BANNED USER: /comment/21314
Minotaur
Si vis pacem, fac bellum
White, right-wing, male.
User ID: 101
Banned by: @ZorbaTHut
So long as we acknowledge Zelensky is an anti-democratic strongman who has used the chaos of war to purge his political rivals, I'm content. If people want to cheer him on even then, well, their call.
Okay, replace "hates Putin" with "fights Putin". My point is that I don't think you should base your perception of good leadership, bad leadership, corrupt leadership, etc., etc., on whether someone is with or against Putin. Putin is not the root of all evil and worthy of being the measure by which all else is judged.
These things were obvious to me before this all played out, so I reject your claim it's hindsight. Russia has been an over-inflated boogieman for a long time.
But Trump isn't universally derided. He is, in fact, immensely popular.
The bravery Zelensky shows is less than the bravery of every normal Russian and Ukrainian soldier. The nobility of Zelensky's actions is less than the nobility of their actions. The self-sacrificial aspect is wholly absent in Zelensky's case, but ample in the soldiers.
Now, you want bravery, we have Vladimir Putin bravely resisting the combined might of the western world rising in defense of an anti-democratic and highly corrupt government defying the will of no small portion of its people, despite the immense cost it's exacting on his people and the stability of his regime.
You want nobility, we have a man striving to recreate a golden empire of old, of striking down an anti-Semitic enemy of old, of reuniting a separated people. Such nobility!
All that applies doubly so for heroism -- what high purpose Putin seeks! All Zelensky wants to do, in comparison, is maintain the unimpressive sovereignty of the Ukraine.
Now, I don't think Putin is brave, noble, or a hero. I also don't think Zelensky is. I could be swayed on the average soldier. But I do insist we be fair and even in our evaluation -- if Zelensky is a hero, then by all measures Putin is.
Also don't be a prick and misquote me. I didn't say Zelensky did it for the pussy. I included that as a perk, but my actual claim is that Zelensky is capitalizing on a tragedy to consolidate political power, purge domestic rivals, and set himself up for a long and illustrious career as either honorary President-for-life or local hero coasting on speaking fees and global patronage.
Yes, that includes the possibility that it is brave.
That doesn't follow unless your sole mark of a good person is "hates Putin". Not even all of Ukraine hates Putin!
I still think they'll lose! Just not quickly. I think Ukraine's loss will take multiple years, though it will not be a complete and total subjugation, and it will not involve Zelensky's death or imprisonment or exile. Russia is nothing if not beautifully self-destructive, and I trust the Russians to sacrifice their flesh and future in bloody droves on a war that was never going to be worth it.
Ukraine deserves a lot of credit. I'm fine with any non-nuclear outcome; I have no sentimental attachment to either nation, but I respect the willingness of both nations to bleed excessively for what they believe in. The only thing I disagree with is that Zelensky is any sort of hero; Zelensky is a would-be dictator who has opportunistically seized on a reckless gamble to purge domestic rivals and cement his influence for a long time. Whatever happens in Ukraine, Zelensky's future is comfortable; at this point, even if Ukraine loses, he'll be a hero welcome in any western nation.
Putin is not a good man. Most people agree on this. But just because he's anti-Putin doesn't mean Zelensky deserves the fawning praise he's getting from the admiring crowds worldwide ignoring what he's actually doing.
I predicted a war that would take three to five years to resolve. I also predicted this would go in Russia's favor, but the important thing is that it was never going to be fast. Anyone who thought it was was engaging in ridiculous wishful thinking -- nothing like this is fast. Savages in the hills last for decades, why would a modern state with a roughly modern if not amazing military not, especially with such significant backing?
Even now, I think Russia's eventual victory is more likely than not (though this changes bit by bit daily), but it will never be a quick victory. There will always be plenty of time for Zelensky to get out of Dodge if he really needs to, though I don't think he will -- even if Ukraine loses, I don't think the loss will be so total as to endanger him.
Very well, I concede 'every way' is incorrect. The west is not officially putting boots down on the ground (though I am sure there's plenty of veterans and consultants unofficially helping out), only the most important ways.
This really does not change what I said at all. Ukraine is getting immense amounts of incredibly important support. It's not standing on its own against the great beast.
I trust nothing said by US intelligence by default, sorry. I did not predict a quick toppling and I don't think anyone serious did, either. Ukraine isn't some goat-herding bunch of terrorists shaking AKs... and even the goat herders didn't go down quickly.
Russia now is a Potemkin force pretending to be a world power.
For the third time, I've said Zelensky's choice to remain in the beginning is brave. I have no dispute with that.
I predicted that Russia would win but it would be slow, bloody, and unpleasant affair lasting a few years. I'm less confident in that prediction with how pathetic Russia's been, but I can't say for sure I was wrong until late 23 or so. I will say Russia's incompetence was surprising; I knew they'd declined, but the degree of that decline was above and beyond.
Bodies are a necessary component of a war effort, but not the primary one these days. The weapons and the intelligence dominate.
Had the contest ever been "Russia, at max powerlevel, against Ukraine", sure. But Russia has been obviously not as powerful as its loudest detractors say for a long time, and the western world united to support Ukraine in every way. I agree, on paper, the first one suggests Russia will steamroll.
I don't think that first one was ever on the table, though, and people who said so were off base. The war was always going to be Ukrainians supported by the US and its friends against a larger but more sclerotic foe. While Russia's since embarrassed itself, anyone predicting a steamroll was engaging in wishful thinking -- the more reasonable expectation was always a long, drawn-out grind that Russia's got an advantage in, but not an uncontestable one.
Yes, I conceded that one could call it bravery to not flee immediately when invaded -- but it became quickly apparent that the Russian machine is dysfunctional, and anyone paying attention has recognized Russia's threat has been exaggerated for decades in service to the interests of western spooks.
Why flee to be a leader in exile when you can stick around, outlaw your political rivals, and establish a cult of personality? The idea Zelensky is standing against an oncoming tide, a bereft underdog, utterly fails to recognize the absolute deluge of nonstop western support propping the country up, and has to acknowledge Russia's own humiliating underperformance significantly reducing any serious risk to Zelensky's health.
The only risk Zelensky's taking is that he might end up sore from the entire fucking world jerking him off.
Not fleeing when his country was invaded by a superior military power
But his country was invaded by Russia.
Indeed. It's not like he's on the front line, eating bullets and killing Russians. Zelensky is bravely encouraging Ukranians to die for him and the west to fund him. And the first is fine, let a man choose what cause he dies for, the latter irritates me. His reward, should he survive -- which by all appearances he's going to -- is a lifetime of hero worship from the global masses. There won't be a sorority house in the world lacking a woman willing to drop to her knees and salute the Ukranian flag.
I'm not even saying Zelensky's a uniquely bad man. He seems unremarkable to me, other than being photogenic and knowing how to play to a crowd with his performance background. He's just Justin Trudeau by way of pop culture Che.
I'm unsure why Zelensky fleecing the west, consolidating power, and eliminating domestic opposition is heroic. Sure, he could have fled the country, but why? It was perhaps brave in the war's beginning, but once it became clear Russia had drastically less competence than expected the calculus changes. Zelensky is setting himself up to be President for life and a heroic icon. Fleeing would be worse for him.
The White underclass is nothing to envy, certainly.
Does anyone have a good sense of how African Americans living in smaller towns compare culturally to those in large cities,
I live in a town of roughly ~19,500 people, of which less than 3% of which is black, from my memories of the last census I checked. 95% White with a smattering of minorities. I've lived here for sixteen years or so, and in that time I've lived in the poorer projects areas as a kid, and nicer places as an adult.
There's minimal crime here, and when it does happen it's usually drug related. There was a drug bust a street or two over last week for fentanyl with five arrests, and three of the five were young black men (there was also a White man and woman who I assume were a couple, but fuck if I know from mugshots). Very little violence, no gangs, nada.
There's a small neighborhood I walk through sometimes I've noticed is disproportionately black. They host more outdoors events in their yards during the summer than the other people I see, but other than loud music it's harmless.
My sense, as a White outsider, is that there's not really enough blacks here for any sort of black community to thrive. Yeah, okay, some black families live in the same area, maybe even most of them given the small absolute number, but even those areas are still White.
The key to integration has always been to spread minorities out and not let them form into ethnic collectives. These blacks might still be disproportionately involved in the crime we do have, but they're not a blight. They're just black-flavored poor Whites.
I'm not "remembering" anything, much less misremembering--I literally just went and checked, because your claim seemed plausible to me, but proved on examination to be wrong. You said:
No, you're still not understanding. CWR is a schism sub. TheMotte, though it came later, is a direct continuation of SSC. It's not about the opening dates, that's irrelevant -- people didn't go to CWR because when CWR opened SSC was still the space. The community migration happened only when SSC forced it, at which point the community moved. They weren't following Zorba, they were following the community. The community that did not go to CWR because SSC was still being used.
It's SSC -> /r/TheMotte -> themotte.org
CWR and The_Schism are branches off that. That's why they're smaller. They've only ever been where the minority of people who can't tolerate the main sub go.
I reject the idea there's an existential threat. Ukraine has had pro-Russian leadership before and endured. I also reject the idea that being an anti-democratic strongman is bad unless you insist it really is a super mega important deal.
More options
Context Copy link