3 ms·

Oh, great, it's those jokers from the Russian Reich again. <sarcasm> Because nothing says "valid political concerns", like a cyber attack on a foreign governme

by jevgeni 12y ago

Oh, great, it's those jokers from the Russian Reich again. <sarcasm> Because nothing says "valid political concerns", like a cyber attack on a foreign government. </sarcasm>

drzaiusapelord 12y ago
I don't see how pissing off your trading partners is helping the Putin regime and its apologists. This is what got them in this mess to begin with. I suspect we're dealing with a regime that refuses to learn the lessons of history and thus more sanctions and isolation are justified.
- higherpurpose 12y ago
  One of the worst things about dictatorships is that the leaders start making very irrational decisions, just because you "embarrass" them or so they "don't look weak" or whatever. They take it personal. In a (real) democracy that's usually much harder to do, since there are many more decision makers who have to act on something, and even if there are a few emotional ones, the rest can keep cool heads and restrict them and make decisions for the long term future of the country.
  - jevgeni 12y ago
    Exactly, it is insane, how personal some people in the ex-USSR perceive some things. The way Russian society went absolutely bonkers over the Pussy Riot case is one example. The reaction to protests and the subsequent revolution in Ukraine is another.
  - drzaiusapelord 12y ago
    >make decisions for the long term future of the country. Or from a more Machiavellian perspective, they know their position is ultimately a temp job. Obama will be gone soon, but Putin will stay. Obama has no incentive to build up some massive cult of personality like dictators do. Its unneeded. Dictators, on the other hand, rule by the fist and part of that fist is building some asinine strongman personality for the borscht eaters who buy into that crap.
  - hga 12y ago
    There's nothing in the least irrational about their decisions of this nature. They're trying to avoid, for example, a preference cascade that could take them from being at the top of the world to in front of a firing squad in as little as 4 days: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceau%C8%99escu%27s_final_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceau%C8%99escu%27s_final_speec... Whatever makes you think most of them give a sh*t about "the long term future of the country"? Hitler, strangely enough, actually did ... just very very poorly.... That's actually something he had in common with what I might call some of the "first generation revolutionary dictators", like Lenin (New Economic Policy) and Mao (where country != the people, who he believed to be very expendable in part because there were so many). But the 2nd generation, such as Stalin, or those who didn't actually do the revolution thing, like Ceaușescu ... I can't think of any examples off the top of my head.
- spacecowboy_lon 12y ago
  And Germans have learnt the hard way that an autocratic non democatic govenment by a cluadillo nevver ends well.
- jevgeni 12y ago
  I agree, it is mind boggling. From personal experience: I've talked to people I know from Russia, who are supportive of the current regime. What either ends the conversation or gets misdirected in nanoseconds is the question "What's in it for you?" when discussing the gov't decisions. For example, even without the sanctions, the Crimea annexation would cost the Russian taxpayer an insane amount, but as far as I could tell people supporting the decision tend to forget that fact.

by jevgeni 12y ago

Oh, great, it's those jokers from the Russian Reich again. <sarcasm> Because nothing says "valid political concerns", like a cyber attack on a foreign government. </sarcasm>

drzaiusapelord 12y ago

I don't see how pissing off your trading partners is helping the Putin regime and its apologists. This is what got them in this mess to begin with. I suspect we're dealing with a regime that refuses to learn the lessons of history and thus more sanctions and isolation are justified.

higherpurpose 12y ago
One of the worst things about dictatorships is that the leaders start making very irrational decisions, just because you "embarrass" them or so they "don't look weak" or whatever. They take it personal. In a (real) democracy that's usually much harder to do, since there are many more decision makers who have to act on something, and even if there are a few emotional ones, the rest can keep cool heads and restrict them and make decisions for the long term future of the country.
- jevgeni 12y ago
  Exactly, it is insane, how personal some people in the ex-USSR perceive some things. The way Russian society went absolutely bonkers over the Pussy Riot case is one example. The reaction to protests and the subsequent revolution in Ukraine is another.
- drzaiusapelord 12y ago
  >make decisions for the long term future of the country. Or from a more Machiavellian perspective, they know their position is ultimately a temp job. Obama will be gone soon, but Putin will stay. Obama has no incentive to build up some massive cult of personality like dictators do. Its unneeded. Dictators, on the other hand, rule by the fist and part of that fist is building some asinine strongman personality for the borscht eaters who buy into that crap.
- hga 12y ago
  There's nothing in the least irrational about their decisions of this nature. They're trying to avoid, for example, a preference cascade that could take them from being at the top of the world to in front of a firing squad in as little as 4 days: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceau%C8%99escu%27s_final_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceau%C8%99escu%27s_final_speec... Whatever makes you think most of them give a sh*t about "the long term future of the country"? Hitler, strangely enough, actually did ... just very very poorly.... That's actually something he had in common with what I might call some of the "first generation revolutionary dictators", like Lenin (New Economic Policy) and Mao (where country != the people, who he believed to be very expendable in part because there were so many). But the 2nd generation, such as Stalin, or those who didn't actually do the revolution thing, like Ceaușescu ... I can't think of any examples off the top of my head.
spacecowboy_lon 12y ago
And Germans have learnt the hard way that an autocratic non democatic govenment by a cluadillo nevver ends well.
jevgeni 12y ago
I agree, it is mind boggling. From personal experience: I've talked to people I know from Russia, who are supportive of the current regime. What either ends the conversation or gets misdirected in nanoseconds is the question "What's in it for you?" when discussing the gov't decisions. For example, even without the sanctions, the Crimea annexation would cost the Russian taxpayer an insane amount, but as far as I could tell people supporting the decision tend to forget that fact.