site banner

Small-Scale Question Sunday for March 2, 2025

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

1
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Isn't that a bit like saying "greenhouse gasses" is "environmentalist propaganda"?

No. Saying that Ukraine deserves to be invaded and the massacre at Bucha was warranted because they didn’t have an election during wartime where parts of the country can’t vote because they are occupied by Russia is Russian propaganda.

But that's not what you said in the previous comment?

Huh? I’m confused.

You said:

“Ukrainian corruption” is a dog whistle for Russian propaganda.

But Ukrainian corruption is directly observable and widely accepted as existing. When I pointed it out you responded by saying that the implication that Ukraine deserves to be invaded because they suspended their elections is what is Russian propaganda, but that doesn't seem relevant to anything that was said further up the response chain.

Ukrianian corruption has no relevance in the context of the Russian invasion. Ukraine could be a hellhole, and it still doesn’t deserve to be invaded. Bringing up “Ukrainian corruption” is repeating Russian propaganda in an attempt to justify the invasion.

But it does. If we send X dollars to Ukraine to fight Russians, and only 0.1X actually gets to the goal, it's fundamentally different situation than if the whole X were used as intended. Note I am not claiming this exact number is correct, but the question of corruption is highly relevant - moreover, I have a suspicion the corruption contributed a lot to the reasons why Ukraine lost so much territory already in this war and why it's losing more. Not the only factor, but a contributing one.

Ukrianian corruption has no relevance in the context of the Russian invasion. Ukraine could be a hellhole, and it still doesn’t deserve to be invaded. Bringing up “Ukrainian corruption” is repeating Russian propaganda in an attempt to justify the invasion.

I disagree. I think Ukrainian corruption is quite relevant when it comes to how and how much 3rd parties might want to fund Ukraine's defenses. Just because Ukraine doesn't deserve to be invaded doesn't mean that it deserves to be helped in its defense by anyone else. The world isn't just, and it's also not anyone's responsibility to make it just. One can certainly argue that we ought to make it more just by making sure Russia's unjust invasion doesn't get rewarded, but taking that point for granted amounts to treating it like a religious crusade rather than politics and war.

More broadly, jumping to conclusions about motives and implications based on simple statements of judgment is something I'd rather see much less of in all contexts, and certainly on The Motte, and if you believe that doing so is correct, I believe you are correct that you'd be better off just ignoring this site.

I don't think so, it's more of a dismissal of the black and white thinking pushed by Western elites. I don't think that saying "Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a dictatorship" justifies the United States' invasion in any way, for example.

In the context of “what to do about the Russian invasion”, Ukraine’s status has absolutely no relevance. Bringing it up is either regurgitating Russian propaganda, or revealing a belief that you think nations should invade other nations if they think they’re too corrupt.

Why? If you're talking about sending help to Ukraine it might be wise to take their corruption into account (do you want it to end up in some oligarch's offshore bank account?). In any case, the conversations here aren't limited to just this context, and in your original comment you seem to have implied that any mention of Ukrainian corruption must be Russian propaganda, regardless of context.