The Kremlin is burning?

[Roman Alymov]

"On this day in 1943, the city of Stalino (now Donetsk, the capital of the DPR) was liberated from Nazi troops. Then our army and our people were united and beat the enemy seriously, until complete victory. 

Today, about half of the DPR is still occupied (not to mention the entire territory of the former USSR). The reason for what is happening is simple: the Russian government does not set itself the goal of winning this war. Their goal is to negotiate with their oligarchic class brothers in the West. In these situations, we, the people, are just a resource for achieving narrow corporate interests. If this were not the case, the current Supreme Commander-in-Chief would have set the task for the whole country for a long time, like Stalin: "Everything for the front, everything for victory." But no. The country is emphatically living a peaceful life, and the oligarchs, having recruited 300 thousand serfs, who cannot resign even after completing a contract or after being wounded and return to their families, are trying to settle their grates with Western oligarchs with these people. These are the realities of today." ( https://t.me/KvachkovV/2094 )

[ink]

The real question is, if Russians are waking up to the idea that capitalism sucks, what are they going to do next? Feels like we've already watched this movie.

 

[RETAC21]

2 minutes ago, ink said:

The real question is, if Russians are waking up to the idea that capitalism sucks, what are they going to do next? Feels like we've already watched this movie.

 

[Roman Alymov]

3 minutes ago, ink said:

The real question is, if Russians are waking up to the idea that capitalism sucks, what are they going to do next? Feels like we've already watched this movie.

 

It is wrong alternative. Not capitalism sucks (while, of course, is far from perfect) but capitalism where ultimate goal is not making money, but channeling money in Western bank. I persinally know few Russian capitalists (from small shop owners up to almost oligarch level) who are helping frontline efforts. But this people are more of "an exception confirming the rule".

[ink]

1 hour ago, Roman Alymov said:

It is wrong alternative. Not capitalism sucks (while, of course, is far from perfect) but capitalism where ultimate goal is not making money, but channeling money in Western bank. I persinally know few Russian capitalists (from small shop owners up to almost oligarch level) who are helping frontline efforts. But this people are more of "an exception confirming the rule".

Small shop owners aren't really capitalists... Oligarchs tend to be.

But that's not the point. The point is that, as a system, it doesn't mesh with the needs of the people unless you rein it in and control it. It needs control. Otherwise it just runs away with the greed of the ruling class.

[Stefan Kotsch]

28 minutes ago, ink said:

The point is that, as a system, it doesn't mesh with the needs of the people

The big unanswered question: Which system is better?😙

[Roman Alymov]

29 minutes ago, ink said:

Small shop owners aren't really capitalists... Oligarchs tend to be.

But that's not the point. The point is that, as a system, it doesn't mesh with the needs of the people unless you rein it in and control it. It needs control. Otherwise it just runs away with the greed of the ruling class.

USSR, officially Socialist country, was ruined by greed and hunger for power of ruling class. Unfortunately, no system is immune from natural human sins.

[ink]

16 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

USSR, officially Socialist country, was ruined by greed and hunger for power of ruling class. Unfortunately, no system is immune from natural human sins.

Oh, please don't misunderstand my criticism of capitalism for some sort socialist wet dream. I don't think that's a better road at all.

I just happen think it's ok to call something out as flawed without offering a solution. 

Edited September 8 by ink

[Roman Alymov]

8 hours ago, ink said:

Oh, please don't misunderstand my criticism of capitalism for some sort socialist wet dream. I don't think that's a better road at all.

I just happen think it's ok to call something out as flawed without offering a solution. 

Please note i have not criticised capitalism in general, except pointing out it is not perfect. I am not in a business of "let's fix entire world". What i am criticizing is our local version of capitalism, that was created as de-facto colonial rule of pro-Western comprador elite.

    I am old enough to remember what socialism was like - with both positive and negative features of it. It was also not perfect (to the extent it collapsed on our heads - by internal reasons, despite of all Western claims of "victory in Cold War").

[seahawk]

You know that capitalism in Russia will always turn out like the current one, because the West has all the nice events, and places that Russian capitalists will want to be a part of too. Capitalism always puts individual fortune above the interests of the nation.

[Roman Alymov]

7 minutes ago, seahawk said:

You know that capitalism in Russia will always turn out like the current one, because the West has all the nice events, and places that Russian capitalists will want to be a part of too. Capitalism always puts individual fortune above the interests of the nation.

   Not exactly, since our local capitalism is ugly result of USSR elites grabbing national property (de-facto stealing it) and they were right from the begining in need of West to hide their assets (and themselves). This people are not sort of "classic" capitalists who grew their business from scratch or even from what parents left. "Classic" capitalists will be far less dependent on West - some of them allready are.

[seahawk]

That is an illusion. Classic capitalists are removed from the idea of being part of a nation. They aspire to be "global citizens" and they will move their cash where it produces the most income, pays the lowest taxes and/or is the most secure from access by any nation.

[Roman Alymov]

1 minute ago, seahawk said:

That is an illusion. Classic capitalists are removed from the idea of being part of a nation. They aspire to be "global citizens" and they will move their cash where it produces the most income, pays the lowest taxes and/or is the most secure from access by any nation.

That is debatable as tax evasion and relocation of assets is subject of regulation by law. Anyway, it is purely academic in particular case since we have what we have.

[Stuart Galbraith]

51 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

Please note i have not criticised capitalism in general, except pointing out it is not perfect. I am not in a business of "let's fix entire world". What i am criticizing is our local version of capitalism, that was created as de-facto colonial rule of pro-Western comprador elite.

    I am old enough to remember what socialism was like - with both positive and negative features of it. It was also not perfect (to the extent it collapsed on our heads - by internal reasons, despite of all Western claims of "victory in Cold War").

Of course, and Ive said so many times. There is a very good book by William Odom called 'the collapse of the Soviet military', that described the system you had as working, after a fashion. It only fell apart when Gorbachev tried to reform it.

Of course, Russians will probably blame us for demanding change, but, speaking for someone whom remembers the first half of the 1980's and how convinced we were that WW3 was around the corner, I still think you landed on your feet, no matter how bad the 1990's were.

 

[seahawk]

21 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

That is debatable as tax evasion and relocation of assets is subject of regulation by law. Anyway, it is purely academic in particular case since we have what we have.

Fascism is the solution to the problem, as it puts the needs of the nation above the interests of the capitalists.

[Josh]

10 hours ago, seahawk said:

You know that capitalism in Russia will always turn out like the current one, because the West has all the nice events, and places that Russian capitalists will want to be a part of too. Capitalism always puts individual fortune above the interests of the nation.

Russia could simply be part of the west and have its own events and places. Or as Roman likes to say, print its own imaginary money. There is absolutely nothing stopping Russia from being the economic powerhouse of Europe other than Russian government.

[Josh]

9 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Of course, and Ive said so many times. There is a very good book by William Odom called 'the collapse of the Soviet military', that described the system you had as working, after a fashion. It only fell apart when Gorbachev tried to reform it.

Of course, Russians will probably blame us for demanding change, but, speaking for someone whom remembers the first half of the 1980's and how convinced we were that WW3 was around the corner, I still think you landed on your feet, no matter how bad the 1990's were.

 

It seems safe to assume that had the west lost the Cold War, Soviet treatment would be less friendly. I think a lot of people regret the economic malaise that befell Russia post break up. There was a misguided sense that political freedom equals economic prosperity and institutional stability. This mistake was repeated in Iraq. There is no shortcut to stable nation development and large upheavals inevitably are exploited by the preexisting power brokers of a culture unless they are heavily regulated or liquidated.

[Roman Alymov]

10 hours ago, seahawk said:

Fascism is the solution to the problem, as it puts the needs of the nation above the interests of the capitalists.

Fascism is just another form of capitalism, with only difference it is capitalists who are defining the meaning of the words "nation" and "needs" - so some people who were part of nation just few years ago could become sort of insects nation needs to get rid of (see the fate of German Jewish WWI veterans).

[Roman Alymov]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

Russia could simply be part of the west and have its own events and places. Or as Roman likes to say, print its own imaginary money. There is absolutely nothing stopping Russia from being the economic powerhouse of Europe other than Russian government.

That is what our Gov was saying to us in Russia for almost 30 years (while looting the country in cooperation with their Western friends). Do you remember all this talks about "Energy superpower" and "Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok"? They were dreaming about Russian citizens given visa-free travel to EU (they believed it would allow the steam out of Russia as all unhappy with their situation would leave).

    Luckily, Western elites were too arrogant and incompetent to allow our elites to sell off Russia completely.

    

[Roman Alymov]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

It seems safe to assume that had the west lost the Cold War, Soviet treatment would be less friendly. 

What is your idea how "West lost the Cold War" would have looked like? 

Edited September 9 by Roman Alymov

[KV7]

Capitalism is more than markets and private property, it canonically also features capitalist class political and economic hegemony. A market mixed economy  with a capitalist sector that is incentivised to develop the nation etc. and which cannot case strife through some capital strike etc. is desirable, and it was partially achieved in parts of the west in the post war period but for this to be stable it, it would then not be capitalism, if it capitalist it will be unstable because the capitalist class can and likely will at some stage tire of the restrictions, and if politically hegemonic, will succeed. 

[seahawk]

11 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

Fascism is just another form of capitalism, with only difference it is capitalists who are defining the meaning of the words "nation" and "needs" - so some people who were part of nation just few years ago could become sort of insects nation needs to get rid of (see the fate of German Jewish WWI veterans).

Then Communism is the answer. Which imho worked well in Russia and was an important systematic alternative to the West, that through its pure existence contained capitalism and weakened the Western imperialism.

[Roman Alymov]

On 9/10/2024 at 8:14 AM, seahawk said:

Then Communism is the answer. Which imho worked well in Russia and was an important systematic alternative to the West, that through its pure existence contained capitalism and weakened the Western imperialism.

Communism never worked in Russia or any other place, as it was never constructed. Socialism was, in many versions - all of them were not perfect.

Edited September 11 by Roman Alymov

[JWB]

I wonder if those boys got paid.

 

[Roman Alymov]

On 9/11/2024 at 6:43 PM, JWB said:

I wonder if those boys got paid.

They were paid for another arson some time ago (some time ago they have set fire to cell tower, for RUR 30K =about USD 300) .  In this incident, they got burns and are now in hospital. By the way father of one of this schoolchildren is now at war -so, probably, will have few extra words to tell to his son when back.

     The helicopter was civilian one. owned by Utair.