging from each massive injustice with a new culture rich from strife, from the cossacks to beauty hidden within the works of the communist era. And the sadness of what totalitarian rule did to a people trying to build an equal and fair society, the people who died for others, and eventually all in vein. It resonates as a country to admire, a people to admire, the mystique of its history and taste of its asian influence. And despite that its a foreign place. London to St Petersburg is closer than LA to New York, at times Russia has been part of Europe. The double standard for me and many of friends (whom I talk history with it) is one of love, sorrow, and admiration. When the illusion of the Russian mythos breaks and the reality of human condition seeps through you get held to that standard. Not one of a distant problem, a stranger in a strange land, one of a friend.
- berntb 13y ago
  Are you a Turing Test program that misunderstood and went off on a tangent? (That would explain a lot on HN, recently.) Or are you just trying to change the subject?
  - rjd 13y ago
    No Im just jet lagged :/ and gave you another reason for the double standard towards Russia.
    - berntb 13y ago
      On consideration, sorry for being pissy (English slang, iirc). Your comment was relevant to part about what I wrote and very well written. I posted a theory about something I find strange -- and waited with bated breath for either support or to be short down with a good reference that taught me a lot about the world. Sigh, no luck on that part. Maybe no one knows.
  - VLM 13y ago
    So you claim its "political propaganda to the citizens of the country where the media writes" and ask "Do you have another explanation?" and he responds that its "the mystique of its history and taste of its asian influence". Not seeing a problem here?
    - berntb 13y ago
      I gave another example. It is easy to give more examples of the hypocrisy I talked about -- without Russia. Edit: Not that it is relevant, but I've liked most every Russian I've spoken to more than five minutes. And Putin scares me when he limits press freedom and organized crime gets integrated with the police.
ShardPhoenix 13y ago
This might be an issue of thinking on the margin - that given their starting points, it's theoretically easier to get Israel or Russia to meet (leftist) American standards than to get Sudan to meet them.
- berntb 13y ago
  I am far from an expert in either case, but that doesn't seem logical. The Russian government is killing press freedom and stealing the oil income. They need external enemies and blame the west. Any criticism from the Western world seems to be dismissed as anti-Russian hate mongering. Re Israel, good luck influencing them: (1) Consider the US reaction on 9/11. Israel had something like that continuously since long before 1948. (2) I believe most of the Jewish population there aren't descended from European refugees but people kicked out from countries in the Middle East, for having the wrong religion. They think things like "They stole three times the size of Israel from us personally when they forced us out, we're getting back the parts of the West Bank some of us was kicked out from".
  - pipy 13y ago
    I am Russian and live in Russia. I don't usually write comments, but, since I've never seen any reasonable explanation of the Russian homophobia issue on any Western website, I'm going to bite the bullet: First of all, as banal as it may sound, Russian State Duma doesn't represent the interests and wishes of the general public in any meaningful way (at least, if compared to any Western European country or US). The votes are constantly rigged, and even though the Putin is supported by the large majority of population (sad truth), Russian State Duma by the huge part is literally a bunch of degenerates, clowns and Putin's yes-men at best. So, they can pass any insane law that they wish to pass. Secondly, the regime's popularity is monotonically decreasing, albeit slowly. And the reason is that the relative economic prosperity is based only on high oil and natural gas prices (which can still help you during the next couple of decades). The industrial complex is in decline and nothing is able to revive it (because of the fact that any owner of successful company can be stripped of his ownership in any time -- and this is de facto at the core of the regime and cannot be changed). When you begin to understand that your popularity trend wont ever change, you start looking for means for tightening control and providing alternative channels to drain the public discontent. For their main ideology the ruling regime has adopted the "back into the future" style monarchism and religion (which is miserable at best, but is the only choice when the largest opposing part of the public still praises higher standards of living in atheistic USSR). Some jerk has made an arbitrary decision that it is a good idea to also go after gays. The passing of the anti-gay-propaganda law and the half-assed media campaign followed. How does majority of the Russian people really relate to gays: 1) First and foremost, no one even thinks about the issue. When the large part of a population lives below poverty line, when there are significant issues with police misconduct and corruption, etc. etc., you have larger issues to think of. 2) Literally the overwhelming majority of the people I ever new are highly tolerant to gays. I'm speaking this as a person that has contacts within diverse social groups (university dropout, served as a conscript in a military for two years, born in another region, but now a long time Moscow resident). 3) This does not preclude that the Russian people as a whole are probably less fond of gays than Western Europeans, but not even near the scale of the current media hype. This is sad. But there are some orders of magnitude sadder things in Russia for everyone to deal with every day. Now, when US and UK have some relationship issues with Russia, they have decided that this is a good time to raise the issue. Since the Russia is de facto tabula rasa for West and vice versa, the bullshit card has worked really fine. I am personally for allowing gay marriage etc. etc., but we shouldn't even be talking about this, because this "Russian homophobia" is pure propaganda stuff, on both sides. There are huge issues in the West and Russia that are much more important. Slightly offtopic: great lecture about ideology by Slavoj Žižek https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1Kb4JZGpA0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1Kb4JZGpA0
Amadou 13y ago
Israel and Russia are considered 1st world countries. That implies a level of social progressivism and standards of living that 3rd world countries don't have. So when a country fails to live up to those standards they get criticism. You might see that as propaganda, I see that as acknowledgement of reality. Everybody expects Israel to behave like the democracy they claim to be, nobody expects the Sudan - with its self-appointed president of nearly 25 years - to behave like a democracy. In other words, Sudan's problems are a symptom of Sudan's level of social progress, while Israel and Russia's problems are seen as an aberration in their level of social progress. You would never see the Olympics hosted in Sudan. As for immigrants being criticized for holding 3rd world views after moving to a 1st world country, they don't have the kind of power that a government does so the harm they can do by acting on their beliefs is significantly less than what the state could do.
- berntb 13y ago
  >> Israel and Russia are considered 1st world countries. [There are higher standards for them] I acknowledged that when I wrote "How many thousands of times is reasonable for different standards?" So, how many factors of ten higher standards should be held for Israel than for, say, the countries that spend a large part of their GNP on artillery for use on civilians? 3? 4? (I've asked that multiple times and never gotten an answer when people repeat your argument. Including in what you comment on.) >> Sudan's problems are a symptom of Sudan's level of social progress I also brought up that at least Swedish media avoid mentioning that the dictators taking control of the UNHRC and not complaining about each others. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council#Specific_issues http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Cou... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council#Sudan_.26_Ethiopian_candidacy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Cou... That is not explained by you thinking it is OK to have a factor thousands in different standards. >>As for immigrants being criticized for holding 3rd world views after moving to a 1st world country, they don't have the kind of power that a government does You really see no problem having factors of ten different standards for different groups of citizens inside a country? Besides, I think you simplify (on the border of excusing) unpleasant regimes that oppress, mass murder and steal -- when you just describe the reason as "different levels of social progress". Countries today are poor mainly because they are controlled by corrupt juntas (or in a conflict, usually created by juntas). Every country on the planet with population over a few millions can and should have a competent government.