The State of Affairs in Russia

[Gaijin de Moscu]

That doesn't mean anything in general, since just because both sides make the mirror arguments doesn't mean that the two arguments are equally valid.  It particularly doesn't mean anything when it comes to Russia, since projecting their intentions onto others is their go-to gaslighting tactic.

True on the validity (ignoring your jab at Russia).

I'm very far from "validating" any arguments in this age-old debate. We've all chosen our own version of truth based on a whole set of factors that make sense to each of us individually. My own humble conclusion is there's no universal truth, which is why I have very little interest in discussing y'all's opinions of why my country is such a horrific monster

But it still amuses me when I read almost the exact arguments on the Russian forums and here, of course serving absolute opposite opinions.

[Gaijin de Moscu]

Ah... yeah, if you're saying that Russia's concerns are broader and Ukraine is just one aspect - a flashpoint at this time - that makes sense. I think that's fairly clear.

I think, conversely, however the Western perspective does not really consider things in the same cold war continuum. It's not about having a strategy to contain or hamper Russia. It's about sovereign countries - and their populations - maintaining their rights. If Ukraine or Belorussia or Kazakhstan or whoever wants to get into bed with Russia, great! Get into bed with Russia. If they don't - and that includes the people rather than individual dictators - then Russia really ought not to use military force.

I appreciate that this can still be seen as an overarching anti-Russian strategy (because Putin is pretty committed to subverting any popular opinions that don't align with his own, and is happy to prop up governments that lack a popular mandate of any kind).

So for the West it really is about Ukraine, because that's the country that is getting abused by Russia the most egregiously.

And while the Eastern marches of the West obviously has serious negative experiences with Russia and takes any threats very seriously (and, in the case of places like Hungary - are happy to play along with Russia), overall the West does not see Russia as a peer competitor (not a peer, not really a competitor) which perhaps forms part of the problem from Russia's perspective.

IMO, of course.

Makes sense to me.

The point of who is abusing Ukraine most egregiously is debatable (I would argue it's their own government, most of the time for the last 30 years), and I don't want to start the discussion on the 2014 coup and the roles of many external actors in that.

At this stage though, Russia's interests are, once again, global.

[Berkut]

That doesn't mean anything in general, since just because both sides make the mirror arguments doesn't mean that the two arguments are equally valid.  It particularly doesn't mean anything when it comes to Russia, since projecting their intentions onto others is their go-to gaslighting tactic.

True on the validity (ignoring your jab at Russia).

...We've all chosen our own version of truth based on a whole set of factors that make sense to each of us individually. My own humble conclusion is there's no universal truth, ....

Case study for the success of the authoritarian attack on the integrity of the "mainstream media".

This is why I react strongly to otherwise moderate, reasonable people prattling on about the bias of the "mainstream media" and how it is out to screw the right/conservatives.

It is not an accident. This is not something that happened as an unforseen consequence of the media's shortcomings. It is and was a concerted and careful attack on the credibility of the media in general, with a very specific goal in mind, and Gaijan is kind enough to offer himself up as a case study in the actual outcome.

There isn't any "truth" at all. It is all lies, so why not pick the lie you like and treasure it?

[garbon]

A multiverse of truths.

[Berkut]

Ah... yeah, if you're saying that Russia's concerns are broader and Ukraine is just one aspect - a flashpoint at this time - that makes sense. I think that's fairly clear.

I think, conversely, however the Western perspective does not really consider things in the same cold war continuum. It's not about having a strategy to contain or hamper Russia. It's about sovereign countries - and their populations - maintaining their rights. If Ukraine or Belorussia or Kazakhstan or whoever wants to get into bed with Russia, great! Get into bed with Russia. If they don't - and that includes the people rather than individual dictators - then Russia really ought not to use military force.

I appreciate that this can still be seen as an overarching anti-Russian strategy (because Putin is pretty committed to subverting any popular opinions that don't align with his own, and is happy to prop up governments that lack a popular mandate of any kind).

So for the West it really is about Ukraine, because that's the country that is getting abused by Russia the most egregiously.

And while the Eastern marches of the West obviously has serious negative experiences with Russia and takes any threats very seriously (and, in the case of places like Hungary - are happy to play along with Russia), overall the West does not see Russia as a peer competitor (not a peer, not really a competitor) which perhaps forms part of the problem from Russia's perspective.

IMO, of course.

Makes sense to me.

The point of who is abusing Ukraine most egregiously is debatable (I would argue it's their own government, most of the time for the last 30 years), and I don't want to start the discussion on the 2014 coup and the roles of many external actors in that.

At this stage though, Russia's interests are, once again, global.

The point of who is abusing Ukraine the most isn't the point under discussion. By definition, if we are talking about sovereignty, then Ukraine abusing itself is Ukraine's problem.

You are justifying the straight up violation of the very UN Charter you just claimed to be your over-riding concern by saying that Russia is justified in using violence and military action against another sovereign power because they simply don't like the government of Ukraine.

You cannot have it both ways. The irrationality in your argument is completely contained within your own argument, it is not predicated on any data that can be dismissed as bias.

[Gaijin de Moscu]

"... saying that Russia is justified in using violence and military action against another sovereign power because they simply don't like the government of Ukraine..."

Sorry, where did I say this?

[Gaijin de Moscu]

A multiverse of truths.

As none of us in this thread has first-hand knowledge of every fact, and we all form our opinions based on the sources we choose to trust and see as credible — yes, in result, we have a multiverse of truths.

It's been this way since the beginning of time.

[Sheilbh]

As none of us in this thread has first-hand knowledge of every fact, and we all form our opinions based on the sources we choose to trust and see as credible — yes, in result, we have a multiverse of truths.

It's been this way since the beginning of time.

And also there's a difference between facts and truth. There are facts - there are things that happen or don't.

But the interpretation and analysis and how those facts tie together  is always contested - that why we read history books. I don't think any of us are capable of getting the first cut right enough to say it's truth.

[Gaijin de Moscu]

And also there's a difference between facts and truth. There are facts - there are things that happen or don't.

But the interpretation and analysis and how those facts tie together  is always contested - that why we read history books. I don't think any of us are capable of getting the first cut right enough to say it's truth.

Completely agreed

[Berkut]

"... saying that Russia is justified in using violence and military action against another sovereign power because they simply don't like the government of Ukraine..."

Sorry, where did I say this?

When you brought up the "The point of who is abusing Ukraine most egregiously is debatable (I would argue it's their own government, most of the time for the last 30 years)" in response to the discussion around Russias violent military intervention into the Ukraine, and their threats to do so again.

[Berkut]

As none of us in this thread has first-hand knowledge of every fact, and we all form our opinions based on the sources we choose to trust and see as credible — yes, in result, we have a multiverse of truths.

It's been this way since the beginning of time.

And also there's a difference between facts and truth. There are facts - there are things that happen or don't.

But the interpretation and analysis and how those facts tie together  is always contested - that why we read history books. I don't think any of us are capable of getting the first cut right enough to say it's truth.

Good propaganda is based around blurring the lines between fact and truth so you can simply turn around and wave away inconvenient facts. Like is being done right here, right now.

[Berkut]

I am just fascinated at watching how authoritarian propaganda works so effectively in real time, right in front of us.

And not even by those who are completely invested in it, but by those who are not, and are supporting it anyway.

[grumbler]

Case study for the success of the authoritarian attack on the integrity of the "mainstream media".

This is why I react strongly to otherwise moderate, reasonable people prattling on about the bias of the "mainstream media" and how it is out to screw the right/conservatives.

It is not an accident. This is not something that happened as an unforseen consequence of the media's shortcomings. It is and was a concerted and careful attack on the credibility of the media in general, with a very specific goal in mind, and Gaijan is kind enough to offer himself up as a case study in the actual outcome.

There isn't any "truth" at all. It is all lies, so why not pick the lie you like and treasure it?

Every President-for-Life like Putin squeals in glee when they encounter evidence that people are buying into the lie that, since there is no absolute objective truth, all forms of less-than-complete-truth are equal.

Every wannabe President-for-Life like Trump thanks the real things for helping make autocracy sound more viable.

[Gaijin de Moscu]

When you brought up the "The point of who is abusing Ukraine most egregiously is debatable (I would argue it's their own government, most of the time for the last 30 years)" in response to the discussion around Russias violent military intervention into the Ukraine, and their threats to do so again.

Funny how you saw in my words what you did.

Looks like a bias, don't you think?

[Berkut]

When you brought up the "The point of who is abusing Ukraine most egregiously is debatable (I would argue it's their own government, most of the time for the last 30 years)" in response to the discussion around Russias violent military intervention into the Ukraine, and their threats to do so again.

Funny how you saw in my words what you did.

Looks like a bias, don't you think?

No, it looks like honesty.