I was born in the Soviet Union during its dying years
back then everyone knew the system was corrupt, inefficient and basically a pile of bullshit and thankfully it all fell apart.
I still remember having to queue hours to get bread from bakery, and not seeing toilet paper, milk or meat for some time...
Anyone who wants to go back to those days is insane imho :(
My parents and older generation of relatives mostly watch Russian news and entertainment channels via satellite, and the unashamed propaganda and brainwashing is incredible to behold, whats worse is how my parents/relatives believe everything they hear even if it is absolutely absurd or borderline conspiracy crazy.
We often argue nowadays about the direction Russia has taken, but usually the arguments end once i ask "where would you want your grand children to grow up, here in the western Europe or back home", that's when they go quiet.
They truly believe that Putin is some sort of a genius (ignoring the rise in oil prices that helped him) and this is actually downright scary :( at least in the Soviet days people didn't buy the propaganda, now a lot of people seem to actually believe all they hear and see, and live under a sort of a massive reality distortion field where the world is out to destroy Russia and its people.
aside: interestingly enough back then the collapse of USSR was partly prompted by low oil prices and a stupid war with Islamists, fast forward 30+ years and economy is even more reliant on resource extraction and Putin is boldly marching into another quagmire
I'm a citizen and former resident of the UK, the UK for many reasons has a very loving relationship to the US, our young people are fashioned by the image of Television, and more than half of all English speaking entertaining media is american.
We like America/Americans, by default before we learn politics.
I travelled to the US in 2013, and to Russia the same year.
What I saw was not "good" vs "evil" or, "propaganda" vs "truth".
What I saw was exactly the same shit, I spoke to natives in both places, I travelled around.
Russia has it's side of the story and America has theirs, America is good at spreading it's propaganda outside of it's borders and fostering the image of "the beacon of light and purity of the world" but those who actually take a sceptical or inquisitive eye to America see an insidious underbelly which is only parabled by that in Russia.
Russia is guilty of being no more evil than the US government, if anything they're more honest with their intentions.
The differing factor is that we bought the kool-aid.
Ah "America does it" strawman, there must be a handbook on internet trolling or something made back in the old country now. Every single time, every single time, same crap gets regurgitated.
"Why are we invading yet another country? Oh because America did it too!"
"Why are our rights being eroded? Oh because America does it!"
and so on...
I been back to Russia and crisscrossed the US over the last decade, I would pick the US for all its problems over Russia any day as a place to live. Anyways I am quite happy here in Europe for now.
I was a member of municipal polling board during last Putin's election. Honestly I did my best to prevent fraud, and yet the voting protocol (a paper where all ballots are summed up, it goes to an higher-level board) was rewritten right under my nose (+25% to a leading candidate, guess which one), with police covering it up. I tried to warn a friendly member of higher-level board, just to learn that all independent members of the board were escorted out of building by our SWAT analogue.
Voting and vote counting were all recorded on much-hyped state-wise CCTV system, so I thought "right, I'll go to a public prosecutor, they will retrieve the record and the fraud would be obvious". Guess what — there were no interest at all, my complaint was routed into the same higher-level board.
It wasn't an isolated event. In fact, the huge part of polling boards in Saint-Petersburg had their protocols rewritten. It was widely publicized in a local independent press, but all court cases were ultimately lost and no one were held accountable. Similar stories took place in other Russian cities.
This was a huge, centrally orchestrated fraud, with those in power getting away with it (as always). Voting is an institute of critical importance to any liberal democracy out there, and it is completely and systematically destroyed by Putin and his team. I can't see how on Earth the country where it's normal can be even compared to US; it's like comparing North Korea and US with a straight face.
And yes, given that it's HN, let me also mention that all cellular and Internet operators in Russia are legally and openly obliged to pay for wiretapping equipment and install it with no regulatory oversight on how it's used. It's so amusing when people somehow combine any degree of support for Snowden AND for Russian government.
We're different. Part of American foreign policy is that "truth is the best propaganda" not the only propaganda, mind you, but the best.
The West also does have a policy of expanding liberal democracies and integrating them into a world trade frame work. Cases where we don't follow this policy is in areas where we're afraid of a counter weight emerging.
For example, the Middle Eastern policy is one where we foster instability to keep the Arab / Muslim world from unifying. Yes of course the war in Iraq is a travesty, but in America and the West in general we know when we get into tragic wars. To the point where even Jeb Bush has admitted that the war was a mistake.
The Russian mindset is different. It's more... brutal? I'm struggling for the right word. But if you look at Russian war doctrine during the cold war and (especially) World War 2, you see this apparatus that is 100% ok with using logic that ends with millions of suffering countrymen. Where propaganda and killing political opponents is acceptable. Where sending a man into space even though your scientists tell you he won't make it back alive.
The West doesn't stand for this. We have our (sometimes blatant) propaganda like the rest of them, and we make mistakes, but our jails cells look nothing like those in most of the rest of the world and our press isn't nearly as controlled.
A handful of conversations and a couple months of travel will not give a Westerner an understanding of Russia. The vast majority USSR emigrants under a certain age (that is, people truly familiar with both systems) would disagree with you in the strongest possible terms. I'm one of them. There is no moral equivalence.
I'll take you word that living in Russia today is better than what your parents went through. I've only watched Russia from afar. As a kid, I heard about the shortages of TP, and in some cases food, but I don't remember you guys having a homeless problem? Or, huge masses of people in extreme poverty.
My views don't matter. I was young. As I stated, I'll take your word it's better now. I have one question about modern Russia.
The question is "How does anything in business get done with all the corruption, bribes, killings, and just illegial behavior?"
I know Russia is not the only country with huge levels of seemingly stifling corruption, and your conversion to capitalism is very early. And yes, even the U.S. has corruption, but here, you can only get away with so much, for so long. As much as I despise our system sometimes; I am proud of our checks and balances.
In your opinion, how many decades will it take in order to stifle the corruption. From my perspective, I just couldn't imagine doing business in that country. I don't even trust .ru domains? Am I being overly paranoid?
I don't remember you guys having a homeless problem?
Or, huge masses of people in extreme poverty.
Both existed. Homeless people were escorted outside of big cities (often jailed, but not always), so foreign journalists would not see them on the streets of the places they were allowed to visit. I estimate the level of homelessness was less than that of the USA, however. The level of poverty, in my estimation, was much higher, and it affected the most vulnerable members of the society, primarily the elderly.
> inefficient and basically a pile of bullshit and thankfully it all fell apart
You must have never lived in Russia post Soviet Union nor experienced how much worse it is to be spouting this crap. No one believes Putin is a genius - but in fact the country was so badly ruined under Yeltsin and Oligarchical capitalism-free-for-all that Putin appeared to people as the best possible option of these.
I was there till the middle of 90s i see the worst of the post-collapse, yes things got worse but Putin is not some genius savior who rode in on a white horse to save Russia from evil capitalism as is the prevailing narrative nowadays. Rising oil prices and modernization of the oil industry by a certain oligarch whose company was then taken from him by Putin is where most of the money came from, money then used by Putin to grab more power.
What followed the USSR was a wild west free for all bringing out the worst of capitalism, with even more corruption and organised crime taking over daily lives of just about everyone. It is tragic and sad that Russia could not transition to a modern economy like some Eastern European countries done.
Putin loves to push the story that without him Russia will go back to the bad old days of "democracy and capitalism" of the 90s, and that his way is the only way forward. The whole thing is awful similar to what was argued in Germany in 30s btw.
> No one believes Putin is a genius
Oh, man, I wish this was true. Just like Dmitri back in Russia I tried to prevent elections fraud, and even though I myself got forcibly removed from the site, and my friends recorded fraud, some my other friends did not care. But that's not the worst: some still think Putin is a genius after knowing that!
While all you are saying is true, I also think the very same kind of propaganda, but actually much more efficient, is happening in Europe and the US. People go absolutely insane if you start questioning democracy, social programs or anything that a state does.
When you point out to them how internet or cellphone networks or taxis or a number of other things is actually cheaper in Russia (or in eastern Europe in general) because of the lack of regulations or government interference, they go in denial. People in Europe and even in the US are so much more brainwashed into believing they need a state that it's painful to even start conversations with them. The most notable case just happened in Finland, where reportedly the police asked citizens to rat on pizza places who sell pizza for less than 6.5 EUR because the government believes a place selling pizzas for less cannot be profitable. In my book, that's almost what a communist state with price controls looks like.
I'd like my kids to grow up in Russia. I like it that, at least when it comes to personal income, the tax rate is 13% (although fundamentally, I believe there should be no taxation). I like it that I have more freedom here than in Europe or the US. The only thing I don't like is the government of any kind telling me or my family what products or services I can use and for how much. Unfortunately that happens in many other countries too and especially so in Europe or the US.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Corruption at all levels of government is rampant in Russia. It's the norm to have to pay off multiple officials when trying to get something built/renovated.
Russia doesn't give a fuck about its own people, to the Russian government lives are expendable if needed [1]. The alcoholism and suicide rate in Russia is monstrous [2], and is probably caused by the lack of opportunity.
> In my book, that's almost what a communist state with price controls looks like.
No. A communist state looks like the murder of millions for the sake of "security"[3].
> I'd like my kids to grow up in Russia. I like it that, at least when it comes to personal income, the tax rate is 13%...
Actually it's even better than you think. 13% of $0 is still $0.
>> When you point out to them how internet or cellphone networks or taxis or a number of other things is actually cheaper in Russia (or in eastern Europe in general) because of the lack of regulations or government interference, they go in denial.
Cool. I'm from a small 3rd world country. Just as in Russia the police officers sometimes rape detainees with bottles of champagne, there is literally no justice, but lots other funny things.
But our prices are lower than those in Russia. And it's OK if you are not paying taxes here. So what? Does it mean the rest of the world must be envy?
Can you elaborate on differences/similarities between that system being a "corrupt, inefficient pile of BS" driven by propaganda, vs the socialistic "government should take care of everyone, by redistributing wealth" prominently posted in HN discussions (a la "guaranteed basic income", "reduced work weeks", "free healthcare/education/etc", "everyone has a right to _____ which others earned", etc - all requiring a dominating government taking what isn't theirs to take, all sounding wonderful but crushingly impossible in implementation a la USSR)?
(Obviously I'm biased, but I am trying to make an earnest question. Russian communism sounded great too, even as you note: your parents still fall for the propaganda. Wish I could ask in a more neutral tone, but it's an inherently divisive subject.)
It was never communism back in USSR, it was authoritarianism where all power flowed to the Kremlin marching under the Socialist banner, 30 years its the same shit but to the tune of Nationalism. The economy still remains resource extraction bound (more so now), corruption goes all the way to the top (see Sochi).
One quote from my mother sums it up when we moved here in middle of 90s when she learned that in Europe this thing called welfare exists "So we were building Socialism for 70 years, and they had it here all along"
BTW they didnt fall for propaganda back then, it was mocked if anything, but the modern take on it by the Russian state controlled media is actually incredible to behold in how it works, hell just look at some of the replies above that my post attracted to see it in action.
Working electricity, sewers, courts, police, and road netowork all require "a dominating government taking what isn't theirs to take" on the same level that free healthcare and university education do.
I was a kid in 80s in communist Poland. It was shitty place, with a lot of absurd propaganda nobody (including the people making a living spewing it, or beating up the protesters) believed. Free education and healthcare had nothing to do with it.
Main differences between communism and modern social democracies:
- independent organisations were banned or discriminated, now they are encouraged
- people were paid to spy on each other with the REAL money (you couldn't buy a car in a month with any amount of money, but if you told the right person that your neighbor listens to radio free europa and prints leaflets - you could get one no problem) - think this one through - no matter how good brain surgeon or rocket scientist or nobel prize writer you are - you won't get a car unless you wait for 10 or 20 years. Spying on your neighbors (or knowing the right people and doing them favours) can solve this in a week. Consider the incentives this sets up throught the whole society.
- there was just one employer (the state)
- social trust was nonexistent - you could only trust your family
- you had to apply for a permission to leave the country, and often when they gave you that permission you had to sign with secret service that you are a spy - so they can later blackmail you with it
I see no reason to think policies like free education till M.A. are in any way connected to these problems, since Poland had free education and healthcare both now and during communism, yet we don't do the bad things I listed anymore.
For the record - I didn't downvoted you and I don't understand why somebody woulld do that for asking a question.
BTW: free university education seems like much better than paid, because as a kid you work harder in school for better grades to go to better university. As a kid of poor parents in system with paid universities you just can't work hard enough to go to Harward (well there are stipends I guess, so they do see this problem).
As a parent it works too - in paid system you spend more time at work to afford better education for your kids. In free system - you teach your kids more so they get better grades and go to a better university. IMHO it's obvious which system sets up the incentives better.
A given level of technology allows a county with given resources (e.g. petroleum, good engineers, conquered peoples being exploited far away, etc.) to have some total amount of wealth. The ruling class will give the bottom 99% some part of the wealth (not 99%, but hopefully 50%) to keep them subdued.
The closer technology is to Star Trek's replicators, the more realistic free housing, food, utilities are. In such a society, people are by default artists, not farmers or workers. The people who becomes doctors and teachers and do not get compensated by their patients or students, need to be compensated by the government which needs to have something people want.
In the USSR, people spent most of their money, time and energy just hustling for the basic necessities.
Note: I was born in Leningrad, but know of life there only from my parents.
I laughed when I read this, but there is indeed a difference. Here, a meaningful portion of your confiscated earnings is distributed to your fellow citizens. Moreover, the means of confiscation is predictable, as is the degree. In Russia, you'll get fleeced just the same. However, your money will primarily line the pockets of those doing the taking.
Thank you New York Times, the News Group that Snowden could not use to whistle blow because it is a direct branch of US government, for reminding us Western how free we are against propaganda.
We can really trust the 6 companies that own all media groups in the US, or the two news agencies that control all what we watch in the West.
Never believe that the Government of the US have ever thought about controlling these 6 groups. That in order to make a movie about the military you have to give your script to the US military for review.
Don't read Propaganda by EDWARD L. BERNAYS or any other book, just trust us, we are the good guys.
What I don't understand is how so many people can still watch TV news and believe what they say. Every news show I have seen in the last 10 years or more is complete BS and exists in a reality bubble where bad things happen but everything is fine as a kitten was saved in the end of the show. Why do they hold so much power? I can understand 50+ year olds maybe, but young people? Are you telling me young people look on their TV and believe that dictator is actually telling the truth? We know the western TV is BS, but so is theirs. Its not about one or the other, its about not believing anything at face value and actually educate yourself.
Sorry about the rant, its just something that surprises me continually.
I don't trust the article, but I have at least read different sources on the information, including some of the Russian ones. And while I cant say 100% what is true or not, I generally distrust news when they are changing their stance way to often. Another reason is that Russia is the aggressor in this war, and that in itself is a very big red sign saying "watch out". I apply the same to the US, UK or any other country that is attacking another country to "save them" or whatever excuse they come up with. I'm not saying that we don't need to help out in certain situations, but the current situation is out of control.
As another example, I currently live in Spain, and the government here lie to our faces and then hide from reporters so they cant ask any important questions. Here in Cataluña the people where tricked again into voting for a guy who is "promising" independence, and people believe it and shut up about any corruption or other issues that related to what's going on. They just blame Madrid and Germany for those issues, as that's what the TV tells them to do.
What I mean with the 50+ is people who are not technologically aware and/or are very set in their ways. I find it a lot harder to change the mindset, or at least talking about it with older generations then the younger ones. From my point of view (European) its hard to understand that people don't distrust any news outlet or politician, but maybe that's just my personal paranoia.
"Put another way: Propaganda works. Putin has understood that from Day"
We can be only glad that Western media (including the NY Times) has never been used for propaganda and all information is absolutely objective, reproducible, and a hundred percent trustworthy.
To be more specific: I don't see any of the features prcolaimed by the West (honest government, no interference in other country's business, avoid civilian kills) upheld by themselves.
If you read wikipedia etc, there seems to be a consensus that the Bush administration really believed that Saddam Hussein's Iraq still had the weapon programs going.
Personally, I think that with all the leaks it would be known if Bush lied. For instance, some Russian source published death and maiming data for the Ukrainian war by mistake [regarding costs for pensions etc].
No one is saying that politicians don't lie. But there are levels in Hell. There is, in these two cases, a big difference between the incompetence of the Bush administration and systematic disinformation.
But I suspect you know this already...
Edit: It is also a bit much to make the US responsible for civilians killed by people also trying to kill American soldiers. To start with, you need to subtract all the people the Hussein regime would have murdered over the years, if it hadn't been kicked out.
Edit 2: 3princip: The WMD thing was probably an excuse for Bush, sure. But I answered the claim that this WMD excuse was a LIE -- which seems to not be true. So it is you that miss the point. (And this is a serious place so give serious references, not some generic youtube video.)
The US has weapons of mass destruction, so does Russia, and China, and Pakistan, and India and Israel.
Keep in mind the context, this was the second such invasion of Iraq, the first war being conducted by Bush Sr, having failed to discourage Saddam from attacking Kuwait[1]. In between the two wars the US bombing and sanctions caused the deaths of an estimated 500000 children[2].
So trying to justify the glaring lies, as some kind of buffoonery, especially in the context of what had been done to Iraq for the previous decade, is naive in my opinion.
Ah... Media these days. I can't trust anyone, anymore.
I guess, best thing to do is not to have opinion at all.
I'm having a GPS in my pocket, I can browse most of the cities from my computer through Google Earth. I can talk to my watch, which replies and sends messages for me, but not a single country can provide a satellite image of the exact location of a fired rocket or any other evidence, like radar logs of some sort.
Sometimes I really think I'm living in a multi-country-conspiracy and Snowden is only the top of the iceberg.
That seems to be the point of modern propaganda. It's no longer about trying to convince people of what to believe in. Instead, the idea is to throw out multiple competing ideas no matter how far fetched to breed cynicism and conspiracy theories.
I tend to read RT.com from time to time when Russia is featuring in the news to see what the Russian media is saying. And I have to confess the barrage of conflicting information (vis a vis western media) is extremely disorienting and difficult to methodically process. I'm not surprised that some people feel the way that you do.
What I would also add is it's interesting to note how the story is pretty consistent from western media (that rebels shot down the plane by mistake). From what I've seen, the Russian media perspective is highly fluid; i.e. prone to change and multi-pronged.
There was an article posted here on HN detailing how this is performed.
I'll see if I can dig up the article, but it had interviews with internet users paid by the Russian state to shape argument. A group of 2-3 would take opposing sites in creating an artificial argument on say, a forum where it was being discussed. The "Western" POV would be discredited, and the argument focused between differing "Russian" explanations. The argument would never actually cease or come to a conclusion, but re-center around a number of accepted conclusions.
Adam Curtis, a documentary film-maker and journalist, has a brilliant aptitude at analysis in this area. His work in general, at the intersection of reporting and politics, is pretty excellent.
It is some malice, more than you might expect; with with a great dollop of ineptitude, far more than you might expect; that allows this climate of total disorientation to exist.
Take some of his thoughts:
> "Politicians used to have the confidence to tell us stories that made sense of the chaos of world events.
> "But now there are no big stories and politicians react randomly to every new crisis - leaving us bewildered and disorientated.
> "And journalism - that used to tell a grand, unfurling narrative - now also just relays disjointed and often wildly contradictory fragments of information.
> "Events come and go like waves of a fever. We - and the journalists - live in a state of continual delirium, constantly waiting for the next news event to loom out of the fog - and then disappear again, unexplained."
The whole point of this kind of propaganda is to make people go "meh, everybody's lying, so I just won't trust anybody".
You have police shooting black unarmed teen, and want people not to be angry about that - make a panel discussion with 12 people telling 12 versions of what happened, 11 of which blame the teenager. Accuse every other source of information of bias and lies. Many people will think "there's sth to this, I won't know the truth anyway, not my problem, let's ignore this issue".
>But not a single country can provide a satellite image of the exact location of a fired rocket or any other evidence.
Assume for a minute that the CIA had that sort of in depth coverage of the event. Assume they know everything from the serial number of the warhead to the crew-members' favorite vodka.
Why would they, or any other intelligence agency risk burning even the tiniest shred of information on an event that open sources have done a pretty good job covering?
The trouble, I see at least in my (Western) country: The main (public) TV programs are in the hand of the state (via regulatory control of the TV channels through political parties) or of two to three big corporations (many channels belong to one big corporation controlling them and also other news media).
From Italy, I heard, that many TV channels are controlled by one media mogul that also was the president. I guess, there are also other western countries, with similar situations.
At least in my country, I see clear evidence, that political unwanted news are at least suppressed or sometimes shown in a very distorted way. For example, when the software patent discussion came up some years ago in Europe, they brought news showing software patents in a shiny, only positive way. I would accept that from a purely private TV channel, but that was a "public TV channel" -- and many in my country still believe, that those public TV channels only tell the truth. But that is not so -- they tell, what our governments want us to know!
Also, at least one leading news reporter was dismissed (against protests from other reporters), he was inconvenient for one leading political party.
So, in the west, we don't have it as bad as in Russia -- but we should be very careful, the situation is far away from good.
"Kiev has claimed that Ukrainian troops have destroyed one separatist L-39 military trainer aircraft, two An-2 agricultural aircraft, one Yak-52 trainer airplane and four Mi-24 attack helicopters -- the latter being the most dangerous aircraft in the list, and the only ones built expressly for an armed role."
"It was regular war zone with dozens other planes shoot down"
with dozens of Ukrainian planes shoot down. (who shot them? where did they got weapons for that? where did they got skills for that?)
"Ukraine army shoot down civil airliner with 90 people on board just a few years ago" How many planes (korean planes to be specific) were shot down by USSR (that includes Russia)
- Just because that they can, doesn't mean that they would.
- The list lists Ukrainian aircraft lost during the conflict, not the separatist/Russian aircraft.
- Yes, separatist-held territory is Ukraine territory, and separatists are (at times) Ukrainian citizens, although Ukraine currently cannot guarantee the safety of its, or other citizens in the separatist-held territory.
- As to the last point, who knows. Who produced what, and sold where in the post-Soviet world is a lot harder to debunk than the publicly exposed news.
Russia never took on, and still does not take on its moral obligation to proactively control its border with the conflict zone. Similarly, Ukraine didn't take appropriate action to ban flights over the conflict zone. Ukraine did take action - when will Russia? Both are "guilty" in the case of MH17, due to their inaction.
"There are risks and costs to action. But they are far less than the long range risks of comfortable inaction." - John F. Kennedy.
It's kind of scary how effective the Russian propaganda is with only 3% believing MH17 was shot down by the rebels when that is almost certainly what happened.
Readit News
I still remember having to queue hours to get bread from bakery, and not seeing toilet paper, milk or meat for some time... Anyone who wants to go back to those days is insane imho :(
My parents and older generation of relatives mostly watch Russian news and entertainment channels via satellite, and the unashamed propaganda and brainwashing is incredible to behold, whats worse is how my parents/relatives believe everything they hear even if it is absolutely absurd or borderline conspiracy crazy.
We often argue nowadays about the direction Russia has taken, but usually the arguments end once i ask "where would you want your grand children to grow up, here in the western Europe or back home", that's when they go quiet.
They truly believe that Putin is some sort of a genius (ignoring the rise in oil prices that helped him) and this is actually downright scary :( at least in the Soviet days people didn't buy the propaganda, now a lot of people seem to actually believe all they hear and see, and live under a sort of a massive reality distortion field where the world is out to destroy Russia and its people.
aside: interestingly enough back then the collapse of USSR was partly prompted by low oil prices and a stupid war with Islamists, fast forward 30+ years and economy is even more reliant on resource extraction and Putin is boldly marching into another quagmire
I'm a citizen and former resident of the UK, the UK for many reasons has a very loving relationship to the US, our young people are fashioned by the image of Television, and more than half of all English speaking entertaining media is american.
We like America/Americans, by default before we learn politics.
I travelled to the US in 2013, and to Russia the same year.
What I saw was not "good" vs "evil" or, "propaganda" vs "truth".
What I saw was exactly the same shit, I spoke to natives in both places, I travelled around.
Russia has it's side of the story and America has theirs, America is good at spreading it's propaganda outside of it's borders and fostering the image of "the beacon of light and purity of the world" but those who actually take a sceptical or inquisitive eye to America see an insidious underbelly which is only parabled by that in Russia.
Russia is guilty of being no more evil than the US government, if anything they're more honest with their intentions.
The differing factor is that we bought the kool-aid.
"Why are we invading yet another country? Oh because America did it too!"
"Why are our rights being eroded? Oh because America does it!"
and so on...
I been back to Russia and crisscrossed the US over the last decade, I would pick the US for all its problems over Russia any day as a place to live. Anyways I am quite happy here in Europe for now.
I was a member of municipal polling board during last Putin's election. Honestly I did my best to prevent fraud, and yet the voting protocol (a paper where all ballots are summed up, it goes to an higher-level board) was rewritten right under my nose (+25% to a leading candidate, guess which one), with police covering it up. I tried to warn a friendly member of higher-level board, just to learn that all independent members of the board were escorted out of building by our SWAT analogue.
Voting and vote counting were all recorded on much-hyped state-wise CCTV system, so I thought "right, I'll go to a public prosecutor, they will retrieve the record and the fraud would be obvious". Guess what — there were no interest at all, my complaint was routed into the same higher-level board.
It wasn't an isolated event. In fact, the huge part of polling boards in Saint-Petersburg had their protocols rewritten. It was widely publicized in a local independent press, but all court cases were ultimately lost and no one were held accountable. Similar stories took place in other Russian cities.
This was a huge, centrally orchestrated fraud, with those in power getting away with it (as always). Voting is an institute of critical importance to any liberal democracy out there, and it is completely and systematically destroyed by Putin and his team. I can't see how on Earth the country where it's normal can be even compared to US; it's like comparing North Korea and US with a straight face.
And yes, given that it's HN, let me also mention that all cellular and Internet operators in Russia are legally and openly obliged to pay for wiretapping equipment and install it with no regulatory oversight on how it's used. It's so amusing when people somehow combine any degree of support for Snowden AND for Russian government.
The West also does have a policy of expanding liberal democracies and integrating them into a world trade frame work. Cases where we don't follow this policy is in areas where we're afraid of a counter weight emerging.
For example, the Middle Eastern policy is one where we foster instability to keep the Arab / Muslim world from unifying. Yes of course the war in Iraq is a travesty, but in America and the West in general we know when we get into tragic wars. To the point where even Jeb Bush has admitted that the war was a mistake.
The Russian mindset is different. It's more... brutal? I'm struggling for the right word. But if you look at Russian war doctrine during the cold war and (especially) World War 2, you see this apparatus that is 100% ok with using logic that ends with millions of suffering countrymen. Where propaganda and killing political opponents is acceptable. Where sending a man into space even though your scientists tell you he won't make it back alive.
The West doesn't stand for this. We have our (sometimes blatant) propaganda like the rest of them, and we make mistakes, but our jails cells look nothing like those in most of the rest of the world and our press isn't nearly as controlled.
Deleted Comment
My views don't matter. I was young. As I stated, I'll take your word it's better now. I have one question about modern Russia.
The question is "How does anything in business get done with all the corruption, bribes, killings, and just illegial behavior?"
I know Russia is not the only country with huge levels of seemingly stifling corruption, and your conversion to capitalism is very early. And yes, even the U.S. has corruption, but here, you can only get away with so much, for so long. As much as I despise our system sometimes; I am proud of our checks and balances.
In your opinion, how many decades will it take in order to stifle the corruption. From my perspective, I just couldn't imagine doing business in that country. I don't even trust .ru domains? Am I being overly paranoid?
You must have never lived in Russia post Soviet Union nor experienced how much worse it is to be spouting this crap. No one believes Putin is a genius - but in fact the country was so badly ruined under Yeltsin and Oligarchical capitalism-free-for-all that Putin appeared to people as the best possible option of these.
What followed the USSR was a wild west free for all bringing out the worst of capitalism, with even more corruption and organised crime taking over daily lives of just about everyone. It is tragic and sad that Russia could not transition to a modern economy like some Eastern European countries done.
Putin loves to push the story that without him Russia will go back to the bad old days of "democracy and capitalism" of the 90s, and that his way is the only way forward. The whole thing is awful similar to what was argued in Germany in 30s btw.
Now I'm in US. Fuck them.
When you point out to them how internet or cellphone networks or taxis or a number of other things is actually cheaper in Russia (or in eastern Europe in general) because of the lack of regulations or government interference, they go in denial. People in Europe and even in the US are so much more brainwashed into believing they need a state that it's painful to even start conversations with them. The most notable case just happened in Finland, where reportedly the police asked citizens to rat on pizza places who sell pizza for less than 6.5 EUR because the government believes a place selling pizzas for less cannot be profitable. In my book, that's almost what a communist state with price controls looks like.
I'd like my kids to grow up in Russia. I like it that, at least when it comes to personal income, the tax rate is 13% (although fundamentally, I believe there should be no taxation). I like it that I have more freedom here than in Europe or the US. The only thing I don't like is the government of any kind telling me or my family what products or services I can use and for how much. Unfortunately that happens in many other countries too and especially so in Europe or the US.
Russia doesn't give a fuck about its own people, to the Russian government lives are expendable if needed [1]. The alcoholism and suicide rate in Russia is monstrous [2], and is probably caused by the lack of opportunity.
> In my book, that's almost what a communist state with price controls looks like.
No. A communist state looks like the murder of millions for the sake of "security"[3].
> I'd like my kids to grow up in Russia. I like it that, at least when it comes to personal income, the tax rate is 13%...
Actually it's even better than you think. 13% of $0 is still $0.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_theater_hostage_crisis
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Russia
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism
Cool. I'm from a small 3rd world country. Just as in Russia the police officers sometimes rape detainees with bottles of champagne, there is literally no justice, but lots other funny things.
But our prices are lower than those in Russia. And it's OK if you are not paying taxes here. So what? Does it mean the rest of the world must be envy?
(Obviously I'm biased, but I am trying to make an earnest question. Russian communism sounded great too, even as you note: your parents still fall for the propaganda. Wish I could ask in a more neutral tone, but it's an inherently divisive subject.)
One quote from my mother sums it up when we moved here in middle of 90s when she learned that in Europe this thing called welfare exists "So we were building Socialism for 70 years, and they had it here all along"
BTW they didnt fall for propaganda back then, it was mocked if anything, but the modern take on it by the Russian state controlled media is actually incredible to behold in how it works, hell just look at some of the replies above that my post attracted to see it in action.
I was a kid in 80s in communist Poland. It was shitty place, with a lot of absurd propaganda nobody (including the people making a living spewing it, or beating up the protesters) believed. Free education and healthcare had nothing to do with it.
Main differences between communism and modern social democracies:
- independent organisations were banned or discriminated, now they are encouraged
- people were paid to spy on each other with the REAL money (you couldn't buy a car in a month with any amount of money, but if you told the right person that your neighbor listens to radio free europa and prints leaflets - you could get one no problem) - think this one through - no matter how good brain surgeon or rocket scientist or nobel prize writer you are - you won't get a car unless you wait for 10 or 20 years. Spying on your neighbors (or knowing the right people and doing them favours) can solve this in a week. Consider the incentives this sets up throught the whole society.
- there was just one employer (the state)
- social trust was nonexistent - you could only trust your family
- you had to apply for a permission to leave the country, and often when they gave you that permission you had to sign with secret service that you are a spy - so they can later blackmail you with it
I see no reason to think policies like free education till M.A. are in any way connected to these problems, since Poland had free education and healthcare both now and during communism, yet we don't do the bad things I listed anymore.
For the record - I didn't downvoted you and I don't understand why somebody woulld do that for asking a question.
BTW: free university education seems like much better than paid, because as a kid you work harder in school for better grades to go to better university. As a kid of poor parents in system with paid universities you just can't work hard enough to go to Harward (well there are stipends I guess, so they do see this problem).
As a parent it works too - in paid system you spend more time at work to afford better education for your kids. In free system - you teach your kids more so they get better grades and go to a better university. IMHO it's obvious which system sets up the incentives better.
The closer technology is to Star Trek's replicators, the more realistic free housing, food, utilities are. In such a society, people are by default artists, not farmers or workers. The people who becomes doctors and teachers and do not get compensated by their patients or students, need to be compensated by the government which needs to have something people want.
In the USSR, people spent most of their money, time and energy just hustling for the basic necessities.
Note: I was born in Leningrad, but know of life there only from my parents.
We can really trust the 6 companies that own all media groups in the US, or the two news agencies that control all what we watch in the West.
Never believe that the Government of the US have ever thought about controlling these 6 groups. That in order to make a movie about the military you have to give your script to the US military for review.
Don't read Propaganda by EDWARD L. BERNAYS or any other book, just trust us, we are the good guys.
Sorry about the rant, its just something that surprises me continually.
And what's even more troubling is that nowadays Russian propaganda is more believable than the western one ...
As another example, I currently live in Spain, and the government here lie to our faces and then hide from reporters so they cant ask any important questions. Here in Cataluña the people where tricked again into voting for a guy who is "promising" independence, and people believe it and shut up about any corruption or other issues that related to what's going on. They just blame Madrid and Germany for those issues, as that's what the TV tells them to do.
Edit: Added missing last sentence...
We can be only glad that Western media (including the NY Times) has never been used for propaganda and all information is absolutely objective, reproducible, and a hundred percent trustworthy.
Has anybody already found the WMDs in Iraq?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/04/russia-s-pr...
So not really the same category...
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War
To be more specific: I don't see any of the features prcolaimed by the West (honest government, no interference in other country's business, avoid civilian kills) upheld by themselves.
Also to note, I don't think Putin does it either.
The media (at least in the UK) was saying there were no WMDs in the days leading up to the vote in parliament.
Personally, I think that with all the leaks it would be known if Bush lied. For instance, some Russian source published death and maiming data for the Ukrainian war by mistake [regarding costs for pensions etc].
No one is saying that politicians don't lie. But there are levels in Hell. There is, in these two cases, a big difference between the incompetence of the Bush administration and systematic disinformation.
But I suspect you know this already...
Edit: It is also a bit much to make the US responsible for civilians killed by people also trying to kill American soldiers. To start with, you need to subtract all the people the Hussein regime would have murdered over the years, if it hadn't been kicked out.
Edit 2: 3princip: The WMD thing was probably an excuse for Bush, sure. But I answered the claim that this WMD excuse was a LIE -- which seems to not be true. So it is you that miss the point. (And this is a serious place so give serious references, not some generic youtube video.)
The US has weapons of mass destruction, so does Russia, and China, and Pakistan, and India and Israel.
Keep in mind the context, this was the second such invasion of Iraq, the first war being conducted by Bush Sr, having failed to discourage Saddam from attacking Kuwait[1]. In between the two wars the US bombing and sanctions caused the deaths of an estimated 500000 children[2].
So trying to justify the glaring lies, as some kind of buffoonery, especially in the context of what had been done to Iraq for the previous decade, is naive in my opinion.
[1] http://www.globalresearch.ca/gulf-war-documents-meeting-betw... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0WDCYcUJ4o
I guess, best thing to do is not to have opinion at all.
I'm having a GPS in my pocket, I can browse most of the cities from my computer through Google Earth. I can talk to my watch, which replies and sends messages for me, but not a single country can provide a satellite image of the exact location of a fired rocket or any other evidence, like radar logs of some sort.
Sometimes I really think I'm living in a multi-country-conspiracy and Snowden is only the top of the iceberg.
I tend to read RT.com from time to time when Russia is featuring in the news to see what the Russian media is saying. And I have to confess the barrage of conflicting information (vis a vis western media) is extremely disorienting and difficult to methodically process. I'm not surprised that some people feel the way that you do.
What I would also add is it's interesting to note how the story is pretty consistent from western media (that rebels shot down the plane by mistake). From what I've seen, the Russian media perspective is highly fluid; i.e. prone to change and multi-pronged.
I'll see if I can dig up the article, but it had interviews with internet users paid by the Russian state to shape argument. A group of 2-3 would take opposing sites in creating an artificial argument on say, a forum where it was being discussed. The "Western" POV would be discredited, and the argument focused between differing "Russian" explanations. The argument would never actually cease or come to a conclusion, but re-center around a number of accepted conclusions.
It is some malice, more than you might expect; with with a great dollop of ineptitude, far more than you might expect; that allows this climate of total disorientation to exist.
Take some of his thoughts:
> "Politicians used to have the confidence to tell us stories that made sense of the chaos of world events.
> "But now there are no big stories and politicians react randomly to every new crisis - leaving us bewildered and disorientated.
> "And journalism - that used to tell a grand, unfurling narrative - now also just relays disjointed and often wildly contradictory fragments of information.
> "Events come and go like waves of a fever. We - and the journalists - live in a state of continual delirium, constantly waiting for the next news event to loom out of the fog - and then disappear again, unexplained."
The rest of that article is here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/ae14be85-3104-...
And the documentary-film that he's referring to in that post, Bitter Lake, is available on iPlayer (for British viewers...or people on a VPN...), here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p02gyz6b/adam-curtis-bi...
The whole point of this kind of propaganda is to make people go "meh, everybody's lying, so I just won't trust anybody".
You have police shooting black unarmed teen, and want people not to be angry about that - make a panel discussion with 12 people telling 12 versions of what happened, 11 of which blame the teenager. Accuse every other source of information of bias and lies. Many people will think "there's sth to this, I won't know the truth anyway, not my problem, let's ignore this issue".
Assume for a minute that the CIA had that sort of in depth coverage of the event. Assume they know everything from the serial number of the warhead to the crew-members' favorite vodka.
Why would they, or any other intelligence agency risk burning even the tiniest shred of information on an event that open sources have done a pretty good job covering?
Dead Comment
The trouble, I see at least in my (Western) country: The main (public) TV programs are in the hand of the state (via regulatory control of the TV channels through political parties) or of two to three big corporations (many channels belong to one big corporation controlling them and also other news media).
From Italy, I heard, that many TV channels are controlled by one media mogul that also was the president. I guess, there are also other western countries, with similar situations.
At least in my country, I see clear evidence, that political unwanted news are at least suppressed or sometimes shown in a very distorted way. For example, when the software patent discussion came up some years ago in Europe, they brought news showing software patents in a shiny, only positive way. I would accept that from a purely private TV channel, but that was a "public TV channel" -- and many in my country still believe, that those public TV channels only tell the truth. But that is not so -- they tell, what our governments want us to know!
Also, at least one leading news reporter was dismissed (against protests from other reporters), he was inconvenient for one leading political party.
So, in the west, we don't have it as bad as in Russia -- but we should be very careful, the situation is far away from good.
- Ukraine army shoot down civil airliner with 90 people on board just a few years ago [1]
- It was regular war zone with dozens other planes shoot down [2].
- It happened on Ukraine territory, most likely by Ukraine citizens.
- Buk 9M38 is not Russian missile, but Soviet (that includes Ukraine).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ukrainian_aircraft_los...
What does that have to do with this incident?
> It was regular war zone with dozens other planes shoot down
This contradicts your point. The rebels didn't have planes, so all planes that were shot down were Ukrainian planes that were shot down by the rebels.
> It happened on Ukraine territory, most likely by Ukraine citizens.
What proof do you have for that?
Source: http://www.ibtimes.com/pro-russian-rebels-have-air-force-mad...
"Kiev has claimed that Ukrainian troops have destroyed one separatist L-39 military trainer aircraft, two An-2 agricultural aircraft, one Yak-52 trainer airplane and four Mi-24 attack helicopters -- the latter being the most dangerous aircraft in the list, and the only ones built expressly for an armed role."
Wikipedia also has a list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Unite...
with dozens of Ukrainian planes shoot down. (who shot them? where did they got weapons for that? where did they got skills for that?)
"Ukraine army shoot down civil airliner with 90 people on board just a few years ago" How many planes (korean planes to be specific) were shot down by USSR (that includes Russia)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655
- The list lists Ukrainian aircraft lost during the conflict, not the separatist/Russian aircraft.
- Yes, separatist-held territory is Ukraine territory, and separatists are (at times) Ukrainian citizens, although Ukraine currently cannot guarantee the safety of its, or other citizens in the separatist-held territory.
- As to the last point, who knows. Who produced what, and sold where in the post-Soviet world is a lot harder to debunk than the publicly exposed news.
Russia never took on, and still does not take on its moral obligation to proactively control its border with the conflict zone. Similarly, Ukraine didn't take appropriate action to ban flights over the conflict zone. Ukraine did take action - when will Russia? Both are "guilty" in the case of MH17, due to their inaction.
"There are risks and costs to action. But they are far less than the long range risks of comfortable inaction." - John F. Kennedy.