• redders@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    95
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well…

    For the equal partner bit they’d probably have had to respect election results and stop murdering political rivals.

    And that would just be a step too far.

    • query@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      81
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Barely. They were in the G8. Even after being kicked out trade kept going as normal, new pipelines were being built, nuclear power plants were being shut down because who needs a fallback?

      Saudi Arabia gets full honors on the international stage, despite publicly executing people for criticizing the government or having independent thought, and cutting up a journalist in a consulate abroad.

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not too sure about that. We’re pals-y with plenty of authoritarian states. Even in the late 2000s and early 2010s we were so desperate to include Russia, corruption and authoritarianism and all, in the international order.

      Above everything, you can get in good with the current international order simply by not making trouble for other countries. Russia, apparently, couldn’t abide by even that minor restriction.

      • Solivine@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Honestly if Russia didn’t do a full scale invasion and just annexed the lands they were originally aiming for I think the west would have probably ignored it like all their other activities in the region.

        • PugJesus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          1 year ago

          I suspect the irritation over the previous annexation of Crimea and Ukraine’s increasingly pro-Western orientation would have led to a Western response even if the invasion wasn’t full scale, but it’s certainly not impossible that the West would’ve prioritized keeping things ‘calm’ over protecting Ukraine’s sovereignty in such a scenario.

    • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      As long as they kept it to murdering political rivals within the country they would have been fine.

      Everybody still does business with PRC, Saudi Arabia, etc

    • Intralexical@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      And that would just be a step too far.

      Eh. Through the history of the 90s, it looked like they might have a shot at establishing a free and stable democracy.

      Then privatization and mishandled foreign aid created their oligarchs, quality of life fell through the floor in basically all the post-Soviet states, people got mad, tired, and scared, Putin stepped in to “stabilize the situation”Then the politicians and journalists started dying, crazy siloviks and vatniks fully captured what was left of their political institutions I guess, and now they’re doing a lot of evil murder and various interesting atrocities.

      There might have been/probably were underlying cultural factors that made it impossible for Russia to ever stabilize as a “normal” country at that point. But those are hard to see from an outside perspective, and I guess they’re probably pretty hard to see from inside as well.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also 2000-2011 was time of “I’m outside of politics” and “let serious people handle situation” propaganda. Kinda also why war happened.

        Also a lot of human rights violation that was done with help of “democratic” states, like DPI systems from Israel, theater of security from US and general surveliance from around the world(mostly US, Turkey and Israel).

        It got even worse than during Soviet time, because back then there were no option for nomenclature to send kids abroad for better quality of life while enshittify quality of life domestically.

        I think first thing after baning “remote digital voting” should be calling FSB criminal organization, lustrations and publishing of everything in archives without exception.

        • Intralexical@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Also 2000-2011 was time of “I’m outside of politics” and “let serious people handle situation” propaganda. Kinda also why war happened.

          Yeah. Vlad Vexler (and Perun too) talks a lot about the engineered depoliticization of the Russian people, post-truth paralysis I guess, and the “Let serious people handle it” type of thinking. Pretty alien to me in a Western country, at that scale… But at the same time feels so familiar too, because you meet people in personal life too who do awful things or let awful things happen because it’s more comfortable for them to stick their head in the sand.

          Also a lot of human rights violation that was done with help of “democratic” states, like DPI systems from Israel, theater of security from US and general surveliance from around the world(mostly US, Turkey and Israel).

          Nothing makes what Russia is doing to Ukraine and to Ukrainian people today okay. But at the same time, when I read of the history of the 90s and early 2000s, I get the sense that that was probably our best chance for a better world, and “we” really dropped the ball there— “We” meaning “the West”, I suppose, simply because the West was in a massive position of power at that point— Not our responsibility to fix Russia, but a missed opportunity for everyone. Doing nothing might have been a better option than accidentally propping up the Chubais Clique, shock therapy and oligarchs and undermining democracy. …Poor Albania, too (and Ukraine too, of course).

          I think first thing after baning “remote digital voting” should be calling FSB criminal organization, lustrations and publishing of everything in archives without exception.

          …“Remote digital voting”. Wow. I had no idea that was even a thing. It looks like there’s barely any English-speaking news about it, and not even an English Wikipedia page. Scary— Should be scary, but also utterly unsurprising on some level… Almost feels inconsequential next to everything else, tiring.

          Maybe I’m just jaded by the situation in the US where they/we have (mostly) public archives and data, but people just ignore that information because it’s boring and so they latch on to politically and emotionally convenient narratives instead, but part of me thinks “publishing of everything in archives without exception” would just be ignored, or even weaponized for new types of autocratizing propaganda, especially in the looming global-cultural trust-apocalypse of LLMs— You sound politically and morally engaged and passionate, and I guess I think/have been learning it’s an easy mistake for people like that to make to imagine that if everyone had access to the same information, then surely we would mostly be in agreement, when in reality I guess a lot of people just don’t care, or have different values that they’re starting from, even if you give them access to full information— But I suppose the truth being available, even if it still ends up ignored, is still a qualitatively and transformatively morally and practically better state of being than the truth being hidden.

          You sound like you’re personally familiar with this stuff. Sorry about it, I guess. Oh, and I’m curious what do you think about “Vlad Vexler Chat” channel on Youtube? What he says seems to line up and resonate with reality, causality, and empathy to my view, but I don’t actually know and can’t actually say. Would you say he’s usually on point in assessing and explaining the state of the Russian government, people, and political climate?

          • uis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Wow. I had no idea that was even a thing. It looks like there’s barely any English-speaking news about it, and not even an English Wikipedia page. Scary— Should be scary, but also utterly unsurprising on some level… Almost feels inconsequential next to everything else, tiring.

            I forgot to mention three-days voting! When city falls asleep mafia wakes up. Nobody knows what happens to baloots during night.

            Story time. It was introduced in few districts of Moscow during elections in local parlament. During voting everything seemd fine(as in everyone knew that administrative resource - teachers, public sector workers - were heavily “recommended” to vote remotely), but when voting ended there were no results. Hour passed - no results. Day ended, every physical station uploaded final protocols - no results. Results came only next day at 14 or 16 MSK. In most districts ДЭГ turned results from opposition win, to UR win. I still remember refreshing CEC website and then after dinner seeing as Yuneman(opposition, strong campaign) hundreds of votes ahead of Rusetskaya(UR, expensive campaign) and communist(weak campaign, but on par with Rusetskaya) was turned into Rusetskaya 18 votes ahead. Not surprising, considering system was managed by city hall(mayor). Oh, and mental alysium voted 100% UR.

            During 2021 federal parlament voting two systems worked at same time: Moscow and federal. Moscow(one of most protest voting city) same as before, except result was overturned in every single district. In federal a lot of “dead souls” and Donbass refugees. New feature of 2021 was hard voting during Sunday with launch break(it seems voting was someone’s day job).

            2022 elections were boring in Moscow, but few opposition candidates were so good at voting stations, that even ДЭГ couldn’t overturn results. At least without going full Chechnya or Kemerovo.

            In 2023 Sobyanin and Pamfilova just can pull any number they want, Moscow is officially electoral sultanat. I think record this year was 108 or more years old dead voter. In Omsk Yabloko won on party list voting and lost on FPTP voting AFAIK UR got majority. On Omsk governor UR candidate was painted to have over 70%, but in trenches(I’m not kidding, there was voting in occupied Ukraine) he got below 50%. Around 30 as I remember. It is scary to paint protocol and ignore men with rifles. In Hakasia communist with strong anti-war position won for governor, UR won parlament. In Yakutia local communists were banned on elections, so UR won governor and 22/35.

            Not our responsibility to fix Russia, but a missed opportunity for everyone.

            Double correct.

            but part of me thinks “publishing of everything in archives without exception” would just be ignored

            Documents from 50-ies are still classified. If not everything, then until 2010 sounds reasonable. After ГКЧП there was declassification comittie, it indeed declassified few documebts and helped to reabilitate many people after death, but after Putin came to power comittie was dissolved and documents were reclassified. It came to the point where for Russian it is easier to ask Ukraine for document than russian archive.

            You sound like you’re personally familiar with this stuff. Sorry about it, I guess.

            You personally did nothing wrong.

            Oh, and I’m curious what do you think about “Vlad Vexler Chat” channel on Youtube?

            Didn’t watch, don’t have opinion, maybe will watch. I think Ekaterina Shulman has few lectures in English.

  • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I legitimately feel bad for the Russian people as a lot of them don’t agree with what’s going on and had to either leave the country to avoid getting jailed for protesting or are forced to suffer in silence.

    • GreenM@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      i know few of them personally and generally those who live outside of Russia are against the regime and those who live inside Russia say they are not affected and are apolitical or that all countries to the west are controlled by US and want to steal Russian land + resources.

      It’s also funny to hear what they get to hear in tv aside from UK like that time they were told that in Europe it is so dry that people don’t have water to drink or that people are freezing in winter because no RU gas

      • vivadanang@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        meanwhile in russian crimea, there is no water to drink and the gas line recently got blasted.

        gonna be a shitty winter in crimea lol

          • prole@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah I’m not sure how much the geolocation has to do with it. Scandinavia seems to be doing just fine. Perhaps even “very well.”

            • GreenM@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              From what i know, Russia has about every conditions we know(freezing winters, pefrost, rain forest,…) If talk about Moscow and St. Perterburg, those are not that hard to live in due to wheather AFAIK

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nah they are enjoying from drama movie like capitalism, richest have everything, mafia (bratva) is integrated into goverment and poor people don’t even have electricity.

    • orrk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      the majority of Russian people very strongly agree with the invasion, remember, Navalny might be the strongest opposition, but he was for even more radical reconquest of “Rightfully western Russian soil”

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I run a, let’s say… “Social Club” on discord (Okay it’s an Erotic Roleplay server) one of our regulars is Russian, I actually worry about him quite a bit. He wishes he could leave the country, he’s very lucid of the entire situation.

      (Edit: I said he was 18+ instead of Russian because I get confused and word association happens. Of course he’s 18+. It’s an erp server literally everyone is.)

      • ytrav@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        did you really have to mention that you run an erotic roleplay discord server just to say that some russians want to flee the country?

        • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s literally our association he is in my server. We are very close knit group and we care about him and worry for him.

        • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I buy dolls from one of the biggest toy makers on Etsy, and I helped donate to her fund to escape eastern Ukraine when the war started.

          It might not seem necessary, but details like that humanize who we are talking about and allow us to emotionally resonate with the speaker and the subject. It’s how basic human communication works.

      • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You’re minimizing the effect of propaganda.

        The Russians have been subjected to it (about this war) intensely those last five years.

        OTOH, and I don’t know where you are from, the US people have been subjected to it intensely since 1955 (the US propaganda machine is probably the best in the world, many books have been written about it).

        And if you’re from the US and it makes you buckle, just consider that it’s the same for the Russians that have been indoctrinated for a while.

        Anyway, not to defend the Russians, but it’s a sad situation all around. And as usual, the civilians are the victims. But they will cheer their oppressors, because they are idiots.

  • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Sadly not a new story, most of the world considered Hitler a great man (He made the cover of Time Magazine) and had an “Aww shucks” attitude to most of the negatives what he did… then he started invading other countries, and even then the first one (Poland) got a shrug at first

    “Not In My Backyard!” types have let all kinds of fuckery grow until it became their problem

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s worth reading the actual Times article that they ran with that cover.

      https://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,00.html

      Führer of the German people, Commander-in-Chief of the German Army, Navy & Air Force, Chancellor of the Third Reich, Herr Hitler reaped on that day at Munich the harvest of an audacious, defiant, ruthless foreign policy he had pursued for five and a half years. He had torn the Treaty of Versailles to shreds. He had rearmed Germany to the teeth— or as close to the teeth as he was able. He had stolen Austria before the eyes of a horrified and apparently impotent world.

      It’s not complimentary. Time’s Man of the Year is based on influence. It’s not saying that influence is good.

      • chatokun@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Same reason Trump was on it during his presidency iirc. Quoting them:

        TIME has a long history of featuring presidents on the cover and Trump, whose presidency defied precedents and fractured norms, has been no exception. Eight of the top 10 people to appear most often on TIME’s cover are U.S. presidents.

        Nixon, Reagan, and Bill Clinton have all been on more than Trump.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Only because they didn’t have a choice. The civil war destroyed their already mediocre industry and it was easier to just ally with the capitalists against the communists in exchange for financial aid.

        Make no mistake, if it were possible for Franco to invade his neighbors he would have.

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Also wasnt portugal increasingly militaristic at the time? So basically Spain was in a hugbox that prevented external military action, also Morroco was a french colony at the time.

          • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Spain did have some coastal African territories that are now part of Morocco, but yes, once the Axis lost there simply wasn’t any hope of expanding.

            Of course, Italian irredentism at the time basically meant restoring the Roman holdings, so even if the Axis had won it probably wouldn’t have worked out in Franco’s favor, so he mostly just stayed home and murdered socialists, feminists, and gay people.

    • uis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Evil is uncontainable. If you accept bribe money, corruption will haunt your country.

    • hh93@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean you’re telling everyone that your country is superior to all others then it’s just logical that you see others as mere support for your country and even entitled to it.

  • SCB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    The implication here is that the west has a good relationship with Russia at some point, and that has never been true.

    • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      There were a few years of hope of a genuine partnership after the wall fell. That hope remained but arguably became delusional once Putin took charge.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        My point is that Russia has never been interested in just oppressing their own people, so this meme has never been true.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, in the nineties there was a lot of optimism and in fact, some decent cooperation.

      However, a major flaw is that Russia suffered a lot and people didn’t see that prosperity everyone just assumed would follow.

      So while in the West, we were partying down about our prospective new buddies, the situation was actually pretty bad in Russia, and Putin found a receiptive audience in that context.

    • uis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, in early nineties it had good relations. Then it stopped having good relation with Russia and started having good relation with oligarchs and later Putin’s mafia.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Kept their space station going for a while, and then built a new one together. What’s left of Roscosmos and the old Soviet space program would not exist without the US propping them up.

        Not entirely for altruistic reasons, mind you. Didn’t want their rocket engineers running off to other countries to make ICBMs. Now that Best Korea has them, though, it’s no longer that important.

        • uis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          What’s left of Roscosmos and the old Soviet space program would not exist without the US propping them up.

          Rogozin’s mansions won’t pay for themselves, it didn’t stop from everything in Roscosmos from being stolen.

          Not entirely for altruistic reasons, mind you. Didn’t want their rocket engineers running off to other countries to make ICBMs.

          Btw when Soviet Union had ICBMs, Soviet Union had ICBMs, not just Russia. Also reason why Putin invaded Ukraine. If Ukraine wasn’t forced to give up their NWs, Putin would think infinitely many times before invading. Fuck Putin, fuck United Russia.

  • uis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, how many times Anticorruption Foundation told “this money is stolen, getting bribes is day job of this official”, yet nothing was done. Still not enough is done. Even now sanctions seems to be sabotaged:

    • Average russian citizen that runs away from being drafted, being killed or killing other people should cross border naked or his posessions will be confiscated. Including phone, shoes and clothes.
    • Very welcome totaly not putin oligarchs/corruptioners can keep their fleet of BMWs and yachts, while still actively supporting war.

    And corporate fuckery:

    • MacDon given so much food for propaganda by “leaving” country, while they can force-buy everything back for one rouble(about one cent).
    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Mmmm, I do recall those yachts being impounded left and right in the west whenever they found them

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        One of two Putin’s yacht was impounded by Italy after second invasion. Putin still has his second yacht. And Anti-Corruption Foundation(started by Navalny) had to fight beaurocracy and legal system to get it impounded.

        Funfact: to pay for only one yacht he would need to be president for over 8000 years. Not over 9000, but very close.

  • Leviathan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Ego nothing. Russia monopolized oil resources going west and Ukraine started developing their own oil resources. Russia would’ve been left with no one to do business with but the east. That’s why they invaded, to seize Ukrainian oil. Anything else is propaganda.

  • Not_mikey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Lol to “equal partner” the u.s. policy towards Russia after WWII and even after the Soviet Union was of containment. Whether that was necessary considering their history with their neighbors is another story, but the idea that after the wall fell there was a path to E.U. and NATO cooperation on equal footing is delusional. None of this justifies the war, but it remains to be seen whether they’ll even bring Ukraine in as an equal partner and not just a battlefield for there war with Russia

    • vivadanang@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      And if the world had stopped immediately after the cold war ended this would be a valid statement.

      Unfortunately there were 30+ intervening years where the US and other countries did invest in Russia. Stop acting like that wasn’t a thing, we’ve spent the last year plus trying to drag that shit out of russia since they invaded Ukraine.

      • jittery3291@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, Germany wasn’t subject to shock therapy in the way that Russia was due to West Germany becoming a capitalist democracy way before neoliberlism was a thing. The USSR collapsed decades later, at a time when the USA was spreading weird economic policies in the most rabid way possible. It was “capitalism at any cost”. And the cost could be democracy… and all social fabric. It was shock therapy that largely led to the oligarchs.

        Listen, fuck Putin. I fully stand behind Ukraine, but US policy created Putin’s opening through shock therapy. The idea that this is just because Russians are inherently violent is absurd.

        • PugJesus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Russians aren’t inherently violent, but the idea that shock therapy, as absurd and damaging as it was, is responsible for Russia’s current state flies in the face of the entire rest of the Warsaw Pact, which also suffered from ‘Shock Therapy’ insanity being imposed, yet have largely moved on to more functional systems than Russia.

          • jittery3291@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Of course shock therapy didn’t cause the war, it was just one big factor that lead to the modern Russian state. Putin and other top brass caused this war. My point was it’s not reasonable to compare Russia to Germany.

            Also, some nations that underwent shock therapy do OK now, but many are still to recover and have rampant corruption and wide spread poverty. Granted, that’s not the same as bombing schools.

            I’m hawkish on my support for Ukraine, but I do think that we need to remember the history behind this.

            • PugJesus@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              My point wasn’t to refute that shock therapy caused the war, but to refute that shock therapy caused the modern Russian state in general. Shock therapy was economically damaging, but the root causes of the Russian kleptocracy are much, much deeper and more severe.

      • orrk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Fun fact, the term tankie came about because some “lefties” decided to defend the imperialism of the Russian state bashing down dissident rioting populations in their imperial holdings, generally by driving a platoon of tanks in, and shooting if the crowd dosn’t disperse

        • PugJesus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Some say if you listen closely, you can hear them apologizing for atrocities to this day…

          • orrk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            no, they still yell from the rooftops that it was perfectly justified and still somehow NATO is at fault.

            Chechnya doesn’t want to Russian? NATO COLOR REVOLUTION! Hungary doesn’t want to Russia? LITERAL NAZI DISSIDENTS CREATED BY NATO! Students protesting in China? TIENANMEN SQUARE NEVER HAPPENED. etc…

      • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Germany was militarily occupied and basically turned into a protectorate of the usa. There are still many us military bases in Germany

        edit: added basically

        • orrk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Germany had the world’s 3ed strongest army during the cold war, 2nd strongest right after unification. your “turned into a protectorate” statement is bullshit and basically shows that you just repeat Tanki shit-takes without understanding what you are talking about.

          you literally are stuck in the mode of seeing the world through the eyes of colonial empires, the shit that caused WW1 and even WW2, and it’s no wonder, a lot of these takes come from Russian funded sources, so it literally is seeing the world through the eyes of a colonial empire!

            • orrk@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              you read the bit in the parentheses? the “by GDP” part?

              as for when? it’s at the approximately 19 second mark, when the spending just to maintain the new joint BRD/GDR army rocketed them to the upper half of the chart.

              and what are you trying to imply with “US bases in Germany” bit? that it’s some hallmark of colonialism? what if I tell you that, up until recently, Germany had bases in the USA? they both somehow protectorate of each other? no, the US has bases in Germany for two reasons, 1: to help NATO nation counter-attack Russian aggression (these bases were basically on the border to the east block when they were built, and it turns out are difficult to move, seeing as they are buildings and not trucks), and 2: to function as a logistics waypoint into the Europe/Mideast region.

              It might also interest you to know that the amount of US bases in Germany is going down, but that doesn’t mix well with your preconceived 19th century notion of global politics.

              Face it, you are a tanki, you do not care about imperialism, you are a fascist wearing the skin of the anarchists, socialists and communists you butchered.

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not sure you understand what exactly was going on in the 90s and early 2000s, but considering your comment on Ukraine, I question whether having the conversation would be at all productive.

      • Not_mikey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What happened in the 90s and 2000s then? The west had been propagandized for half a century that Russia was the enemy, so had Russians, so neither side was going to hold out there hand and try for cooperation. If the west was serious about incorporating Russia they would’ve done some sort of marshall plan to modernize them before bringing them into the fold like Poland. They didn’t, they did let a bunch of their business men buy former public property for pennies on the dollar, which I guess is investment but only really for the corrupt officials who got rich off it. There was no path to EU membership, especially after Poland and the baltics joined because they, justifiably, hate Russia for all the imperial oppression they’ve done over the centuries.

        Where am I wrong about Ukraine, do you think E.U. and NATO are going to let them in even after all this? I’m not a tanky , the Russian invasion of Ukraine is horrific and unjustified, that doesn’t mean the west’s response to it is benevolent and with the ukrainians best interest.

        • PugJesus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          What happened in the 90s and 2000s then? The west had been propagandized for half a century that Russia was the enemy, so had Russians, so neither side was going to hold out there hand and try for cooperation.

          Both sides did, actually. The refrain in the US was always that Russians weren’t the enemy, that Communism was - we learned our lesson with our propaganda campaigns against Germany in WW1. Even Reagan, anti-Soviet agitator extraordinaire, stuck to that line. Yeltsin expressed strong interest in joining the international order - even Putin claims that he raised the issue of NATO, though he wanted special fast-track status for Russia, which was a non-starter. God, I don’t know how to express the sheer triumphalism of 90s academia on the subject. Communism was defeated. Russia was free. That was what the West told itself.

          If the west was serious about incorporating Russia they would’ve done some sort of marshall plan to modernize them before bringing them into the fold like Poland.

          There was no Marshall Plan for Poland. Or any of the ex-Sovs or Warsaw Pact states. The Soviet Union refused all aid when the Marshall Plan was implemented in the 40s, and there was neither the political will nor interest in the 90s in extending generous aid terms. Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine, the Baltic States - they all managed to escape not only the horrendous effects of ‘Shock Therapy’, but also half a century of Soviet exploitation, if not necessarily evenly. Yet Russia, and Belarus, did not. One might then begin looking for reasons why Russia and Belarus failed to integrate, rather than reasons why the West failed to welcome, with that in mind.

          They didn’t, they did let a bunch of their business men buy former public property for pennies on the dollar, which I guess is investment but only really for the corrupt officials who got rich off it.

          This I agree with. ‘Shock therapy’ was nothing but a plundering of the old Soviet states by a plutocratic elite who could generously be said to have gotten high on their own supply of free market fetishism, or more cynically to simply have done what the faithless dogs would do with any weakened state - strip it bare for short term gain.

          There was no path to EU membership, especially after Poland and the baltics joined because they, justifiably, hate Russia for all the imperial oppression they’ve done over the centuries.

          Man, you put too much stock in old grudges. As much as I enjoy ragging on Old Worlders for their ancient blood feuds, it’s not actually that prominent in terms of diplomatic behavior. International relations are predicated almost exclusively on “What can you offer me NOW?” If they weren’t, Germany would never have snuggled up to Russia, France would currently be blockading Britain, and Spain would have cut off the New World colonies which kicked them out. In the 30s and 40s, Ukrainians and Poles were genociding each other, independent of Nazi-led initiatives - now the relation between the two countries is very warm.

          History matters for context - but speaking as a History Major, it rarely matters more than present circumstances.

          • Not_mikey@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Thank you for your well thought out response. I still think that there was no path to cooperation without a buy out. Even though both sides ostensibly were against the leaders of their opponents, Reagen would say were against the communist regime not the russians and kruschev would say they’re against the imperialist capitalists not the americans, how that was interpreted by the average person was just anti-american, anti-russian sentiment. In the 90s Russians either saw westerners as their cold war enemy or the carpet baggers looting their country.

            The only way to win the Russians over would be a marshall plan like foreign aid package that would buy they’re loyalty. Stalin refused it in the 40s for ideological reasons but I doubt Yeltsin would turn down free money. It’s just that there was no political will in the west because there lingering antagonism towards Russia and the idea that liberal capitalism would solve all their problems. They will shell out huge sums for military aid for Ukraine, which again is justified, but if they had sent an equivalent sum to what we are sending now to Ukraine to Russia in the 90s I don’t think we’d be in this mess.

        • PugJesus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          (Part 2 due to character limit)

          Where am I wrong about Ukraine, do you think E.U. and NATO are going to let them in even after all this?

          Yes, definitely. NATO expansion has long been a goal of NATO hardliners, and NATO support in NATO countries has shot up to a degree few would have expected before Russia made the dubious decision of validating the purpose of the old alliance, which had become lethargic and uncertain in recent years.

          What reason is there to exclude Ukraine from NATO once the war is over? Do you think the West wants to deal with a land-grab like this bullshit again, disrupting international markets? Or do you think we’d much prefer to station a token ‘tripwire’ force in Ukraine and ensure that Russia can’t do this bullshit again in ten years?

          The EU I’m less informed on the nuances of, but it seems to me they’re pretty forward about opening a path to EU membership to Ukraine. I’d be more concerned on the EU trying to stall on including them in the Schengen Area than excluding them from the EU entirely.

          I’m not a tanky , the Russian invasion of Ukraine is horrific and unjustified, that doesn’t mean the west’s response to it is benevolent and with the ukrainians best interest.

          I appreciate that you aren’t a tankie, or a Russian bootlicker, but sometimes national (or international) interests and the right thing line up. Western hegemony benefits most from countries deeply connected to the international market (ie Russia and Ukraine) NOT invading each other and disrupting world trade. As Russia is the aggressor, it is in the interests of the West to discourage further aggression, both practically (supporting Ukraine to end the war faster) and in principle (assuring other countries that their sovereignty will be reinforced in the case of blatant outside interference).

  • nostradiel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s a meme so I don’t take it seriously cause otherwise it’s terribly wrong. West didn’t want Russia to join them. Western corporation/families wanted to gain controll over rich natural russian resources. Putin stopped that in 90s. And that’s why we’re where we’re…

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The idea that Putin, who has spent the past 20 years entrenching the kleptocratic oligarchy and putting a great deal of effort into welcoming Western investment into Russia, is the one who saved Russia from the evil Western ‘corporation/families’ seeking ‘rich natural russian resources’ is… absurd.

  • MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I used to do business with a lot of Russians right after the Berlin wall came down, we all got filthy rich privatizing the trillions of dollars worth of state industries. They were excited about joining NATO when Putin applied, they thought they were going to be in the club. Point is, they did everything we asked, but in the end they were more useful to us as an enemy, so it never mattered what Russia did, we were never going to let them into the club. Looking back on it now, I laugh. Thanks for the profits, Boris! You fucking rube!

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      They were excited about joining NATO when Putin applied, they thought they were going to be in the club. Point is, they did everything we asked

      They were never even in a partnership plan, much less doing ‘everything we asked’. Nice bootlicking though. Even when nominally satirical you can’t help yourselves, can you?

      • MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah maybe if they just simped a little harder and cut us in on a little bit more of the profits we would have accepted them! 😉. I like the cut of your jib.

          • MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m on your side, you just missed the memo. We can stop pretending that there was any chance of Russia getting let into the club, the current mark is Ukraine. If they privatize everything and sacrifice enough of their people to fight the barbaric Russkies for us we might let them into NATO and EU. 😉

  • iain@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    72
    ·
    1 year ago

    Equal partner? The EU doesn’t even treat their own poorer member states as equal partners. It remains to be seen whose dick tastes better the coming decades.

    • kameecoding@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      why the anti-eu shit? Russian dick sounds tasty to you or what?

      and which of these poorer countries do you think id worse off since joining the EU? other than maybe Hungary but that has nothing to do with the EU, lol

      • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        37
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        We’re 100% better off in the EU than we would be out of it, but there is a lot of favoritism and “Rules for thee but not for me” shit that rolls eastward.

        Romania and Bulgaria are now suing the Austrian government for blocking our entrance into Schengen despite fulfilling every single point asked of us, and they still turn around and go “Lol no, you’re not western EU, you don’t deserve to be in this club”.

        Also, wtf is this shit France is talking about with tiered membership? I fully suspect they’ll use this to try and strip poorer EU countries of voting rights if they get their way.

        • dustyData@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          Exactly, like, the EU is not perfect, shit sucks sometimes, internal conflict is frequent. But let’s not pretend like the alternative being turning into a soviet vassal state is all roses and singing.

          • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            The cherry on top is that poor EU states are almost universally those that were under USSR subjugation, so we know full well both sides. Unequal treatment is better than subjugation.

        • kameecoding@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Also, wtf is this shit France is talking about with tiered membership? I fully suspect they’ll use this to try and strip poorer EU countries of voting rights if they get their way.

          To be fair countries like Hungary and Poland have exposed the obvious weaknesses of a fully equal partnership that’s present in the EU, it’s all nice and stuff untill the whole EU pulls together, once you have bad actors fucking up quasi dictatorships like HUngary can stop your shit way too easily.

          “Rules for thee but not for me” shit that rolls eastward.

          I feel like that would exist regardless of EU or not and while present in the EU it would be worse without it.

          I mean don’t get me wrong, the EU isn’t perfect, but the person I replied to is clearly doing a false equivalence shit, comparing an imperfect EU with the fuckstorm that is russia.

          • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That can be solved by removing the veto, but it’s pretty telling that France wants to replace that with a tiered system rather than accept that they might get overruled by a majority if they do fucked up shit like Hungary was doing.

            EU isn’t perfect, but the person I replied to is clearly doing a false equivalence shit, comparing an imperfect EU with the fuckstorm that is russia.

            Completely agree. However many problems I have with the way the EU runs, it’s infinitely better than living under a boot.

            • GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’ve seen European history summarized as “everything was going well until one day a Frenchman had an idea and things went disastrously bad for everyone”.

        • PugJesus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Romania and Bulgaria are now suing the Austrian government for blocking our entrance into Schengen despite fulfilling every single point asked of us, and they still turn around and go “Lol no, you’re not western EU, you don’t deserve to be in this club”.

          Isn’t that just a function of small numbers of dissenting countries being able to gum up the entire EU more than favoritism from the organization itself, though? I feel like I hear similar scenarios from the EU all the time.

          • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Partially true, but you almost never hear about Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, etc vetoing shit because the retaliation would be harsh. It’s almost always rich countries doing the vetoing (notable exception of Poland and Hungary’s former mutual defence pact to prevent sanctions on each other, and that did cause retaliation).

            I do agree that the veto system needs to go though.

            • severien@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Lifting the veto is more problematic than it might appear. Each country having a veto lends a lot of legitimacy to EU, without it you’ll see a lot of discussion about loss of sovereignty which is bound to be explosive. If countries don’t have veto and still are strictly against some measure, how does the EU actually enforce it? Will “EU police” enter Hungarian parliament?

      • iain@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Worse off I’m not sure, but you bet Greece, Italy and Spain are not treated as equal partners to France, Germany or even Belgium.

        This doesn’t mean I’m anti EU, I’m just realistic in that Russia would never be treated the same.

        I’m also not confident that US/EU will be on top forever. China is gaining ground.

        I would advise you to not confuse your preference for the US/EU with reality. And not every form of criticism means advocating for the other side.

    • GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is still far too many people hurt by the Cold War or its fallout, which many Westerners forget lead to the deaths of millions, for any partnership with Russia to be anything other than tenuous.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        far too many people hurt by the cold war

        And all of those people hurt are a result of the Soviet Union being a hell state.

        • GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          The USSR was not the hellscape you think it was for many people and the decline of the second wealthiest nation brought about real struggles for people in the aftermath.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            “The USSR was a good thing, actually” is maybe the worst possible argument you could have made here lol

            The unpleasant reality is, Russians, like the Chinese, have never, in all their long history, existed without authoritarian rule. Their people are culturally inured to it. They actively seek it. They’re broken, as a society, and only dissolving their society will cure them.

            Balkanize Russia and China. It’s the only way.

            • hark@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Balkanization is divide and conquer bullshit. Why do you think the US commits to keeping the states together even though red and blue states are supposedly so much different from each other?

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                The US is a very different case, in that the state/federal divide and disagreement is almost entirely illusory, and those arguing for more state control are just using slanted language to hide their desire to persecute others.

                There has never been an instance of Americans fighting for dissolution of federal power where they have not also wanted to use that power to persecute others.

                The opposite is true is Russia.

                • hark@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  None of that has anything to do with breaking apart a country to make it weaker, which is entirely the point of the balkanization argument.

            • GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I did not say it was good I said it was not a hellscape. Just like China is authoritarian and yet hundreds of millions seem to be happy with it so were millions of Soviet citizens.

              You cannot overlook that there was a huge decline in the average quality of life for many/most immediately following the demise of the USSR. That harmed many many people.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Their people like it because their culture clamors for strongman, authoritarian leadership. They’re ill, culturally.

                Everything about the USSR was objectively bad, just like being hooked on heroin is objectively bad. That some addicts fucking love heroin is immaterial.

                Detoxing is painful, and rather than detox, the Russian people relapsed.

                • iain@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You have North Korea level indoctrination my friend. Stop seeing the world so black and white, you sound like a teenager.

                • hark@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Trump got elected in the US and a large chunk of the country still supports him. I guess that means the US has an ill culture that clamors for strongman, authoritarian leadership, or does that not count because of American exceptionalism?

                  No, the reality is that bad actors can take advantage of instability to gain power and people will go along for a number of reasons (apathy, distracted by just trying to survive, hopes of stability, etc). The US made Putin possible by capitalizing on the collapse of the USSR through shock therapy of forced “free market” principles, creating the oligarchy that exists in Russia to this day.

            • GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Im not on hexbear and you should try talking to some people who lived through it. Not everyone hated it all the time even my former boss who did time in a gulag has mixed opinions on it.