Political Forum. Opinions and Debates.

Log in | Registration
Go to the first message← Previous page
Next page →Go to the last message

Figure skating, ballet, music etc 2

  Redhead
Expat


Messages: 16334
18:41 18.02.2019
Grin (25771) wrote in reply to post:
> ⍟ Redhead (Expat),
> How's your day going?
quoted1

My day is going absolutely super. I am supposed to be studying today all day, but my husband's uncle from Guildford (remember I wrote about him before) with his wife and son are here for a visit. They are staying for a few days and they want to take our kids for a couple of days to Sweden — this is where my husband's uncle's wife is from. It is half term here you see (mid term one and a half week school holidays) and both John and me are busy and the kids are bored in London.
Link Complain Quote  
  Redhead
Expat


Messages: 16334
18:49 18.02.2019
Grin (25771) wrote in reply to post:
> The truth is in times of Russian Empire there were «славянофилы» and «западники». «Западники» considered Russia and Russian culture as part of Europe. «Славянофилы» were talking about the third way, third Rome etc. Nowadays we just copycat western culture, nothing really to talk about.
quoted1

Truth is Russia is a Western country deep down by mentality. From what Oleksa Eryomin is trying to prove — it is the opposite — they are trying to oppose Russia as westerners and present Russia as «v atniks». I deeply disagree with that concept you see. I actually think that Russia deep down is closer to the western mentality than Ukraine.
Liked: Grin
Link Complain Quote  
  Redhead
Expat


Messages: 16334
18:58 18.02.2019
Grin (25771) wrote in reply to post:
Expand message beginning

>
>
>
quoted1

We in the City are none the wiser. I could write pages here about what has been going on re Brexit, but ultimately — we are just happy with any good business news that is coming through. All these politics you know — it is not good for us — ultimately, all the turmoil. But deep down we know that Britain will pull through, London will pull through, the City will pull through. How do we know? Cause people here experienced it all before — during Thatcher, during not joining the Euro period, etc.
Link Complain Quote  
  Redhead
Expat


Messages: 16334
19:12 18.02.2019
Grin (25771) wrote in reply to post:
Expand message beginning

>
>
>
quoted1
Whichever way you look at it — you are a third world country — economy wise. So you have to grow at 7−9% per year — to catch up, like China did. The 1.5%-2% growth is OK for Britain, but not for you. Your country is deeply corrupt, unreformed, undemocratic and with oppressive regime in power. You might think I am being aggressive and abusive, but I am just being truthful. Your answers to the needs of modernisation is outward aggression. And that is what usually brings your attempts at having an Empire to its demise. I am quoting the article from the Economist again — from 2015 — which you discarded as propaganda — I actually think it hits the nail on the head, this article is epic.

If Russia breaks up
The peril beyond Putin






The world rightly worries about the prospect of a Greater Russia. But a Lesser Russia could be just as troubling


If Russia breaks up
The peril beyond Putin

THE WORLD IF 2015
Jul 1st 2015, 10:24

The world rightly worries about the prospect of a Greater Russia. But a Lesser Russia could be just as troubling

UNDER Vladimir Putin’s presidency, Russia is seen in the outside world as an expansionist power trying to revise post-Soviet borders and rebuild an empire. But what if Russia itself—a country of nearly 200 nationalities that stretches across 11 time zones—is in danger of crumbling?

It would not be the first time that Russia tried aggression and expansion as a defence against modernisation and by doing so undermined its own territorial integrity. In 1904, when Russia was on the verge of a revolution, Nicholas II attempted to stave off change by looking for national traitors and starting a small war with Japan. The war ended a year later in Russia’s defeat and 12 years later the tsarist Russian empire faded away in a few days. In 1979, as Communist rule struggled under the weight of its own contradictions, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan; 12 years later the Soviet Union collapsed just as suddenly.

In 2011 Moscow’s urban middle class took to the streets to demand modernisation. Mr Putin responded by picking out alleged national traitors, annexing Crimea and starting a war against Ukraine. The idea that Russia’s latest foreign-policy adventures might end in the same way as previous ones—with the collapse of the state and disintegration of the country—is not as far-fetched as it might seem.

The Soviet Union came apart because it overstretched itself and ran out of money and ideas. Local elites saw no benefit in remaining part of a bankrupt country. It fragmented along the administrative borders of the 15 republics that made up the giant country.

Yet there was no reason why the process had to stop there. Indeed, many of Russia’s regions—including Siberia, Ural, Karelia and Tatarstan—declared their «sovereignty» at the time. To prevent further disintegration Russia’s then president, Boris Yeltsin, came up with the idea of a federation, promising each region as much «sovereignty as it could swallow». Yeltsin made this promise in Kazan, the ancient capital of Tatarstan, which acquired many attributes of a separate state: a president, a constitution, a flag and, most important, its own budget. In exchange, Tatarstan promised to stay part of Russia.

Mr Putin has reversed federalism, and turned Russia into a centralised state. He cancelled regional elections, imposed a «presidential» representative over the heads of governors and redistributed tax revenues in Moscow’s favour. But he did not build common institutions. The Russian state is seen not as an upholder of law but as a source of injustice and corruption.

DESPITE RUSSIA’S DEEP PARANOIA THAT AMERICA IS TRYING TO BREAK IT UP, SUCH A SCENARIO IS ONE OF THE WEST’S WORST NIGHTMARES

In the words of Mikhail Iampolski, a historian, Russia at present resembles a khanate in which local princes receive a licence to rule from the chief khan in the Kremlin. For the past decade the main job of the Moscow-appointed governors has been to provide votes for Mr Putin. In exchange they received a share of oil revenues and the right to rule as they see fit. Chechnya under Ramzan Kadyrov, a former warlord installed by Mr Putin, is a grotesque illustration of this. In the most recent presidential election, Chechnya provided 99.7% of its votes for Mr Putin with a turnout of 99.6%. In return, Mr Kadyrov receives subsidies and freedom to subject his people to his own «informal» taxes and Islamic rules. Moscow pays a dictatorial and corrupt Chechnya a vast due in return for Mr Kadyrov pretending to be part of Russia and pledging loyalty to Mr Putin.

If Mr Putin goes and the money runs out, Chechnya could be the first to break off. This would have a dramatic effect on the rest of the north Caucasus region. Neighbouring Dagestan, a far bigger and more complex republic than Chechnya, could fragment. A conflict in the Caucasus combined with the weakness of the central government in Russia could make other regions want to detach themselves from Moscow’s problems.

Tatarstan, home to 2m Muslim ethnic Tatars and 1.5m ethnic Russians, could declare itself the separate khanate it was in the 15th century. It has a strong identity, a diverse economy, which includes its own oil firm, and a well-educated ruling class. It would form a special relationship with Crimea, which Crimean Tartars (at last able to claim their historic land) would declare an independent state.
The Ural region could form a republic—as it tried to do in 1993—around Yekaterinburg, Russia’s fourth-largest city, or else it could form a union with Siberia. Siberia itself could revive its own identity, from a base in the cities of Krasnoyarsk and Irkutsk, and lay claim to its oil-and-gas riches, which it would sell to China. Unlike Russia, China might not have much interest in territorial expansion into the sparsely populated Far East and Siberia, but it could (and already does) colonise these regions economically. Vladivostok and Khabarovsk, two of the largest cities in the Far East, are more economically integrated with China and South Korea than they are with the European part of Russia.

Things fall apart—with nukes inside

Despite Russia’s deep paranoia that America is trying to break it up, such a scenario is one of the West’s worst nightmares. It opens the question of control over Russia’s nuclear arms. Although the command centre would remain in Moscow, securing missiles spread across Russian territory could be harder than it was after the collapse of the Soviet Union. At the time, the Russians and Americans worked successfully together to move the nuclear arsenal from Ukraine and Kazakhstan to Russia. Ukraine was given a piece of paper—called the Budapest memorandum and signed by Russia, America and Britain—which guaranteed its territorial integrity in exchange for giving up its nuclear arms. Now, Russia’s annexation of Crimea has made any such assurance worthless.

The spectre of disintegration is already haunting Russia. Politicians and pundits are scared to discuss it publicly. Shortly after annexing Crimea and stirring separatism in eastern Ukraine, the Kremlin introduced a law which makes «incitement of any action undermining Russia’s own territorial integrity» a criminal offence. Yet the greatest threat to Russia’s territorial integrity is posed by the Kremlin itself and its policies in Ukraine.

By breaking the post-Soviet borders, Mr Putin opened a Pandora’s box. If Crimea «historically» belongs to Russia as he has claimed, what about Kaliningrad, the former Königsberg, an exclave which Germany lost to Russia after the second world war? Should not eastern Karelia, which Finland ceded to the Soviet Union after the winter war in 1940, be Finnish and the Kuril Islands return to Japan?
Even more perilously for Russia’s future, Mr Putin brought into motion forces that thrive on war and nationalism. These are not the forces of imperial expansion—Russia lacks the dynamism, resources and vision that empire-building requires. They are forces of chaos and disorganisation. Eastern Ukraine has turned into a nest of criminals and racketeers. They cannot spread Russian civilisation, but they can spread anarchy.

In short, Russia under Mr Putin is much more fragile than it looks. Vyacheslav Volodin, his deputy chief of staff, recently equated Mr Putin with Russia: «No Putin, no Russia,» he said. It is hard to think of a worse indictment.

http://worldif.economist.com/article/12114/peri...
Link Complain Quote  
  Grin
25771


Messages: 7073
21:02 18.02.2019
Redhead (Expat) wrote in reply to post:
> My day is going absolutely super.
quoted1
glad to hear it

Redhead (Expat) wrote in reply to post:
> In 2011 Moscow’s urban middle class took to the streets to demand modernisation. Mr Putin responded by picking out alleged national traitors, annexing Crimea and starting a war against Ukraine. The idea that Russia’s latest foreign-policy adventures might end in the same way as previous ones—with the collapse of the state and disintegration of the country—is not as far-fetched as it might seem.
quoted1
It is a blunt propaganda indeed. I was there among the middle class at Bolotnaya, I admit Putin didn't respond like we all expected. But what he did in Crimea has nothing to do with it. It was a response to coup in Kiev, obviously.

Redhead (Expat) wrote in reply to post:
> In short, Russia under Mr Putin is much more fragile than it looks.
quoted1
Russia isn't as strong as it used to be in times of USSR, isn't as strong as vatniks think of it. But the problem is Russia isn't nearly as weak as your thinktanks belive it is.

Going to watch figure skating now


I'll post some interesting perfomances later (if any).
See you
Link Complain Quote  
  Redhead
Expat


Messages: 16334
21:17 18.02.2019
Grin (25771) wrote in reply to post:
> Russia isn't as strong as it used to be in times of USSR, isn't as strong as vatniks think of it. But the problem is Russia isn't nearly as weak as your thinktanks belive it is.
quoted1

This article is on the extreme side. It is just a «warning type of article.» Our press works very differently from yours. It doesn't praise, it gives scenarios: some are positive, some are negative, some are neutral. The break up of Russia scenario is a negative scenario that no one wants — but it is like risk analysis in brokering, finance you know. You take all sorts of scenarios, calculate probabilities, use the technical analysis, etc. I am sorry I thought you were a financial professional and you would understand where I was coming from. Sorry.
Of course Russia is not weak. But the way your propaganda and your authorities are carrying on with it is like «we are going to destroy you all horrible westerners and burn you down to the ground», there is honestly no need for it. Your economic capabilities leave much to be desired, to say the least. And as for the threats of the nuclear war — well, we will all die in that case, won't we?
Link Complain Quote  
  Redhead
Expat


Messages: 16334
21:18 18.02.2019
Grin (25771) wrote in reply to post:
> Going to watch figure skating now
quoted1

Have a great time.
Grin (25771) wrote in reply to post:
> I'll post some interesting perfomances later
quoted1

Please do.
Liked: Grin
Link Complain Quote  
  Grin
25771


Messages: 7073
21:39 18.02.2019
Redhead (Expat) wrote in reply to post:
> I am sorry I thought you were a financial professional and you would understand where I was coming from. Sorry.
quoted1
Nice try
I was reading economist every month for years. They are biased when they talk about Russia too. It's not about scenarios, they pretend that agreement between Yanukovich and opposition never happened. But it was guaranteed by the EU, and when EU didn't give a duck about it it triggered Putin. They are pissing you in the eyes and you are like — thanks, great job! What a great media we have!
Sorry for calling a spade a spade
Link Complain Quote  
  Grin
25771


Messages: 7073
21:44 18.02.2019
Redhead (Expat) wrote in reply to post:
> Please do
quoted1
Btw, you know that in ice dance a Brit represents Russia.



Jonathan Guerreiro (from Australia) and Tiffany Zahorski (from Britain) are № 2 Russian ice dance pair
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiffany_Zahorski
Link Complain Quote  
  Redhead
Expat


Messages: 16334
21:44 18.02.2019
Grin (25771) wrote in reply to post:
> Redhead (Expat) wrote in reply to post:
>> I am sorry I thought you were a financial professional and you would understand where I was coming from. Sorry.
quoted2
>Nice try
> I was reading economist every month for years. They are biased when they talk about Russia too. It's not about scenarios, they pretend that agreement between Yanukovich and opposition never happened. But it was guaranteed by the EU, and when EU didn't give a duck about it it triggered Putin. They are pissing you in the eyes and you are like — thanks, great job! What a great media we have!
> Sorry for calling a spade a spade
quoted1

You are not calling a spade a spade, you are just being a silly childish pathetic little sod that you are. Go on now, off to watch the figure skating telly. Don't bother me anymore. Cheerio.
Link Complain Quote  
  Grin
25771


Messages: 7073
21:45 18.02.2019
Redhead (Expat) wrote in reply to post:
> Cheerio.
quoted1
Cheer
Link Complain Quote  
  Oleksa Єromіn
WILDTRACER


Messages: 12195
23:51 19.02.2019
Redhead (Expat) wrote in reply to post:
> Truth is Russia is a Western country deep down by mentality. From what Oleksa Eryomin is trying to prove — it is the opposite — they are trying to oppose Russia as westerners and present Russia as «v atniks».
quoted1
It is complete nonsense that I am trying to present Russians as 'vatniks'. I have grown in Russian culture and still reckon that Russian, but not Ukrainian, is my mother tongue, though I am using the last.

Grin is talking right. There was a huge movement in Russia which talked about the 'third way'. Just recall Pushkin's 'Клеветникам России' for example. Those thoughts about Constantinople, about the Orthodox Empire and Panslavic community… Then it became 'Socialistic society', 'the most progressive nation in the world' and 'the rotting West'.
> I deeply disagree with that concept you see. I actually think that Russia deep down is closer to the western mentality than Ukraine.
quoted1
And I reckon that not. What can support your statement?
Link Complain Quote  
  Redhead
Expat


Messages: 16334
00:26 20.02.2019
Oleksa Єromіn (WILDTRACER) wrote in reply to post:
> It is complete nonsense that I am trying to present Russians as 'vatniks'. I have grown in Russian culture and still reckon that Russian, but not Ukrainian, is my mother tongue, though I am using the last.
quoted1

Yeah, you are. You are trying to present your culture as a better culture, closer to Europe, away from Russia, etc. You are mate, your propaganda is and you are trying to do that — all the way. Like you are number one and they are some subservient nation.

Oleksa Єromіn (WILDTRACER) wrote in reply to post:
> There was a huge movement in Russia which talked about the 'third way'. Just recall Pushkin's 'Клеветникам России' for example. Those thoughts about Constantinople, about the Orthodox Empire and Panslavic community… Then it became 'Socialistic society', 'the most progressive nation in the world' and 'the rotting West'.
quoted1

I do not care about all that shit and their propaganda, it is not significant at all.

Oleksa Єromіn (WILDTRACER) wrote in reply to post:
> And I reckon that not. What can support your statement?
quoted1
Listen, what the West is interested in — number one — is Russia, not yourselves. Russia is a huge and rich country. This is where all the wealth and the economy is. In your constant opposition to Russia — you forgot what they are, how huge and powerful they are. With all due respect.
Link Complain Quote  
  Oleksa Єromіn
WILDTRACER


Messages: 12195
00:53 20.02.2019
Redhead (Expat) wrote in reply to post:
> Yeah, you are. You are trying to present your culture as a better culture, closer to Europe, away from Russia, etc. You are mate, your propaganda is and you are trying to do that — all the way. Like you are number one and they are some subservient nation.
>
quoted1
What the rubbish did you write?! Where have I written any bullshit about 'better culture'? If, for example, I will tell that Ukrainian culture is closer to the European than Turkish, would you call that 'supremacist'?
> I do not care about all that shit and their propaganda, it is not significant at all.
>
quoted1
It is significant. Of course elites don't give a damn with principles they are drawing on TV, but they sell what is being bought. And again I am not talking about economic relations. Chinese, you know, produce smartphones, cars, satellites, inventions of the Western mind, too but they won't call them West because of it.
Redhead (Expat) wrote in reply to post:
> Listen, what the West is interested in — number one — is Russia, not yourselves. Russia is a huge and rich country. This is where all the wealth and the economy is. In your constant opposition to Russia — you forgot what they are, how huge and powerful they are. With all due respect.
quoted1
I know that EU is irritated with Ukraine and that they are interested in co-operation with Russians, though I am not deluded with that 'economic rationalism', like a citizen of a country that borders Russia, and remember the previous experiences of it


Link Complain Quote  
  Redhead
Expat


Messages: 16334
01:11 20.02.2019
Oleksa Єromіn (WILDTRACER) wrote in reply to post:
> What the rubbish did you write?! Where have I written any bullshit about 'better culture'? If, for example, I will tell that Ukrainian culture is closer to the European than Turkish, would you call that 'supremacist'? Well, you keep saying that you are closer to Europe and want to break away from the Russian culture. Come on. Russia is not Europe now? Russia is Europe all the way up to the Ural Mountains last time I checked. Your quest to break away from Russia is pathetic. Your idea of Europe is joining the EU. To be honest mate — EU is not the idea of Europe in Britain, the EU is hated all over Europe.
quoted1

Oleksa Єromіn (WILDTRACER) wrote in reply to post:
> It is significant. Of course elites don't give a damn with principles they are drawing on TV, but they sell what is being bought. And again I am not talking about economic relations. Chinese, you know, produce smartphones, cars, satellites, inventions of the Western mind, too but they won't call them West because of it.
quoted1

It is significant to you. It is not significant to us. Noone here has even heard of those characters writing «third way» shit like that and ultimately — no one cares.
Oleksa Єromіn (WILDTRACER) wrote in reply to post:
> I know that EU is irritated with Ukraine and that they are interested in co-operation with Russians, though I am not deluded with that 'economic rationalism', like a citizen of a country that borders Russia, and remember the previous experiences of it
quoted1

The EU couldn't give a toss about Ukraine, there is a bigger fish to fry — Brexit for one, and then — the elections in summer — the far right populists are going to make huge gains — all over Europe.
Link Complain Quote  
Go to the first message← Previous page
Next page →Go to the last message

Return to the list of threads


Username
Thread:
B I U S cite spoiler
Message:(0/500)
More Emoticons
        
Forums
Main discussion
En/Ru discussion new
Russian forum
Users online
Translate the page
Figure skating, ballet, music etc 2. My day is going absolutely super. I am supposed to be studying today all day, but my ...
.
© PolitForums.net 2019 | Our e-mail:
Mobile version