Did you take my post as finger wagging? — Echarmion

It wasn't aimed specifically at you. It's just a thing that comes up with some regularity.

not sure what else you expect me to say — Tzeentch

Well, expectations aren't so high I suppose, but at least you did respond to some. Stopping in the middle? Oh well, if you can't/won't.

What did you think of Stradner's post (Sep 30, 2023)?

Big questions about elections in Ukraine.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/05/world/europe/ukraine-zelensky-elections-war.html

Interestingly, watch dogs seem to be more against holding elections, as are the opposition candidates. The idea is that the elections will be marred by continued martial law and that it also won't be a particularly fair election environment. Being wartime leader confers huge advantage for Zelensky and could help him expand his power.

There is also the question of votes in Russian held areas, which would shift outcomes.

Pavel Gubarev via Anton Gerashchenko on Sep 29, 2023

I wonder when those guys will declare independence (from Russia in addition to Ukraine), with guarded borders and all that. Maybe it's not in the cards. Anyway, harsh words. I thought the Kremlin was concerned with neo-Nazism, though?

What did you think of Stradner's post (Sep 30, 2023)? — jorndoe

I think she's right that these conflicts are related to the war in Ukraine, and perhaps more directly with the shifting geopolitical landscape in a wider sense.

However, it would be too easy to label this as 'a thing evil Russia does', because the US / The West seems to be doing the same, for example in the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia.

China, Iran and North Korea are indirectly supporting Russia and its most ambitious stated goal to establish a new World Order alternative to the Western-led World Order, also through this war. — neomac

A fully understandable objective, don't you think? They are free to attempt to get a different type of world. Who are we to stop them? Maybe this is where the conflict could arise. The continuous obsession with implementing how the nations should be and live. — javi2541997

It’s not an obsession. It’s exactly what states are expected to do: rule over a certain territory and pursue national interest with allies or against competitors in the international arena. Allies and competitors will exercise peer-pressure no matter how powerful a country is. Powerful countries will always exercise the greatest pressure, though. As already argued many times Russia too has hegemonic ambitions in Ukraine which, in this case, means imposing by brute force how Ukraine should be and live.
Besides Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea are countries with great competitive interests between them too, despite their conjoint effort to counter-balance the hegemon, perceived now as weak. To that extant I find their objective understandable. But I’m pro-West and find all these countries more oppressive powers than the US so I support policies and a stance aiming at suppressing or containing the threat coming from these countries.

Indeed I talked about AVG standard of life, meaning that it is important to see how public and private resources and services are distributed over the population, how large is the middle class, how easy it is to move from lower classes to higher, etc. — neomac


OK, I see you like the digits I showed, so I will continue to use others as well - they are reliable, don't be shy to accept them - :

Russia: In 2022, the Economist calculated that Russia did graduate into the category of high-income economies by 2022, if counted at purchasing power parity rather than the exchange rate, but could fall below the threshold because of invasion of Ukraine. In December 2022 in a study an economist at the Bank of Russia’s Research and Forecasting Department, finds that the import dependence of the Russian economy is relatively low, does not exceed the median for other countries and the share of imports in most industries is lower than in other countries. The key explanation for this could be the low involvement of the Russian economy in global value supply chains and its focus on production of raw materials. However, 60% of Russia’s imports come from the countries that have announced sanctions against Russia. Russia's expenditure on education has grown from 2.7% of the GDP in 2005 to 4.7% in 2018 but remains below the OECD average of 4.9% A 2015 estimate by the United States Central Intelligence Agency puts the literacy rate in Russia at 99.7% (99.7% for men, 99.6% for women). The Human Rights Measurement Initiative finds that Russia is fulfilling 86.8% of what it should be fulfilling for the right to education, based on its level of income. Russia 1
A member of the middle class is defined as someone who considers themselves ‘above average’ on two or more of the indices.

By this measure, almost 50.8% of all Russian families belonged to the middle class, up from 41.8% in 2000. Check this out!!! https://iq.hse.ru/en/news/276242940.html#:~:text=Russia%E2%80%99s%20Middle%20Class%201%20Between%20the%20rich%20and,for%20its%20active%20use%20of%20paid%20services.%20 — javi2541997

Still not enough, you have to compare the AVG living standards between Russia and the West.

I even doubt they are suitable metrics to asses the AVG life standards in Moscow. — neomac


I thought you would not like - or accept - the metrics of Moscow's living standards and economics, even though I made a big effort to share them with you...

That's why I get bothered. Why don't you believe in information related to Russia? — javi2541997

Dude, it’s not that difficult to fetch stats about Russia on the Internet.
And overall Russia doesn’t stand a chance:
https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/global
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/civil-liberties-index-eiu
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/freedom-index-by-country
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_social_welfare_spending
https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/unemployment_rate/
https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/standard-of-living-by-country/
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/au/investing/currencies/top-10-strongest-currencies-in-the-world/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
https://ocindex.net/2021/rankings/?y=2023&f=rankings&view=List
https://www.internationalinsurance.com/health/systems/
https://rankedex.com/society-rankings/education-index
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/cleanest-countries-in-the-world
https://www.iqair.com/world-most-polluted-countries
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_net_migration_rate
https://www.passportindex.org/byRank.php?country=fr
Not to mention the possibility for avg Westerners to move and migrate for economic opportunities more easily within the West.
Besides, as far as I’m concerned, it’s not only matter of stats. I’m taking into consideration all sorts of feedback I could gather through professional and personal acquaintances from around the world. So don’t waste your time trying to convince me otherwise.

They are free to attempt to get a different type of world. — javi2541997

To what end? Dictatorship, authoritarianism? Sortition? Democracy?

For the sake of our children's children, I'll run with the latter. Otherwise ...

I'll take the tedious task of ruling with an iron fist. — Nov 30, 2022

Your choice. :up:

But I’m pro-West and find all these countries more oppressive powers than the US so I support policies and a stance aiming at suppressing or containing the threat coming from these countries. — neomac

Although I understand what you are defending with arguments, here is when I disagree with you. Are you really sure that the USA is a lesser threat to the world? Latin America, Asia, Africa and East Europe would disagree with you. It is obvious that the White House no longer bombs citizens and cities, but the ambitions remain in a more subtle way: imposing Capitalism worldwide, the rule of the Dollar, your military headquarters being settled worldwide (we have two!), Hollywood culture..., the homogeneous plan of speaking English worldwide, etc. If you do not consider those as a threat...

Still not enough, you have to compare the AVG living standards between Russia and the West. — neomac

OK. I will not give up on my beliefs, so here is the comparative between Russia and your lovely 'Western family'

Russia: GDP Increase $4.771 trillion
• Per capita Increase $33,263
Gini (2020) Positive 36.0
HDI (2021) Increase 0.822 very high.

Spain: GDP $2.36 trillion
• Per capita Increase $31,223
Gini (2021) Positive decrease 33.0[9]
HDI (2021) Increase 0.905

Greece: GDP $418.113 billion
Per Capita $22,595
Gini (2022) Positive decrease 31.4[7]
HDI Increase 0.887.

Are you happy now? And keep in mind that Russia is suffering an unfair financial block from the West. Imagine their development without our weird behaviour in Europe just to make the White House happy.

Dude, it’s not that difficult to fetch stats about Russia on the Internet. — neomac

I don't believe those statistics. They are made by Western universities and foundations. They have zero relevance to me.

To what end? Dictatorship, authoritarianism? Sortition? Democracy? — jorndoe

Written by another user who backs up the nuclear attack on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Don't waste your time. I will not answer posts from a 'Pro-Genocide' and destructive cultures-Japan-Asia like you.

Speculation that's come up more than once out there, that seems unlikely (to me): Are others eyeing Russian territory? After all, there's so much of it.

Japan raps Russia's 'illegal occupation' of disputed islets in rally
^{— Kyodo News · Feb 7, 2023}
Putin Is Opening A Door For China
^{— Alexander Etkind · NOĒMA · Apr 20, 2023}
Kremlin calls Polish decision to rename Kaliningrad 'hostile act'
^{— Andrew Osborn · Reuters · May 10, 2023}
Russia may be devoured by its neighbours (archived)
^{— Svitlana Morenets · The Telegraph · May 31, 2023}
Explained: Why Has Russia Rejected China's New Map, What All Territorial Disputes Does China Have With Neighbours?
^{— Madhur Sharma · Outlook (India) · Sep 4, 2023}

Might Moldova eye Transnistria? What of Kazakhstan? Georgia? Technically possible, but not likely (as far as I can tell anyway). Would certainly...complicate things. (What might Lukashenko do?)

, say what...?

You are not writing arguments, but you just post some links to the Western press. The fact the U.S. dropped two atomic bombs on Japan killing 226,000 people is a fact, mate. This is not speculation from the Kremlin or Shanghai, so I still do not understand why you defend such an atrocity.

Might Moldova eye Transnistria? — jorndoe

They did.

What of Kazakhstan? — jorndoe

They did.

Georgia? — jorndoe

They did, back in 2008 but nobody gave a f*ck. Russo-Georgian War Relations reached a full diplomatic crisis by April 2008, when NATO promised to consider Georgia's bid for membership. Yikes! The same problem kicked in fifteen years ago. What a damn coincidence!

(What might Lukashenko do?) — jorndoe

This dude is zero relevant. You guys love to create enemies in each Eastern country, and I agree with Putin in this fact.

But I’m pro-West and find all these countries more oppressive powers than the US so I support policies and a stance aiming at suppressing or containing the threat coming from these countries. — neomac


Although I understand what you are defending with arguments, here is when I disagree with you. Are you really sure that the USA is a lesser threat to the world?
Latin America, Asia, Africa and East Europe would disagree with you. It is obvious that the White House no longer bombs citizens and cities, but the ambitions remain in a more subtle way: imposing Capitalism worldwide, the rule of the Dollar, your military headquarters being settled worldwide (we have two!), Hollywood culture..., the homogeneous plan of speaking English worldwide, etc. If you do not consider those as a threat… — javi2541997

I never argued that the US is a lesser threat to the World. I only argued that the US is a less oppressive hegemon to the West than Russia was for centuries toward the people it submitted and can still be given how they are treating the Ukrainians or Georgian or Belarusian, and the Russians themselves.
The US is a great threat to countries with rival hegemonic ambitions like Russia and China, and yet the US wasn’t hostile toward them during the post Cold War era of globalization. Indeed that’s how Russia and China got rich, influential and bold. Russia and China didn’t use their wealth to increase AVG standard of life to the level of Western countries, they used it to strengthen their authoritarian regime, increase hegemonic influence and anti-Western narratives abroad. And that doesn’t sound promising even for the population of countries whose government seek partnership with Russia and China, like the Iranians. I sympathise with the Iranians not with the Russians.

Latin America, Asia, Africa and East Europe would disagree with you. — javi2541997

Some countries from those regions not all. East Europe like Poland, Baltic Countries and Ukraine? Asia like Vietnam, Japan and South Korea?

It is obvious that the White House no longer bombs citizens and cities, but the ambitions remain in a more subtle way: imposing Capitalism worldwide, the rule of the Dollar, your military headquarters being settled worldwide (we have two!), Hollywood culture..., the homogeneous plan of speaking English worldwide, etc. If you do not consider those as a threat… — javi2541997

Yes that’s exactly what non-oppressive hegemons are expected to do, buy popular consensus (not just oligarchy’s consensus) through shared rules, business agreements, sharing technologies, granting political and civil rights, communicate a peaceful and cooperative narrative between allies through words, acts and cultural exchanges. But OBVIOUSLY not to the extent of compromising their power advantage against potential/actual rivals. That makes perfect sense to me, if we are expecting more than this we are likely delusional and if we want more than this for us, we must be ready to pay the consequences, which for Europeans likely means moving the hegemonic conflict, political and military, from the margin of Europe, in the heart of Europe. And if the US loses, Russia will be the hegemon with a greater chance of exploitative/abusive behaviour than the US, given that Russia has more to get than to offer to Europeans and reasons to humiliate the West as a triumphant retaliation.

Still not enough, you have to compare the AVG living standards between Russia and the West. — neomac


OK. I will not give up on my beliefs, so here is the comparative between Russia and your lovely 'Western family'

Russia: GDP Increase $4.771 trillion
• Per capita Increase $33,263
Gini (2020) Positive 36.0
HDI (2021) Increase 0.822 very high.

Spain: GDP $2.36 trillion
• Per capita Increase $31,223
Gini (2021) Positive decrease 33.0[9]
HDI (2021) Increase 0.905

Greece: GDP $418.113 billion
Per Capita $22,595
Gini (2022) Positive decrease 31.4[7]
HDI Increase 0.887.

Are you happy now? And keep in mind that Russia is suffering an unfair financial block from the West. Imagine their development without our weird behaviour in Europe just to make the White House happy. — javi2541997

OK now you may have given me an answer from your point of view, not mine though. I most certainly keep in mind that Russia is suffering a financial block from the West, since network of allies and enemies is also what can determine AVG standard of life of a country.

Dude, it’s not that difficult to fetch stats about Russia on the Internet. — neomac


I don't believe those statistics. They are made by Western universities and foundations. They have zero relevance to me. — javi2541997

Whatever makes you happy.

I only argued that the US is a less oppressive hegemon to the West than Russia was for centuries toward the people it submitted and can still be given how they are treating the Ukrainians or Georgian or Belarusian, and the Russians themselves. — neomac

I think you should define 'oppression' if you want me to agree with you. If you truly think that Russia has been more oppressive than the US in the last centuries, we have a big issue here because you are away from reality itself.

Some countries from those regions not all. East Europe like Poland, Baltic Countries and Ukraine? Asia like Vietnam, Japan and South Korea? — neomac

Tell how Russia treats countries such as South Korea or Vietnam oppressively, because they are so far away from their geopolitical ambitions. I am seeing you coming, and maybe you would say: Don't you remember how Soviet Russia supported Vietnam? And why not, mate? They are free to back up countries with similar ideologies. They also support Syria for the Baaz socialist party.

Yes that’s exactly what non-oppressive hegemons are expected to do, buy popular consensus (not just oligarchy’s consensus) through shared rules, business agreements, sharing technologies, granting political and civil rights, communicate a peaceful and cooperative narrative between allies through words, acts and cultural exchanges. But OBVIOUSLY not to the extent of compromising their power advantage against potential/actual rivals. — neomac

Ha! ha! This one made me laugh :lol:

OK now you may have given me an answer from your point of view, not mine though. I most certainly keep in mind that Russia is suffering a financial block from the West, since network of allies and enemies is also what can determine AVG standard of life of a country. — neomac

Mate, I am providing you with reliable information on the middle-class of Russia, but I feel that you do not believe in the metrics, or you just don't open the links I have shared with you. OK, don't worry that much, I will open the link and share the information and proven evidence in this thread. Nonetheless, keep in mind that if you do not believe in these metrics, it is your problem, not Russia's.

The HSE Centre for Studies of Income and Living Standards studied the dynamics of the middle class and its behaviour with regard to paid services. The study was based on data drawn from the HSE Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS-HSE) for the years 2000 to 2017, and the results were presented at the 20th April International Academic Conference hosted by HSE.

The HSE researchers applied three criteria for their study:

Material well-being;
Social and professional status;
Self-identification.

The middle class is identified according to the following factors: income, savings, property (durable goods), real estate and assets typical of villagers (land and farming revenue).

Although the overall middle class grew continually from 2000 until 2015 and levelled off only in the lead-up to 2017, the generalized middle class continued to expand right up until 2017.

The middle class is heterogeneous and includes several different groups:

The core. This includes those who satisfy all three of the above-listed criteria.

The semi-core. Those who satisfy two of the three criteria.

The periphery. Those who satisfy only one of the criteria.

The generalized middle class consists of those households belonging to the core and semi-core, while the overall middle class also includes those in the periphery.

Happy now? https://iq.hse.ru/en/news/276242940.html#:~:text=Russia%E2%80%99s%20Middle%20Class%201%20Between%20the%20rich%20and,for%20its%20active%20use%20of%20paid%20services.%20

I only argued that the US is a less oppressive hegemon to the West than Russia was for centuries toward the people it submitted and can still be given how they are treating the Ukrainians or Georgian or Belarusian, and the Russians themselves. — neomac


I think you should define 'oppression' if you want me to agree with you. If you truly think that Russia has been more oppressive than the US in the last centuries, we have a big issue here because you are away from reality itself. — javi2541997

As a starting point, I take “oppression” as an expression of political averse preference (which admits degrees and possible revision of course) by an individual or collective subject toward hegemonic influence wrt available alternatives. I say "starting point" because one can also make further distinctions: popular or elite, actual or potential, economic or military, compensation-based or comparatively-based, etc.
If ex Warsaw pact countries and ex Soviet Republics prefer to join the West (like EU and NATO) instead of remaining under Russian sphere of influence, it likely means that these countries likely perceive EU and NATO as less oppressive than joining Russian sphere of influence.
If Vietnam prefers to military/economically ally with the US instead of China, then it means that Vietnam finds the US less oppressive than China.
If European countries prefer to preserve or want to join American-led/supervised Western institutions like EU/NATO, then it means they find such institutions as less oppressive than remaining exposed to the influence of other hegemons (like Russia or China).

Some countries from those regions not all. East Europe like Poland, Baltic Countries and Ukraine? Asia like Vietnam, Japan and South Korea? — neomac


Tell how Russia treats countries such as South Korea or Vietnam oppressively, because they are so far away from their geopolitical ambitions. I am seeing you coming, and maybe you would say: Don't you remember how Soviet Russia supported Vietnam? And why not, mate? They are free to back up countries with similar ideologies. They also support Syria for the Baaz socialist party. — javi2541997

South Korea or Vietnam are more concerned by China than by Russia. So in their case I would say they feel the US to be a less oppressive hegemon than China.
Yet since the US is competing also with Russia then of course South Korea or Vietnam will likely act in line with what their hegemon has chosen to do against Russia. Do ut des.

Yes that’s exactly what non-oppressive hegemons are expected to do, buy popular consensus (not just oligarchy’s consensus) through shared rules, business agreements, sharing technologies, granting political and civil rights, communicate a peaceful and cooperative narrative between allies through words, acts and cultural exchanges. But OBVIOUSLY not to the extent of compromising their power advantage against potential/actual rivals. — neomac


Ha! ha! This one made me laugh :lol: — javi2541997

Laughing is not an argument, though. On the other side, risus abundat in ore stultorum.

OK now you may have given me an answer from your point of view, not mine though. I most certainly keep in mind that Russia is suffering a financial block from the West, since network of allies and enemies is also what can determine AVG standard of life of a country. — neomac


Mate, I am providing you with reliable information on the middle-class of Russia, but I feel that you do not believe in the metrics, or you just don't open the links I have shared with you. OK, don't worry that much, I will open the link and share the information and proven evidence in this thread. Nonetheless, keep in mind that if you do not believe in these metrics, it is your problem, not Russia's.

The HSE Centre for Studies of Income and Living Standards studied the dynamics of the middle class and its behaviour with regard to paid services. The study was based on data drawn from the HSE Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS-HSE) for the years 2000 to 2017, and the results were presented at the 20th April International Academic Conference hosted by HSE.

The HSE researchers applied three criteria for their study:

Material well-being;
Social and professional status;
Self-identification.

The middle class is identified according to the following factors: income, savings, property (durable goods), real estate and assets typical of villagers (land and farming revenue).

Although the overall middle class grew continually from 2000 until 2015 and levelled off only in the lead-up to 2017, the generalized middle class continued to expand right up until 2017.

The middle class is heterogeneous and includes several different groups:

The core. This includes those who satisfy all three of the above-listed criteria.

The semi-core. Those who satisfy two of the three criteria.

The periphery. Those who satisfy only one of the criteria.

The generalized middle class consists of those households belonging to the core and semi-core, while the overall middle class also includes those in the periphery.

Happy now? https://iq.hse.ru/en/news/276242940.html#:~:text=Russia%E2%80%99s%20Middle%20Class%201%20Between%20the%20rich%20and,for%20its%20active%20use%20of%20paid%20services.%20 — javi2541997

I read your link. But, again, my question was about comparing AVG in the West with AVG in Russia according to relevant metrics. That link at best shows the metrics and the source you care. My previous answer showed the metrics and the source I care. With an addendum: the direct experience or feedback I got from acquaintances from countries like Russia, Iran and China.
And when it's matter of my preference, of course it's my problem not Russia's.

Dude, I’m not here, in this philosophy forum, because I care for my family, my country, the West, the Ukrainians, Humanity. Or to convince anonymous nobodies from the internet about my beliefs. I’m here EXCLUSIVELY because I care about myself and the way I think. I’m here EXCLUSIVELY to clarify my own ideas to myself through the intellectual challenges other pose, especially if they are interested to do the same for themselves. In other words, our exchange is to me just an intellectual and self-targeted exercise. Like brushing teeth or go jogging. To do that I just need arguments, hopefully as compelling as possible.

↪javi2541997, say what...? — jorndoe

:brow:

If European countries prefer to preserve or want to join American-led/supervised Western institutions like EU/NATO than it means they find such institutions as less oppressive than remaining exposed to the influence of other hegemons (like Russia or China). — neomac

I partially agree with some of these points and disagree at the same time.

There is a big debate about whether the EU countries established the European Union freely, or whether it was an attempt to not depend on the two blocks: not the USA and Russia (the Soviet Union back then). Yet, it is true that European institution ended up being more linked with Washington and not with Russia. I still see it as a notorious mistake. I don't attempt to ignore the USA because it is impossible, but I wish they had had a more neutral position, and don't perceive Russia as an enemy. I see this objective far more than ever, and I feel that the White House is satisfied with this.

On the other hand, there are some nations which were pushed to join those American institutions. One example is Spain. We had to join NATO to show that we were your friends, and then get accepted by the European Union. There was a big disappointment amongst the citizens because most of us were against NATO back in the day. You can check this out on the Internet if you want to, but I don't want to bother you with my irrelevant country.

I read your link. But, again, my question was about comparing AVG in the West with AVG in Russia according to relevant metrics. — neomac

Well, I understand why it is so difficult to persuade you. If you do not give a chance to my evidence or metrics, it will be very complex to make your eyes open. There are some metrics which come from Western institutions or magazines, such as 'The Economist'. Furthermore, since the war started, it is complex to find out reliable information about Russia's reality because the Western media manipulates us and the Kremlin blocks the most information they can. But fortunately, there are some premises that we can consider as true:

1. Russia is a rich and developed country but with a few problems.

2. More than 50 % of Russians live in the Middle-class

3. Then, Russia is a country with high-quality living standards, but they must face some issues as every nation does.

Furthermore, even the International Monetary Fund - a great biassed Western institution - says that the purchasing power parity will keep rising in Russia in the following years: $36,135.834 (2024); $37,273.366 (2025), etc. Do you still think that the average family in Russia lives or will live badly? Is the IMF a reliable source for you?
Poverty line: 12.10% in 2020. This means that more than 85 % - the middle-class obviously - of Russians live well. More metrics from a Western lover institution: The World Bank. https://www.worldbank.org/en/home

If European countries prefer to preserve or want to join American-led/supervised Western institutions like EU/NATO than it means they find such institutions as less oppressive than remaining exposed to the influence of other hegemons (like Russia or China). — neomac


I partially agree with some of these points and disagree at the same time.

There is a big debate about whether the EU countries established the European Union freely, or whether it was an attempt to not depend on the two blocks: not the USA and Russia (the Soviet Union back then). Yet, it is true that European institution ended up being more linked with Washington and not with Russia. I still see it as a notorious mistake. I don't attempt to ignore the USA because it is impossible, but I wish they had had a more neutral position, and don't perceive Russia as an enemy. I see this objective far more than ever, and I feel that the White House is satisfied with this.

On the other hand, there are some nations which were pushed to join those American institutions. One example is Spain. We had to join NATO to show that we were your friends, and then get accepted by the European Union. There was a big disappointment amongst the citizens because most of us were against NATO back in the day. You can check this out on the Internet if you want to, but I don't want to bother you with my irrelevant country — javi2541997

.

My premise still holds, states are expected to rule over a certain territory and pursue national interest with allies or against competitors in the international arena. Allies and competitors will exercise peer-pressure no matter how powerful a country is. But powerful countries will always exercise the greatest pressure, though. So politicians’ choices are always conditional on given power relations, whatever one’s wishes are. So even “pushing” needs to be qualified more carefully: there are “sticks” and “carrots”, so the proportion of these factors can make the difference. And, again, the difference must be taken in prospective and comparative terms. That’s what it means to me to be realistic when talking politics. I find European populist movements far from being realistic and definitely useful idiots for hostile foreign powers.
And it’s totally false to claim that Russia was perceived as an “enemy” by American administrations (despite the warning of the American analysts of the Russian threat). America financed Russia after the collapse of Soviet Union, returned the nuclear arsenal to Russia from Ukraine, opened the Western market to Russia (when USSR was the enemy, there was no globalization) and gave a free pass to Russia in Middle East and Africa when Islamist terrorism was perceived as the imminent enemy. Meanwhile Russia grew hostile to the West because still pursuing hegemonic ambitions not welfare or wellbeing of its people (the same story with Iran and China), while the American reputation was severely stained by the 2 infamous adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. And once the Americans realised that their globalization was nurturing hegemonic competitors and warned the EU, the EU underestimated the American security concerns. And still the response of the West was hesitant toward Russia, even after the invasion of Crimea. The Americans were still distracted by domestic issues (thanks also to Russia’s meddling) and China, while the EU was still needy of cheap Russian oil and gas and the Chinese market. So Russia got emboldened and moved on to take a larger piece of the cake. Not fear but opportunity pushed Russia into this war. And if America didn’t react as it reacted (and notice that its reaction is still softer than one might expect), the king would be perceived as naked. So here we are.

I read your link. But, again, my question was about comparing AVG in the West with AVG in Russia according to relevant metrics. — neomac


Well, I understand why it is so difficult to persuade you. If you do not give a chance to my evidence or metrics, it will be very complex to make your eyes open. There are some metrics which come from Western institutions or magazines, such as 'The Economist'. Furthermore, since the war started, it is complex to find out reliable information about Russia's reality because the Western media manipulates us and the Kremlin blocks the most information they can. But fortunately, there are some premises that we can consider as true:

1. Russia is a rich and developed country but with a few problems.

2. More than 50 % of Russians live in the Middle-class

3. Then, Russia is a country with high-quality living standards, but they must face some issues as every nation does.

Furthermore, even the International Monetary Fund - a great biassed Western institution - says that the purchasing power parity will keep rising in Russia in the following years: $36,135.834 (2024); $37,273.366 (2025), etc. Do you still think that the average family in Russia lives or will live badly? Is the IMF a reliable source for you?
Poverty line: 12.10% in 2020. This means that more than 85 % - the middle-class obviously - of Russians live well. More metrics from a Western lover institution: The World Bank. https://www.worldbank.org/en/home — javi2541997

You waste your energies because you do not understand what I’m asking nor why. If historical circumstances are such that I have to chose between two hegemons, I will chose the hegemon which lets me enjoy the most favourable ratio of carrots/sticks to MY taste, not to YOUR taste. The avg ratio of carrots/sticks in Russia (not to mention the countries under its direct hegemonic influence like Belarus) until now looks still undoubtedly shitty compared to the ratio of of carrots/sticks Western countries get under the US hegemony. I gave you the metrics relevant to me to measure the ratio carrots/sticks. And again stats are not the whole story.

A bit odd?

Some in Congress want to cut Ukraine aid and boost Taiwan’s. But Taiwan sees its fate tied to Kyiv’s
^{— Didi Tang · AP · Oct 9, 2023}

Ukraine’s survival is Taiwan’s survival. Ukraine’s success is Taiwan’s success. — Hsiao Bi-khim

Taiwan has been careful not to weigh in on the U.S. debate about continued funding for Ukraine

not a zero-sum game — Bradley Bowman

... Well, now add the wretched Middle Eastern escalation.

Other related news ...

Kremlin-Friendly Hungary Government Wants to Hold Back Some Ukraine Aid
^{— Jorge Valero · Bloomberg · Oct 3, 2023}
Slovakia halts military aid for Ukraine as parties that oppose it negotiate to form a new government
^{— AP · Oct 5, 2023}

I will chose the hegemon which lets me enjoy the most favourable ratio of carrots/sticks to MY taste, not to YOUR taste. The avg ratio of carrots/sticks in Russia (not to mention the countries under its direct hegemonic influence like Belarus) until now looks still undoubtedly shitty compared to the ratio of of carrots/sticks Western countries get under the US hegemony. — neomac

Understandable. Who am I to force you to choose your taste?

But, as much as I can remember, our debate didn't start because of likes or preferences. You asked me for evidence and metrics on the Russian middle-class, and I have provided them using both Western and 'Pro-Russia' sources. Then, you said that they are not reliable to you, something that I must not complain about because I do not trust Western institutions either. You are not admitting it, but I feel that you ended up in the conclusion that Russia is a cool place in objective terms. Speaking subjectively, maybe it is not likeable for some people, including you, and I respect your position. If you think that the world governed by Western institutions is better, cool. But stop believing in false premises about Russia.

You waste your energies because you do not understand what I’m asking nor why. — neomac

I do not waste my time because I am helping you to see the truth. :smile:

But, as much as I can remember, our debate didn't start because of likes or preferences. You asked me for evidence and metrics on the Russian middle-class, and I have provided them using both Western and 'Pro-Russia' sources. Then, you said that they are not reliable to you, something that I must not complain about because I do not trust Western institutions either. You are not admitting it, but I feel that you ended up in the conclusion that Russia is a cool place in objective terms. Speaking subjectively, maybe it is not likeable for some people, including you, and I respect your position. If you think that the world governed by Western institutions is better, cool. But stop believing in false premises about Russia. — javi2541997

Then your memory is fooling you.

As far as I’m concerned the following is the relevant starting point:

I don’t love the Western world. I simply prefer to live as an avg Westerner than an avg Russian, Chinese, Iranian, North Korean. You? — neomac

Next, since your answers weren’t focused on what I was asking, I gave you more clarifications as follows:

I don’t talk about tourism, I don’t talk about giving a chance. I talk about living your life as an avg person in Western countries vs in one of those authoritarian countries. Which one do you personally prefer? — neomac

Again, I’m not talking about privileged people, nor about the ability to live (happily or unhappily) in a country, nor about OTHER people, I’m asking you if YOU would prefer to live as an AVG person in China, Russia, Iran or as an AVG person in a Western country, let’s say, Spain, WHATEVER YOUR understanding of life in these countries is and whatever parameters YOU find relevant to assess life standards. — neomac

Next, YOU started throwing at me stats by yourself because, at his point, I didn’t ask you for evidence and metrics yet. So much so that you wrote all by yourself as follows:

Are you looking for evidence and data? OK, I will show you — javi2541997

But I was unimpressed because you offered mostly non-AVG aggregated metrics and trivia highlights which can objectively be misleading to assess AVG standard of life in Russia or in Moscow, EVEN IF THEY ARE ACCURATE (so the objection didn’t concern their reliability of your stats per se, but their relevance wrt what I was asking). And aggregated stats about Moscow can not be taken as representative of the AVG standard of life in the entire Russia. Most importantly, I didn’t ask you to compare cities (like Moscow vs Melilla), I asked you to express your preference as a function of AVG standards of life between states (e.g. Russa vs Spain), so I objected:

As far as I’m concerned, your data do not concern the AVG Russian life standards, I even doubt they are suitable metrics to asses the AVG life standards in Moscow. — neomac

----

I do not waste my time because I am helping you to see the truth. :smile: — javi2541997

Well it doesn’t work. You should try to help me see the truth by paying me instead. But I’m very expensive (and do not accept rubles, moy drug).

So!

Putins wrath finally for joining NATO?

HELSINKI (AP) — Damage to an undersea gas pipeline and telecommunications cable connecting Finland and Estonia appears to have been caused by “external activity,” Finnish officials said Tuesday, adding that authorities were investigating.

Finnish and Estonian gas system operators on Sunday said they noted an unusual drop in pressure in the Balticconnector pipeline after which they shut down the gas flow.

The Finnish government on Tuesday said there was damage both to the gas pipeline and to a telecommunications cable between the two NATO countries.

Good that we got in and weren't left hanging like Sweden. :smile:

Winter is coming. Destabilizing the supply of gas in the Baltic as much as from the Middle-East to Western countries, has its benefits for Putin, I guess.

BTW, what would Putin, the "Russian security concerns" whiner, suggest to address Israeli security concerns?

BTW, what would Putin, the "Russian security concerns" whiner, suggest to address Israeli security concerns? — neomac

I think he won't be able to stay quiet, hence we will hear about it.

Next, since your answers weren’t focused on what I was asking, I gave you more clarifications as follows — neomac

But I see a bit of contradiction in your arguments, mate. Firstly, you say that you want evidences in how it is to live in Russia, not just for tourism. I showed you some evidence which you didn't like. Later on, you also said that you like Western countries because you travelled around them... That's contradictory.

Next, YOU started throwing at me stats by yourself because, at his point, I didn’t ask you for evidence and metrics yet. So much so that you wrote all by yourself as follows: — neomac

Because my points are based on the fact that Russia is likeable basically. To back up my opinion, I showed you evidence. If you don't like them, and you do not want to accept the reality it is your problem mate, not Russia's or mine.

I asked you to express your preference as a function of AVG standards of life between states (e.g. Russa vs Spain) — neomac

I did that, but you rejected my arguments too... here

And aggregated stats about Moscow can not be taken as representative of the AVG standard of life in the entire Russia. — neomac

I partially agree.

It is true that I focused on Moscow and not other Oblasts or cities. Well, this is due to using metrics, we tend to focus on capital cities because they are the places where most of the citizens live. It is the largest city in Russia by population, but we can take into account another city: Saint Petersburg.

St. Petersburg is a major trade gateway, financial and industrial center of Russia specialising in oil and gas trade, shipbuilding yards, aerospace industry. St. Petersburg has three large cargo seaports: Bolshoi Port St. Petersburg, Kronstadt, and Lomonosov. Toyota is building a plant in Shuishary, one of the suburbs; General Motors and Nissan have signed deals with the Russian government too. Automotive and parts industry is on the rise here during the last decade. The federal subject's gross regional product as of 2021 was ₽9.44 trillion (€108 billion), ranked second in Russia, after Moscow.

Impressive! It is clearly a city full of opportunities for Russian citizens.

Well it doesn’t work. You should try to help me see the truth by paying me instead. But I’m very expensive (and do not accept rubles, moy drug). — neomac

Well, you just accept that you are open to accepting bribes. Ha! Don't bother if a Russian politician does it as well. This is all that I have in my wallet. Take it or leave it!

NATO is one line of US influence, and an important one. There are others. Why does the US want to expand NATO, support overthrowing a president, etc.? It's part of a very clear strategy for eastern Europe.
— Mikie

Sure, that is the US strategy, but that does not mean the US is the main cause of the processes. That is what you got completely wrong. — Jabberwock

My claim is that NATO membership, after years of training, arms supply, and drills, was the main cause of the invasion. There are others, of course. The US has many reasons for its actions in Eastern Europe, as do the Russians.

France has supported the American Revolution, provided weapons and even troops to Americans, because it suited France's interests in the conflict with the British. Yet if I wrote that France has organized the American Revolution, therefore should be blamed for it, nobody would take me seriously. — Jabberwock

A better analogy would be: were the British responsible for the revolution, given its actions leading up to it? I’d say yes.

Mikie: 'Russia would not attack if Ukraine did not want to join NATO!'
Jabberwock: 'Russia has attacked Ukraine in 2014 precisely when it has abandoned its NATO aspirations.'
Mikie: 'Let us talk about something else! How about 2022?' — Jabberwock

Russia attacked in 2014 after the US-back coup, yes. NATO did not abandon its plans after 2014. In fact it increased its involvement— now under the invented “imperialist ambitions” cover.

Your thesis that Ukraine abandoned its NATO ambitions in 2014 is proof that Russia would attack Ukraine no matter what, and that NATO was just the latest cover story, confuses two things: 1), US influence, and 2) one such influence: NATO. You also ignore the fact that the NATO threat was in the background since 2008. It did not disappear as a threat simply because one leader was against it. But when that leader is removed, with US support, in favor of the pro-EU and pro-NATO, US-approved Poroshenko — yes, I’d say NATO is still a factor in Russian decisions.

Again, the actions of Russia took place AFTER the coup, not before— so I’m really not seeing your point that NATO couldn’t possibly factor into Russian aggression in Crimea. Sure, it wasn’t the main factor in this case— and I never said it was — but it was not irrelevant either.

My claim is that NATO membership, after years of training, arms supply, and drills, was the main cause of the invasion. There are others, of course. The US has many reasons for its actions in Eastern Europe, as do the Russians. — Mikie

That makes no sense though. Russia already had a perfectly good frozen conflict in the Donbas. There'd be no way for NATO membership of a country in an active (if sporadic) armed conflict with Russia.

Russia attacked in 2014 after the US-back coup, yes. NATO did not abandon its plans after 2014. In fact it increased its involvement— now under the invented “imperialist ambitions” cover. — Mikie

Obviously if you attack a country it'll look for protection. What was the Russian strategy here according to you?

Next, since your answers weren’t focused on what I was asking, I gave you more clarifications as follows — neomac


But I see a bit of contradiction in your arguments, mate. Firstly, you say that you want evidences in how it is to live in Russia, not just for tourism. I showed you some evidence which you didn't like. Later on, you also said that you like Western countries because you travelled around them... That's contradictory. — javi2541997

Dude, this exchange is getting surreal. Or surrealistic.
Do you wear long pointy upward moustache by any chance?

I didn’t write anywhere that I want evidences, indeed you can not quote me saying it, and I even made it clear when I wrote the following:

“Do you prefer X or Y?” and “give me the reasons why you prefer X over Y?” are two different questions. I just asked you the first — neomac

So I didn’t ask you for evidences. It’s you by your own initiative to throw evidences at me with the following preamble:

Are you looking for evidence and data? OK, I will show you — javi2541997

And my objections weren’t about the evidences per se nor because I needed evidences, but since you were trying to answer my question by providing some evidences, I limited myself to question their pertinence.
It’s as if I’m asking you: “do you prefer to eat a pizza in an Italian pizzeria or in a Chinese pizzeria?”
And you answered:
- I know people who enjoyed Chinese restaurants.
- I would give a chance one day to try a Chinese restaurant.
- People can eat in a Chinese restaurant and be happy.
- Chinese restaurants are particularly trendy in China, and demand for it will grow in the next years.
- You can find the best Chinese restaurants in Beijing
- 100 millions of Chinese restaurants in Beijing. With a nice view on the Yellow river.
- 60% of the people in China can afford to eat in a Chinese restaurant.
- In China restaurants can serve you a meal in 3 seconds.
I hope you understand that no matter how true these claims are, none of these evidences are sensibly pertinent to answer my question “do you prefer to eat a pizza in an Italian pizzeria or in a Chinese pizzeria?”. Because the question is about pizzerias and not whatever restaurant one can find in China, and about comparing Italian pizzeria vs Chinese pizzeria, not about Chinese pizzerias per se or the pizzerias in Beijing.

Well it doesn’t work. You should try to help me see the truth by paying me instead. But I’m very expensive (and do not accept rubles, moy drug). — neomac


Well, you just accept that you are open to accepting bribes. Ha! Don't bother if a Russian politician does it as well. This is all that I have in my wallet. Take it or leave it! — javi2541997

I do bother because Russia would pay a politician to spread Russian lies not me.
Or are you suggesting me to spread Russian lies for free as you do?

My claim is that NATO membership, after years of training, arms supply, and drills, was the main cause of the invasion. There are others, of course. The US has many reasons for its actions in Eastern Europe, as do the Russians. — Mikie

Again, you completely ignore why Ukraine has started training, arms supply and drills - because it has ALREADY been invaded and there was still ongoing conflict with Russia. Russia has attacked Ukraine and has maintained the armed conflict for eight years, so Ukraine began to arm itself - that was the sequence of events, which you consistently ignore.

A better analogy would be: were the British responsible for the revolution, given its actions leading up to it? I’d say yes. — Mikie

But that was not the point. The point was that mere support is not sufficient to be cited as a cause. You have given no support why we should think Russia would not attack Ukraine without US/NATO actions and you are desperately ignoring the evidence that Russia did start the armed conflict for other reasons.

Russia attacked in 2014 after the US-back coup, yes. NATO did not abandon its plans after 2014. In fact it increased its involvement— now under the invented “imperialist ambitions” cover. — Mikie

No, Russia attacked after it has messed up, because its meddling has sparkled a popular uprising. ANOTHER point that you desperately ignore in your analysis.

Your thesis that Ukraine abandoned its NATO ambitions in 2014 is proof that Russia would attack Ukraine no matter what, and that NATO was just the latest cover story, confuses two things: 1), US influence, and 2) one such influence: NATO. You also ignore the fact that the NATO threat was in the background since 2008. It did not disappear as a threat simply because one leader was against it. But when that leader is removed, with US support, in favor of the pro-EU and pro-NATO, US-approved Poroshenko — yes, I’d say NATO is still a factor in Russian decisions. — Mikie

No, it was not 'one leader', it was legislation adopted by the whole parliament. That basically neutralized the NATO threat. And the leader was removed because Russia has messed up in a different matter. Without Russian meddling Yushchenko would remain in power and Ukraine would be militarily neutral, just as it was decided by the parliament.

Again, the actions of Russia took place AFTER the coup, not before— so I’m really not seeing your point that NATO couldn’t possibly factor into Russian aggression in Crimea. Sure, it wasn’t the main factor in this case— and I never said it was — but it was not irrelevant either. — Mikie

Well, I have evidence why it would not be very relevant - Ukraine has pledged neutrality and Russia did not mention NATO when it has invaded Crimea. On the other hand, you say NATO was definitely a factor, because you say so. See the difference?

However, given that you have acknowledged that it was not the main factor for the agression, that is all I need to reject your argument: given that NATO expansion was not the main factor in starting the conflict, all we have to do is to consider whether that main factors have ceased to exist before the further escalation of the conflict (which has never ceased, contrary to your claims). And the answer is, of course, no - Russia still had the same reasons, so it started the full-scale war.

You have given no support why we should think Russia would not attack — Jabberwock

This is again a strange request.

I do have support: it didn’t happen. What did happen is attacks during a period of US involvement.

So as long as we’re asking for ridiculous things: you’ve given no support that Russia would have attacked WITHOUT US influences.

No, Russia attacked after it has messed up, because its meddling has sparkled a popular uprising. — Jabberwock

A US-backed/funded uprising, yes.

Without Russian meddling Yushchenko would remain in power and Ukraine would be militarily neutral, just as it was decided by the parliament. — Jabberwock

Without US meddling, you mean.

However, given that you have acknowledged that it was not the main factor for the agression, that is all I need to reject your argument: given that NATO expansion was not the main factor in starting the conflict, all we have to do is to consider whether that main factors have ceased to exist before the further escalation of the conflict (which has never ceased, contrary to your claims). And the answer is, of course, no - Russia still had the same reasons, so it started the full-scale war. — Jabberwock

It was certainly the main factor in 2022.

Well, I have evidence why it would not be very relevant - Ukraine has pledged neutrality and Russia did not mention NATO when it has invaded Crimea. On the other hand, you say NATO was definitely a factor, because you say so. See the difference? — Jabberwock

Except that’s complete nonsense:

Let me note too that we have already heard declarations from Kiev about Ukraine soon joining NATO. What would this have meant for Crimea and Sevastopol in the future? It would have meant that NATO’s navy would be right there in this city of Russia’s military glory, and this would create not an illusory but a perfectly real threat to the whole of southern Russia. These are things that could have become reality were it not for the choice the Crimean people made, and I want to say thank you to them for this. — Putin, 2014

https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Address_by_President_of_the_Russian_Federation_on_the_reunification_of_the_Republic_of_Crimea_and_the_city_of_Sevastopol_with_Russia

So yes, it was very much a factor. EU expansion was also a factor. US-backed coups was also a factor. Add it up, and US influence is all over these events.

But we’re supposed to believe Russia shouldn’t have been worried, that their fears were completely unwarranted, and that NATO was irrelevant — because you say so.

Sorry, no.