Role of Russia

[quote author=Dragon Snacks]
Putin's no hero.
[/quote]

I think it behooves us to remember history and learn about those who are considered by many to be "heroes" today. How many of them were accepted universally as heroes when they lived? Given that human history is dominated by pathological people and ponerized masses, anyone wishing to take action to change the state of affairs is faced with apparently insurmountable odds. Heroes are those who try and achieve some success in such a situation. They inevitably face with opposition - not only from the entrenched pathological power centers which would be a given - but also from the very people whose lives they are trying to improve . This is a habit (or a so-called "law") of human existence. After these people pass away their ideologies and lives are sometimes twisted, mythicized, and coopted at varying levels to create the "hero" to be encountered by the future. Sometimes, later generations recognize the context and enormity of the impact of the actions taken by such a hero and thereby start venerating him. But in any case, they never receive universal approval during their lifetime.

To evaluate a leader in real time is thus a very tricky affair. A starting point could be to consider how much worse things could be if the leader in question had acted differently in the specific situations he encountered ? It is a part of human psychology to take good things for granted and focus on the negative aspects. Keeping this bias in mind in this specific context may be useful.

Another aspect of faulty perception perhaps comes from the lack of experience/insight into what it takes to really make a positive long term impact on people's lives. Theories abound in this area, and have largely proved to be useless down the centuries. Try taking up a very small scale effort - even within the limits of one's own family - to bring about a meaningful beneficial change that goes against the grain of currently held ideas. If you succeed, extend into a larger social circle. In essence, get an experience of working with people. It should give, if one is a little conscious, a taste of the difficulty that confronts one in this area. One cannot accomplish much unless one is strategic in terms of setting priorities as well as picking the battles to fight.
 
Hi peeps I could do with a bit of advice and support on this one. I don't know whether what Barry Grossman has written re Russia is true or not. However much of what he has said previously makes total sense. I hesitate to respond without networking as he has a huge following so it is an opportunity to get more truth out there.

The FB thread is here: https://www.facebook.com/barry.grossman.3/posts/677837252308762?comment_id=677971092295378

What he has said against Putin most concerns me. The rest speaks for itself. The comment is:

The thing is Liz Ashley, while I have some sympathies with Russia, Putin has sworn to help advance Israel's security and is working very closely with Egypt to advance the new KSA agenda being sold publicly as the new face of a more reasonable, home grown war on extremism. China never gets involved in anything except to advance its own postion, though that is a preferable position to the imperialism of the US led Empire. All in all, while Russian intervention in Syria was a significant factor which let the Assad government live to breath another day, I cannot find much of anything to commend Putin's politics as a matter of principle. Also, while I very much sympathise with what ethnic Russians are going through in the Eastern Ukraine, my own view has consistantly been that Putin is scarcely less at fault than the US in creating that crises and certainly over played his hand. That is not to suggest that I support the US position or the Kiev junta in any way. Howver, I take the view that it is not possible to polish a turd and when we look carefuly at Putin's career and his unrestrained corruption, to say nothing of his overt hostility to Islam, I cannot help but form the view that he is a turd, even if some of his policy decissions during this 3rd term as President have won him a lot of kudos from Wrsterners who understandably have become entirely disgruntled by the Empire's politics. From my perspective, Iran and some South American countries like Bolivia, Ecuador, Venezuela and Brazil, stand out as being alomst alone in championing the politics of being ethically correct and being willing to take a committed stand against the Empire. Certainly for those looking for a consistantly moral champion in the current international order, Iran stands out "head & shoulders" above all others as the best candidate. Of course I don't expect or require that everyone agree with me and I am not suggesting that Iran, lie any other nation, does not have its own domestic issues.
 
happyliza said:
Hi peeps I could do with a bit of advice and support on this one. I don't know whether what Barry Grossman has written re Russia is true or not. However much of what he has said previously makes total sense. I hesitate to respond without networking as he has a huge following so it is an opportunity to get more truth out there.
Click to expand...

Imo, there are so many inaccuracies and contradictions in what he said (Overt hostility toward Islam? especially since Russia was always accused of being friends with Arabs? Not to mention the fact, that Putin is friends with all the countries he called being ethically correct), that it is "not even wrong". Personally, after seeing the level of those who are "anti-Putin", I would approach such diatribes the same way as Israeli Hasbara tactics.

They concentrate on details (and every leader no matter how good has their own long list of mistakes) and avoid the big picture. They demonstrate lack of deep thinking and ability to see the "line of force" behind person's actions. So, really, in such case, there is no point discussing or proving anything to such people. As Mico Peled said in his interview on SOTT radio, that we shouldn't waste our energy, especially since they are not going to change their mind anyway. If they are serious, they can do their own homework.
 
Dragon Snacks said:
Putin's no hero.

The give me back my pen video is great illustration of a centralized authority abridging the freewill of it's unfortunate constituents, but it makes great political theater because he's punishing a group of people whom a different group of people consider bad or greedy or corrupt.
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt that "unfortunate constituents" have any free will of their own, because consciousness is needed for it and vast majority of people are just mechanical ; demockracy is a mirage and one of major memes that contains sheeple in pen... Just like Santa's trick for toddlers: If you behave like a good boy/girl - demockracy will bring you many nice things for Christmas or whenever.... :pinocchio:

... and good that Putin is no hero since he ought to be dead to fit that definition...

Long Live Putin! :-[

:bye:
 
Keit said:
happyliza said:
Hi peeps I could do with a bit of advice and support on this one. I don't know whether what Barry Grossman has written re Russia is true or not. However much of what he has said previously makes total sense. I hesitate to respond without networking as he has a huge following so it is an opportunity to get more truth out there.
Click to expand...

Imo, there are so many inaccuracies and contradictions in what he said (Overt hostility toward Islam? especially since Russia was always accused of being friends with Arabs? Not to mention the fact, that Putin is friends with all the countries he called being ethically correct), that it is "not even wrong". Personally, after seeing the level of those who are "anti-Putin", I would approach such diatribes the same way as Israeli Hasbara tactics.

They concentrate on details (and every leader no matter how good has their own long list of mistakes) and avoid the big picture. They demonstrate lack of deep thinking and ability to see the "line of force" behind person's actions. So, really, in such case, there is no point discussing or proving anything to such people. As Mico Peled said in his interview on SOTT radio, that we shouldn't waste our energy, especially since they are not going to change their mind anyway. If they are serious, they can do their own homework.
Click to expand...

Thanks Keit. Good advice. Best I just leave no reply. Others can also do their own research, after all I have enough info now on my timeline alone on Putin. So best not to muddy the waters and open up a can of worms. I agree about the stupid hostility to Islam rubbish - totally amazing.
 
Antony said:
So that leads to some intriguing questions.
1) How long Russia have been under the world government?
2) Did the Russian elite sign a similar pact with the west after the break up of USSR? (That may partly explain the worsening situation inside Russia).
3) As it was stated in the documentary about Gurdjieff, was Stalin a sort of "black magician" (STS oriented) and seeking an unlimited power as all the patocratic individuals? Or he was a great leader trying to do good for the country and the world?
4) Is Putin honestly STO oriented (serving country's, people's, world's interests) or it is just a show and his/oligarchs attempts to stay in power after realizing that they are not welcomed in the World's government ran primarily by western families ( as Cs mentioned that the world affairs are just the cover up for forthcoming events and Russia is just a leg (hidden part) of the beast serving STS higher agenda)?
Click to expand...

Que le spectacle commence!

1) Always. Every government is.

What people fail to understand about the idea of a shadow government, especially of the Fortean variety, is that it must necessarily be dispassionate in regards to human condition. In the same way a Farmer doesn't care who the broccoli's president is, as long as they grow.

Another example is that of a cattle farmer, or farmers. Some are kind and generous (to whatever degree a person who is ultimately going to kill and eat you can be) others are harsh and violent. The "World Government" as you put it, or shadow government or whatever is much like this. The spice must flow. Ultimately who is in charge is unimportant. Why this is is of course rather obvious. The illusion of progress must be maintained for humanity, the system in place allows challengers, and even encourages them. What Putin is doing in Russia is simply showing that he is a better, more composed leader than the West, and that Russia is better placed and less culturally inbred than the USA. The shadow government is simply testing out the waters to see who wins. Ultimately they don't really care all that much. It doesn't matter who comes out on top in the grand scheme of things, but locally it matters alot. It's the difference between being on the good farm or the bad farm.

Obviously there are many hairsplitting details that have been glossed over. Please put down the axe and think about it before you try to split the hairs.

2) Nonsense.

3) Irrelevant, but also unlikely. Stalin was not necessarily good or bad, but this is quite in the past now.

4) Putin is in no way STO, no person on the planet is to any significant degree. This world is not STO. There is the possibility of being an STO candidate. Perhaps he is or could be. But this is irrelevant. The only things that are important when it comes to Putin are: What he says, what he does, and what are the results.

He says: I will help.
He does: Help.
Result: People are happier and better situated. Objectively and by the numbers.

As long as his deeds and results continue to match his promises, then he is a good leader. But he is still a cow, on a cow farm, with all that that entails.
 
happyliza said:
The thing is Liz Ashley, while I have some sympathies with Russia, Putin has sworn to help advance Israel's security and is working very closely with Egypt to advance the new KSA agenda being sold publicly as the new face of a more reasonable, home grown war on extremism. China never gets involved in anything except to advance its own postion, though that is a preferable position to the imperialism of the US led Empire. All in all, while Russian intervention in Syria was a significant factor which let the Assad government live to breath another day, I cannot find much of anything to commend Putin's politics as a matter of principle. Also, while I very much sympathise with what ethnic Russians are going through in the Eastern Ukraine, my own view has consistantly been that Putin is scarcely less at fault than the US in creating that crises and certainly over played his hand. That is not to suggest that I support the US position or the Kiev junta in any way. Howver, I take the view that it is not possible to polish a turd and when we look carefuly at Putin's career and his unrestrained corruption, to say nothing of his overt hostility to Islam, I cannot help but form the view that he is a turd, even if some of his policy decissions during this 3rd term as President have won him a lot of kudos from Wrsterners who understandably have become entirely disgruntled by the Empire's politics. From my perspective, Iran and some South American countries like Bolivia, Ecuador, Venezuela and Brazil, stand out as being alomst alone in championing the politics of being ethically correct and being willing to take a committed stand against the Empire. Certainly for those looking for a consistantly moral champion in the current international order, Iran stands out "head & shoulders" above all others as the best candidate. Of course I don't expect or require that everyone agree with me and I am not suggesting that Iran, lie any other nation, does not have its own domestic issues.
Click to expand...

He is completely naive. Putin is in no way at fault for Ukraine. The USA is completely at fault, and have admitted as much when the tape of their planning the coup d'etat was leaked. And they officially apologized for the foul language used! Everything else that he says is a qualitative (subjective) judgement about the situation which shows a puerile intellect attempting to ruminate on subjects far beyond his capacity to contemplate.
 
Antony said:
If a TRUE leader has a WILL to Serve To Country/People- the results would be obvious.
Stalin is a good example.
Click to expand...

Yes, Stalin managed to create a huge and powerful empire during a relatively short period of time. But at what cost? Just one example: the White Sea Canal (Belomorkanal). The famous construction project, one of the biggest in the USSR. Now just imagine: only during the first winter 300,000 builders died. This is the officially acknowledged number. People died of hunger and intense labor. This is how the so called "pyatiletka's" (five-year periods) were achieved: by starving thousands and millions of people to death and forcing them to work like slaves.

This is just one example, I will not describe all the horrors here, because this is not the point. The point is: are you suggesting that Putin should use similar repressions to achieve similar results? Because, obviously, one cannot restore the ruined economy within several years without creating an environment of total control and obedience and without massive sacrifice of human lives and health.

And this is the fundamental difference between Putin and Stalin.

Putin is not aimed at creating an empire at any cost. He is restoring a ruined country for the people. When Putin promises to restore ruined houses within 3 months, his aim is to help the people. And the schedule is strict not because he wants to satisfy his ambitions, but because the winter is coming.

In Stalin's case, if you haven't fulfilled his plan in time, you're a dead person. See the difference?

History knows many tyranic leaders. Some of them were rather efficient economists. But while developing the economy we should also remember about humanity.

ADDED:

Antony said:
Kniall - the masons were actively working in Csar's Russia long before Bolsheviks in 1917.
Click to expand...

Kniall made a very good point, by the way. Indeed, the major ones came exactly in 1917. Those were Lenin and rigth after him - Stalin. Masons or not, they were both very much into occultism. And this is just another reason to stop and think who this person (Stalin) really was and what was his goal.
 
I guess comparing and contrasting government leaders is fun, but in the end it's a Hegelian dialectic. You're arguing about which leash you'd prefer was around everybody's neck. We're used to being confined, by politicians and media, to such narrow parameters in a debate where two options are given: statism or statism lite. What about a third option–no government, no state?
 
Dragon Snacks said:
I guess comparing and contrasting government leaders is fun, but in the end it's a Hegelian dialectic. You're arguing about which leash you'd prefer was around everybody's neck. We're used to being confined, by politicians and media, to such narrow parameters in a debate where two options are given: statism or statism lite. What about a third option–no government, no state?
Click to expand...

Knowing how the masses of people - at least half of them - NEED government, well, I don't think that would work.

I had similar views years ago, but years of reading history, psychology and sociology and working with people directly has given me my comeuppance.

There's a great article on sott that explains it very well: http://www.sott.net/article/163349-Moral-Endo-skeletons-and-Exo-skeletons-A-Perspective-on-Americas-Cultural-Divide-and-Current-Crisis
 
I am hoping for a reasonable discussion/networking for the purpose of sorting out the dilemma.
Laura- one wouldn't expect from moral masochists and slaves to build a country like Russia, give the world that cultural, technological and other great inputs. Even though in Czar's times indeed ordinary people inherited the concept of Good Czar and a surrounding bad elite.
I agree that Putin, when compared to western leaders (that are trying to spread chaos everywhere- Cs: grab and destroy), looks much more veracious. Indeed Syria was fought off from the "vultures" (for now as the main attention is on Ukraine) who instigated the conflict from the beginning. But the feel and need for that (after the reset/perezagryzka "show" with the US") came only after Libya was "given away". Gaddafi (i bet he was not perfect either) was trying to be a leader in Africa, proposing that African countries should unite, get rid off western corporations, introduce a single currency - "golden dinar" and eventually return "real" sovereignty. Obviously West could not allow it to happen.
For some reasons - Russian elite's interests did not clash with west's in that case. The veto in SC UN was NOT used by us, so it gave a green light to a destruction of the country and a mass killings of innocent Libyans. (Yes, post factum we have seen on TV Putin's resentment-did it change Libyans life for better?...).
Domestic degradation seen in everyday's life is what puts most of thinking people in a trouble. As Machiavelli put in Prince, the leader either relies on people as a whole, or elite. Do we expect elite (oligarchs) to care about people?

Another point not analyzed. If the ruling elite was patriotic and independent - would it keep it's "wallet" in the "enemy's" pocket?

Atreides-I overally agree on the first question but could you please clarify your comment "nonsense" on second?
There is his fault in Ukraine -strategic policy planning wise. No necessary preventive measures taken until the Coup in Kiev. Last year nobody in a scariest dream would have imagined a war between basically one nation. Although experts have foreseen such possibility - article written in December 2008 called Obama will start WW3 in Crimea http://www.utro.ru/articles/2008/12/26/789711.shtml (did not find English version).

Siberia- yes I do understand the period of 1930s. And Stalin understood that if no extraordinary measures taken fascists would eliminate USSR and the world. There were victims no doubt. According to other estimates Belomorcanal took lives from 2 to 120 thousands people http://www.1tv.ru/owa/win/one_sp_33_video.print_version?pr_id=63453
By the way, concerning repressions (not Soljenitsin and other "democrats" propaganda source) there is a solid factual material released by academic Zemskov http://www.great-country.ru/rubrika_myths/reprisal/00044-01.html

Mason influence were well before them (good pictures of Kremlin's hall nowadays and Czar's inauguration at the bottom) http://www.illuminati-order.ru/3.htm (click on the left ч.2, ч. 3 and so on).
 
Antony, have you finished watching the recommended video, the "Unknown Putin"?

Do you know what Hasbara means?
 
Anthony, it seems to me that you have a very naive view of the world. It doesn't work like you think it does nor does it work, or will it ever work, as you would like it to. Until you accept that you're never going to understand the nature of the dynamics at play.

In as few words as possible I'll say that: America and the West is all "black", Russia is a shade of grey. It's not an ideal choice, but which do you chose to support, keeping in mind that, from a 'higher' perspective, the main role that Russia is playing today is to provide a last gasp opportunity for people to have an alternative viewpoint from the lies told by the West, and to choose. Note, Russia is not doing this consciously, it is, rather, a function of the macro dynamics in this little corner of the Universe?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom