7 ms·

> The USSR is not Russia or the Russian Empire; it is not an empire at all. > The Soviet Union does not need new territory. > A communist regime cannot feel

> The USSR is not Russia or the Russian Empire; it is not an empire at all. > The Soviet Union does not need new territory. > A communist regime cannot feel secure so long as an example of another kind of life exists anywhere near it, with which its subjects can draw comparisons. It is for this reason that any form of Communism, not only the Soviet variety, is always at pains to shut itself off from the rest of the world This is a massive insight. Most current analysis of Putin centers around a WWII Lebensraum perspective of his actions. Modelling his behavior in terms of neutralizing breakaway territories seems a much better fit.

Perdition 12y ago
I don't see how. Putin isn't a communist and Western media is widely available in Russia so there is no benefit in regards to information flow in expanding the border. And there is no significant economic difference between Russia and her neighbours, the Soviets were trying to hide the evidence that average people in the West had it better than the new Soviet man. Putin's actions look much more like those of the 19th century Russian Empire than of the USSR (which never used nationalist rhetoric).
- tumanian 12y ago
  Putin's administration justifies the current economic state and the rampant corruption in Russia by that Russia has is own 'special way' of development which is limited the history and the socio-economic heritage of the communist regime. If Ukraine(or any other ex-Soviet country) manages to get rid of the current cleptocratic system and launches succesfull socio-economic reforms that tackle corruption, it will be a strong signal to the broad russian population that the current regime is not the driver, but a hindrance to the overall development. That is why any regime change in ex-Ussr countries is viewed by suspicion or even open hostility by the elites in Russia.
  - korzun 12y ago
    Ukraine is broke. They owe Russia millions of dollars and have been living on pretty much free gas (courtesy of Russia). I assume you live in US? Do you not find it ironic that you blame Russia for taking this seriously (in their own backyard) while US have been staging government coups within other countries (with multiple death tolls) for decades? And in regards to corruption: "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" Perhaps you should focus on your own backyard first ;)
    - vasilipupkin 12y ago
      Ukraine is broke to a large extent because it's economy has been essentially taken over by corrupt oligarchs with close Kremlin ties. As far as comparisons with U.S., in the context of the cold war U.S. has done some nasty things. But look at all the countries which U.S. was heavily involed in. Taiwan? South Korea? Chile? Germany ? Japan? How are they doing 20, 30 years later. Now look at countries that have had heavy Russian / Soviet involvement. Cuba? North Korea? Sorry, but the comparison doesn't quite compute.
      - notastartup 12y ago
        South Korea definitely had a period of dictatorship and hard knock life for it's citizens. I think Taiwan also had a period of such oppressive rule. Chile as well had dictatorship up to 90s. At least South Korea is doing well because it has seen so much sacrifice of it's own people by enriching the nation's government and it's handful of conglomerates. They may be doing well but South Korea and Japan has the highest suicide rates, a sign that although economically prosperous do not equate to collective happiness. Chile for instance has a higher happiness index than of South Korea or Japan. However, I will add that such economic progress is not at all miserable and unwanted situation. U.S. has provided much of the security guarantees and the environment for such successes.
        Demiurge 12y ago
        You are entirely correct. All of these Asian economic successes were under a military dictatorship. The work week in South Korea is 6 days, 16 hours a day. It's not magic, it's really hard work and strictness.
  - notastartup 12y ago
    that is very good insight. Another point might be the idea of creating buffer zone (Ukraine) to counter the threat of NATO military assets being placed right at the border with Russia, access to Black Sea. I understand that if Putin does not take Ukraine, NATO will. This is like China not willing to give up North Korea, it has it's function as a buffer.
    - Perdition 12y ago
      That is why it is happening. NATO was set-up to counter the Soviets (dominated by Russia) and it is a slap in the face for Russia to allow NATO right on their border when they are trying to become a real world power again. NATO might have gotten away with limited defence/economic pacts with former Soviet satellites, but full NATO and EU membership was bound to provoke a reaction from Russia. Apparently the US State Department didn't learn from its arrogance in Iraq, because such blatant provocation shouldn't have been allowed.
      - ceejayoz 12y ago
        > Apparently the US State Department didn't learn from its arrogance in Iraq, because such blatant provocation shouldn't have been allowed. Provocation: Letting Ukraine voluntarily choose closer ties with the West Not Provocation: Invading and annexing the Crimea Gotcha. Also, since when is the US State Department in charge of the EU?
        Perdition 12y ago
        >Provocation: Letting Ukraine voluntarily choose closer ties with the West Ukraine should have been quietly told that joining NATO or the EU was not possible. >Not Provocation: Invading and annexing the Crimea Strawman: This. What Russia did is absolutely wrong IMO, but it is expected (just like the US doesn't like anyone else messing with South America or the Caribbean). >Also, since when is the US State Department in charge of the EU? The US has been the primary power in Western Europe since the 8th of May 1945. The US can directly control who enters NATO, and wields significant influence over the primary EU members. The possibility of Ukraine joining NATO or the EU would have gone through State and should have been firmly rejected. EDIT: Downvotes and no replies, I can't tell whether I am on Hacker News or reddit.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
Spooky23 12y ago
Current analysis on the general consumption news is always specious. Usually it's some form of regurgitating whatever the administration says via press release. The current situation is more like the 19th century "great game". The Ukraine is in Russia's turf, and Putin is all about rebuilding the lost greatness of the nation (while enriching himself & friends as much as possible). Maneuvering to place the Ukraine under the umbrella of NATO, dominated by the US, or the EU, dominated by Germany, just feeds that message. I don't watch Russian news, but I'm sure the last 6 weeks have been longest victory lap of all time. People are reverting to WW2 stories because they can't figure out WTF the point of US policy is, and it's easier to say "OMG, Hitler!" than attempt to explain why the Vice President is flying around re-affirming US willingness to go to war with Russia in order to protect Estonia and Latvia.
abcd_f 12y ago
> This is a massive insight. Don't forget that it was provided by a KGB defector who was sentenced to death and was living under protection of his asylum country. Anything that's not a verifiable fact should really be assumed to have a massive bias.

Perdition 12y ago

I don't see how. Putin isn't a communist and Western media is widely available in Russia so there is no benefit in regards to information flow in expanding the border. And there is no significant economic difference between Russia and her neighbours, the Soviets were trying to hide the evidence that average people in the West had it better than the new Soviet man. Putin's actions look much more like those of the 19th century Russian Empire than of the USSR (which never used nationalist rhetoric).

tumanian 12y ago
Putin's administration justifies the current economic state and the rampant corruption in Russia by that Russia has is own 'special way' of development which is limited the history and the socio-economic heritage of the communist regime. If Ukraine(or any other ex-Soviet country) manages to get rid of the current cleptocratic system and launches succesfull socio-economic reforms that tackle corruption, it will be a strong signal to the broad russian population that the current regime is not the driver, but a hindrance to the overall development. That is why any regime change in ex-Ussr countries is viewed by suspicion or even open hostility by the elites in Russia.
- korzun 12y ago
  Ukraine is broke. They owe Russia millions of dollars and have been living on pretty much free gas (courtesy of Russia). I assume you live in US? Do you not find it ironic that you blame Russia for taking this seriously (in their own backyard) while US have been staging government coups within other countries (with multiple death tolls) for decades? And in regards to corruption: "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" Perhaps you should focus on your own backyard first ;)
  - vasilipupkin 12y ago
    Ukraine is broke to a large extent because it's economy has been essentially taken over by corrupt oligarchs with close Kremlin ties. As far as comparisons with U.S., in the context of the cold war U.S. has done some nasty things. But look at all the countries which U.S. was heavily involed in. Taiwan? South Korea? Chile? Germany ? Japan? How are they doing 20, 30 years later. Now look at countries that have had heavy Russian / Soviet involvement. Cuba? North Korea? Sorry, but the comparison doesn't quite compute.
    - notastartup 12y ago
      South Korea definitely had a period of dictatorship and hard knock life for it's citizens. I think Taiwan also had a period of such oppressive rule. Chile as well had dictatorship up to 90s. At least South Korea is doing well because it has seen so much sacrifice of it's own people by enriching the nation's government and it's handful of conglomerates. They may be doing well but South Korea and Japan has the highest suicide rates, a sign that although economically prosperous do not equate to collective happiness. Chile for instance has a higher happiness index than of South Korea or Japan. However, I will add that such economic progress is not at all miserable and unwanted situation. U.S. has provided much of the security guarantees and the environment for such successes.
      - Demiurge 12y ago
        You are entirely correct. All of these Asian economic successes were under a military dictatorship. The work week in South Korea is 6 days, 16 hours a day. It's not magic, it's really hard work and strictness.
- notastartup 12y ago
  that is very good insight. Another point might be the idea of creating buffer zone (Ukraine) to counter the threat of NATO military assets being placed right at the border with Russia, access to Black Sea. I understand that if Putin does not take Ukraine, NATO will. This is like China not willing to give up North Korea, it has it's function as a buffer.
  - Perdition 12y ago
    That is why it is happening. NATO was set-up to counter the Soviets (dominated by Russia) and it is a slap in the face for Russia to allow NATO right on their border when they are trying to become a real world power again. NATO might have gotten away with limited defence/economic pacts with former Soviet satellites, but full NATO and EU membership was bound to provoke a reaction from Russia. Apparently the US State Department didn't learn from its arrogance in Iraq, because such blatant provocation shouldn't have been allowed.
    - ceejayoz 12y ago
      > Apparently the US State Department didn't learn from its arrogance in Iraq, because such blatant provocation shouldn't have been allowed. Provocation: Letting Ukraine voluntarily choose closer ties with the West Not Provocation: Invading and annexing the Crimea Gotcha. Also, since when is the US State Department in charge of the EU?
      - Perdition 12y ago
        >Provocation: Letting Ukraine voluntarily choose closer ties with the West Ukraine should have been quietly told that joining NATO or the EU was not possible. >Not Provocation: Invading and annexing the Crimea Strawman: This. What Russia did is absolutely wrong IMO, but it is expected (just like the US doesn't like anyone else messing with South America or the Caribbean). >Also, since when is the US State Department in charge of the EU? The US has been the primary power in Western Europe since the 8th of May 1945. The US can directly control who enters NATO, and wields significant influence over the primary EU members. The possibility of Ukraine joining NATO or the EU would have gone through State and should have been firmly rejected. EDIT: Downvotes and no replies, I can't tell whether I am on Hacker News or reddit.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

Spooky23 12y ago

Current analysis on the general consumption news is always specious. Usually it's some form of regurgitating whatever the administration says via press release. The current situation is more like the 19th century "great game". The Ukraine is in Russia's turf, and Putin is all about rebuilding the lost greatness of the nation (while enriching himself & friends as much as possible). Maneuvering to place the Ukraine under the umbrella of NATO, dominated by the US, or the EU, dominated by Germany, just feeds that message. I don't watch Russian news, but I'm sure the last 6 weeks have been longest victory lap of all time. People are reverting to WW2 stories because they can't figure out WTF the point of US policy is, and it's easier to say "OMG, Hitler!" than attempt to explain why the Vice President is flying around re-affirming US willingness to go to war with Russia in order to protect Estonia and Latvia.

abcd_f 12y ago

> This is a massive insight. Don't forget that it was provided by a KGB defector who was sentenced to death and was living under protection of his asylum country. Anything that's not a verifiable fact should really be assumed to have a massive bias.