Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Russia/Ukraine conflict

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Really?...

According to the translation, at one point he said: "Democracy is the worst form of government [..."

I do of course not agree with that. And I don't think you do either.

Maybe there was something wrong with the translation... I don't speak Russian, but that channel's translations aren't always 100% grammatically correct English...
Click to expand...

The Russians view democracy very differently than the west does. During the Soviet era the government line was democracy was the root of all evil. Then after the fall of the USSR Russia experimented with democracy for about a decade and that decade was one of massive turmoil and disruption. Then Putin came into power and ended the experiment, things got better, and people concluded that democracy must be to blame.

Today the Russian media highlights and amplifies any turmoil that happens in western democracies to enforce the message that democracies are unstable. Last winter they were telling lies about how bad things were in the western democracies with lines for fuel and food.

As long as most Russians believe the alternative to Putin is worse than Putin, they will put up with Putin.

Ukraine becoming more western was an existential threat to this narrative. A large number of Russians have relatives in Ukraine, so they used to travel there a lot. There was a lot of people moving back and forth between the two countries and a lot of cultural and information exchange. Zelensky himself worked in Russia for a while. To have a successful democracy with improving conditions that a lot of Russians visit would destroy the narrative that democracies are terrible.

A lot of the wealthier Russians did regularly visit western countries before the war, but they were more or less in on the scam and they didn't interact much with the poorer Russians, so the secret was safe.
 
The Russians view democracy very differently than the west does. During the Soviet era the government line was democracy was the root of all evil. Then after the fall of the USSR Russia experimented with democracy for about a decade and that decade was one of massive turmoil and disruption. Then Putin came into power and ended the experiment, things got better, and people concluded that democracy must be to blame. [My underline.]

And your source for this is...

Also: What do the Russians conclude now when their anti-Democracy Dictator has directly caused the death of ~half a million human beings out which ~360,000 were Russians?... And that's not even taking into account the ~350,000(?) that has been severely mutilated as a result of the Dictator's totally unprovoked attack on UKR.

As long as most Russians believe the alternative to Putin is worse than Putin, they will put up with Putin.

So the fact that there is ZERO Democracy, ZERO human rights AND that the elections are rigged... That equates to what in your analysis?...


Ukraine becoming more western was an existential threat to this narrative. A large number of Russians have relatives in Ukraine, so they used to travel there a lot. There was a lot of people moving back and forth between the two countries and a lot of cultural and information exchange. Zelensky himself worked in Russia for a while. To have a successful democracy with improving conditions that a lot of Russians visit would destroy the narrative that democracies are terrible.

Agreed.

A lot of the wealthier Russians did regularly visit western countries before the war, but they were more or less in on the scam and they didn't interact much with the poorer Russians, so the secret was safe.

Are you talking about the ~1,000,000 Russians that have fled the Dictator's Russia since the invasion here?...
 
Also: What was this?...


Anti-Putin_rally_in_Moscow_4_February_2012_Faerberg.jpg

Moscow_rally_24_December_2011%2C_Sakharov_Avenue_-8.JPG

Moscow_rally_4_February_2012%2C_Yakimanka_Street%2C_Bolotnaya_Square_26.JPG
 
And your source for this is...

Also: What do the Russians conclude now when their anti-Democracy Dictator has directly caused the death of ~half a million human beings out which ~360,000 were Russians?... And that's not even taking into account the ~350,000(?) that has been severely mutilated as a result of the Dictator's totally unprovoked attack on UKR.

I can't find it right now, but Kamil Galeev has talked about it. The Russians were getting sour on the idea back in 1993
The Russians Rethink Democracy

I have read about it in other places.

So the fact that there is ZERO Democracy, ZERO human rights AND that the elections are rigged... That equates to what in your analysis?...


The average Russians are poorly educated and fed a constant stream of misinformation about the rest of the world. Living in a different news universe is not that alien to Americans. There is nobody forcing one news narrative on anyone, but there are two distinctly different news universes in the US and people gravitate towards one or the other. One of these news universes is congruent with what most Europeans absorb (more Amero-centric, but same universe) and the other is a completely different universe with completely different news.

It turns out it isn't that difficult to convince at least some people that up is down and down is up if they aren't getting information from another source that is more fact based.

Agreed.



Are you talking about the ~1,000,000 Russians that have fled the Dictator's Russia since the invasion here?...

The people who fled were mostly people who had more resources to flee, which were the better educated and wealthier Russians. A large percentage of these people have visited the west before and knew that Putin's propaganda was just that.

1 million people is a large number of people, but it is only about 0.7% of the country's population.
 
Wikipedia and WaPo (too) are probably riddled by Kremlin agents. Don't take them too seriously.

I don't think the Kremlin would support the statements Navalny made that were quoted in the WaPo piece made, nor the overall anti-Putin parts, so I highly doubt it was written by a Kremlin agent. Basically it gives a fairly balanced view of Navalny. Navalny is half Ukrainian and had a childhood there. That's why he has a connection to the country, and when asked, he feels they are the "same people" (something his critics will say is very similar in view to Putin).

However, his practical view even prior to Russia taking over Crimea, is that while he expressed he was unhappy Crimea was transferred to the Ukraine SSR due to actions by the Soviet Union's Khrushchev back in 1954 (to be clear when both Ukraine and Russia were still part of USSR), he also was opposed to Russia annexing Crimea, saying that "international agreements and Russia’s word must be worth something". Most Ukrainians either forget or overlooked this latter point. After Russia did take Crimea, he also expressed views that it was now defacto Russia's and Ukraine would not have hope of it returning in the forseeable future, plus when pressed about returning it if he became president, he made the remark: "Is Crimea a bologna sandwich, or something, to be passed back and forth? I don’t think so". Of course, his most recent views are more clearly in support of Ukraine, even in terms of Crimea.

So while I'm pretty sure there are plenty of Ukrainians that dislike Navalny, especially his prior comments on Crimea, to suggest he is in any way supportive of the Ukraine war makes zero sense given his background and overall comments.
 
I don't think the Kremlin would support the statements Navalny made that were quoted in the WaPo piece made, nor the overall anti-Putin parts, so I highly doubt it was written by a Kremlin agent. Basically it gives a fairly balanced view of Navalny. Navalny is half Ukrainian and had a childhood there. That's why he has a connection to the country, and when asked, he feels they are the "same people" (something his critics will say is very similar in view to Putin).

However, his practical view even prior to Russia taking over Crimea, is that while he expressed he was unhappy Crimea was transferred to the Ukraine SSR due to actions by the Soviet Union's Khrushchev back in 1954 (to be clear when both Ukraine and Russia were still part of USSR), he also was opposed to Russia annexing Crimea, saying that "international agreements and Russia’s word must be worth something". Most Ukrainians either forget or overlooked this latter point. After Russia did take Crimea, he also expressed views that it was now defacto Russia's and Ukraine would not have hope of it returning in the forseeable future, plus when pressed about returning it if he became president, he made the remark: "Is Crimea a bologna sandwich, or something, to be passed back and forth? I don’t think so". Of course, his most recent views are more clearly in support of Ukraine, even in terms of Crimea.

So while I'm pretty sure there are plenty of Ukrainians that dislike Navalny, especially his prior comments on Crimea, to suggest he is in any way supportive of the Ukraine war makes zero sense given his background and overall comments.

It's all a propaganda mixed Krempin soup they are competing who lies more. Just don't trust them.

 
It's all a propaganda mixed Krempin soup they are competing who lies more. Just don't trust them.

Well they seem more trustworthy than the random guy (seems to be a race car driver from a quick search) you seem to be quoting frequently on Twitter, given their sources seem more verifiable and are referenced. On the flip side the medium of Twitter doesn't work if you want to verify sources of the information (given the short format), especially now that you can't see replies without an account.
 
Last edited:
Well they seem more trustworthy than the random guy (seems to be a race car driver from a quick search) you seem to be quoting frequently on Twitter, given their sources seem more verifiable and are referenced. On the flip side the medium of Twitter doesn't work if you want verify sources of the information (given the short format), especially now that you can't see replies without an account.

Igor Sushko is a retired race car driver, but so what. Elon Musk was once just a programmer. People can be more than just what they did as their profession in the past.

I think Sushko has gotten out over his skis from time to time with speculation, but he is plugged into some good sources of information. He has been reporting on this war since early in 2022 and he has broken some stories of substance.
 
Well they seem more trustworthy than the random guy (seems to be a race car driver from a quick search) you seem to be quoting frequently on Twitter, given their sources seem more verifiable and are referenced. On the flip side the medium of Twitter doesn't work if you want to verify sources of the information (given the short format), especially now that you can't see replies without an account.
Yeah, it's a walled garden, so hard to get an account, almost as hard as TMC.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: madodel and KBF
Igor Sushko is a retired race car driver, but so what. Elon Musk was once just a programmer. People can be more than just what they did as their profession in the past.

I think Sushko has gotten out over his skis from time to time with speculation, but he is plugged into some good sources of information. He has been reporting on this war since early in 2022 and he has broken some stories of substance.
Sure, in terms of insider info, perhaps he would have better sources than mainstream media. However, in terms of giving a less biased view (a lot of his points seem to be purely opinion) and referencing/sourcing public interviews, I trust mainstream media more.

For example, on Navalny's comments on Ukraine (even though people above would say NYTimes is not reliable), it's not hard to find mainstream articles that provide good references to his comments.
Here's an article that can be quickly googled by referencing to the comments WaPo pointed to:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/17/...s-on-crimea-ignite-russian-twittersphere.html
It links the source from Interpreter Mag (a publication run by a dissident) which provided a translation of the interview Navalny did with Ekho Moskvy.
Russia This Week: Gorbachev Confirms There Was No NATO ‘Non-Expansion’ Pledge (October 13-19)
 
Yeah, it's a walled garden, so hard to get an account, almost as hard as TMC.
TMC can be viewed even without an account and arguably is far more informative than Twitter in general for deeper discussions. I opened an account here because I wanted to comment here, but I have zero desire to tweet so had no desire to open an account. That they closed it up makes me desire it even less, because it's an even more closed platform than before.
 
"when pressed about returning it if [Navalny] became president, he made the remark: "Is Crimea a bologna sandwich, or something, to be passed back and forth? I don’t think so".

Putin turned the Donbas into the world's largest meatgrinder, so what's a little bologna between fraternal socialist republics? /s
 
Really?...

According to the translation, at one point he said: "Democracy is the worst form of government [..."

I do of course not agree with that. And I don't think you do either.

Maybe there was something wrong with the translation... I don't speak Russian, but that channel's translations aren't always 100% grammatically correct English...

No idea if the person interviewed is familiar with Winston Churchill or just speaking extemporaneously but:

The Worst Form of Government

‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’
Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947

Whenever we see anything out of Russia we have to keep in mind that truth there is influenced by the imminent threat to one's personal life from their own government. So there is no point in debating what the gentleman really thinks. All we know is that Putler has engaged in a war of genocide against Ukraine for the purpose of conquest. And we know that most Russians will not do anything right now to stop it. a true democracy gives everyone including dangerous extremists the right to choose their leaders. The Wiemar Republic was a budding democracy up until it wasn't.

The fact that he was willing to comment on such a topic is impressive in itself so maybe he knows Churchill's quote or maybe he honestly thinks a dictatorship by a megalomaniac sociopath is actually a better way to run things.
 
1. IDK. Would UKR disclose if any military targets were hit? I don't think they would.

2. Who knows? I don't think we'll ever know until the Russian Dictator and all the other War Criminals in Russia stand trial in an International Court of Justice.
Never going to happen.

Never?...

Why wouldn't it happen if the Russian Dictator's 'regime' falls?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cjkosh and DanCar
Moderator:

Tread VERY carefully, everyone. The ice was extremely thin under the prior several posts.


I think violations are going to end up with time-outs. There have been more than enough warning-by-deletions already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EVCollies
Payback.

After an attack of unknown drones on a substation in Zheleznogorsk, Kursk region, the city was completely cut off from electricity and heat supply. Gas stations, shops and ATMs stopped working in some parts of the city. Stores have mostly sold out of water.

twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1742511303149670790