The Future of U.S.-Russian Relations
Trident
Trident
****************************************************************
Johnson's Russia List, #7234
22 June 2003
davidj...@erols.com
A CDI Project
#12
June 20, 2003
Symposium: The Future of U.S.-Russian Relations
By Jamie Glazov
Interlocutor: Welcome gentlemen to Frontpage Symposium. It has become
pretty clear that Putin's Russia is no friend of the United States.
Russia's despicable behaviour vis-à-vis Saddam before and during the
Iraqi war demonstrated that fact.
There are those who would argue that the Soviet system still holds
power in Russia. In other words, despite 1991, the communists still
control Russia and they hold no good intentions toward America or the
West. And this is confirmed, arguably, by Russian mischief in Iraq.
And God knows what the Russians are up to in North Korea.
So let's begin with this question: is America's alliance with Russia a
serious blunder for American foreign policy? Is it time for the U.S.
to see Russia as an enemy?
Pipes: There is some truth in your observations Jamie, but it is not
the whole truth. I don't believe that "the Soviet system still holds
power in Russia." The system has been dismantled but the Soviet
mindset remains. In particular, the majority of Russians believe that
their country has the right to be a "great power" and as such
respected and fear. Since it is not, there is a great deal of envy and
resentment simmering, as shown by opinion polls that indicated during
the recent Iraqi campaign that 58 percent of Russians wish for an
American defeat and only 3 percent want the USA to win. At the same
time, the country's rulers realize that they need to be friendly to
the US for economic and political reasons. Hence the vacillations and
contradictions.
Heilbrunn: Sorry, Jamie, I don't buy it. Vladimir Putin is no friend
of the U.S. But that hardly makes him an "enemy," either. What
conceivable incentive would Putin have had to spirit away Saddam to a
dacha outside Moscow? If anything, Putin is scrambling to improve
relations with the U.S. after opposing Gulf War II. The impoverished
Russian state does not have the resources to mount a serious challenge
to the U.S. on the order of the late USSR. It is unable, for example,
to subdue Chechnya--witness the suicide bombing that just took place.
With George W. Bush wary of any further military action before the
2004 election, his best hope is to nudge the Russians to push Iran to
disclose its nuclear activities. As far as North Korea is concerned,
I'd ascribe far more influence to China than to Russia. If Russia had
the ability to challenge the U.S. seriously, it would. But to
designate ramshackle Russia an "enemy" would be to give it too much
credit.
Yarim-Agaev: The Soviet communist system collapsed irreversibly in
1991. Yet, since democratic infrastructure has not been created in its
place, old Soviet political structures and loyalists filled the void
and returned to power. Those people by their nature and skills are
doomed to carry out inimical policy toward the US. As long as old
Soviet political structures control Russian politics, Russia would
remain our enemy. And the longer we support them, the longer they
would hold their control. It is totally in our hands to break this
vicious circle, since we do not need anything from the current Russian
government, neither its world influence, because it does not have it
anyway, nor its votes, because it has them only by our generosity.
Until we break this circle, however, Russia would remain our enemy.
Surely, if the definition of "enemy" is the one which imposes a deadly
threat on us, then the only country, which still may possibly qualify,
is China. However we usually define "enemy" by its hostile attitude
and intentions, rather then by its strength. An enemy can be strong or
weak. Putin's Russia is a weak and hidden enemy, but an enemy
nevertheless. Interestingly, despite the friendly disposition of our
politicians to Russia, this fact is present in their minds, perhaps
even subconsciously. Otherwise one cannot explain the policy of
appeasement toward that country. You do not appease your friends. When
your friend hurts you, you either overlook his action, as a minor
accident, or get really angry and say: "Stop. Do you realize what you
are doing? You are hurting me." And that is exactly how we reacted to
Germany and France's behavior during the Iraq War. Not so with respect
to Russia, whose behavior was much more outrageous. We started to
appease it instead. Appeasement is a bad policy even toward a strong
enemy, but doubly inappropriate for a weak one. Yet, that is how it
stands now: American policy toward Russia is containment and
appeasement; the Russian policy toward America is blackmail and
extortion. Russia usually gets our money and political favors in
response to either its hostile action toward us or a threat of such –
would it be selling arms to our enemies, nuclear or bacteriological
proliferation or vetoing Security Council decision supporting our
policy. I do not want to speculate on some unconfirmed rumors about
Hussein being taken into Russia, but this kind of act would well fit
into that pattern. Putin would not have anything to lose but much to
gain. He would eventually sell back Hussein to us, get money and
reconfirm himself as an important player and a person with whom we can
do business.
With such Russian-American relations there is no contradiction between
getting money from America and being its enemy. So, there is hardly
any need to find explanation in Putin's behavior, as being driven by
his populous hostile to America, and he hardly is. First, the mindset
of Putin and his clique is even more Soviet than of the majority of
Russian people. Second, the part of the Soviet mindset mindset is to
follow directions of the rulers, rather than to tell them what to do.
If Russian people are told tomorrow that America is good, the results
of polls can change overnight. Having said that, it is important to
mention that the false Soviet pride is a serious obstacle to both good
Russian-America relations and to democratization of Russia. There is
no excuse for feeding into it, which, unfortunately, is part of our
appeasement policy toward Russia. Letting Russia remain a permanent
member of the UN Security Council, bringing it into G7, keeping Soviet
space programs alive, all of this plays into hands of that aberration
and delays normalization of our relations. Bukovsky: "Enemy" is too
strong a word for Putin's petty-minded jealousy and Russian
bureaucracy's schizophrenia. Indeed, they lack the strength for a
direct challenge. But this is exactly the reason why they will always
try to sabotage the U.S. behind its back. Why would they bother to
secretly move nuclear material and Saddam out of Iraq? Well, I can
think of two reasons. First, nuclear material was most likely supplied
by them (directly or indirectly), while Saddam knew too much about it
(as well as about many other things) and could not be trusted to keep
his mouth shut. Second, the same reason they felt compelled to beat
the Americans to the airfield in Kosovo: this is their way of saying
"up yours!" Just imagine Putin's pleasure when he has asked Tony Blair
with a sardonic smile: "So, where are the weapons of mass
destruction?" [...]
Heilbrunn: OK, let me beat a slight tactical retreat. No question:
Russia is probably best labelled a competitor, one that will try to
sabotage American foreign policy whenever and wherever possible. To
some extent, it seems like pathetic nostalgia -- I'm told that at the
recent Geneva human rights meeting, Russian representatives spent much
of their time palling around with the most retrograde countries
present. The Bush administration is trying to gild the lily on Russia,
but maybe that's the best that can be accomplished. It's not even
clear that Putin is in full command -- or is this a new version of
Uncle Joe being at the mercy of the real hardliners in the Politburo?
Still, I'm rather skeptical that Russia grabbed nuclear material
supplied to Saddam. The sad fact is that Russia can't even keep tabs
on the tons and tons of lethal stuff within its own borders. When
would they have pulled off a complicated operation in Iraq? I'm scared
stiff that terrorists or countries like Iran will get what they need
from some disgruntled, or simply impoverished, Russian scientist.
What's more, given the reports about unsecured materials in Iraq, it
might be a good thing had the Russians actually been able to maintain
control over what they originally supplied to Iraq. But I doubt it. If
Putin gets to indulge in a little Schadenfreude when he meets Blair,
it won't be because of his own cleverness. True enough, just as the
Syrians got wiped out in the Bekka Vally in Lebanon in 1983 by
American technology, Iraq took it on the nose once again. Getting in
bed with Russia is no recipe for military victory. Maybe we should set
up an exchange program between the Third World and Moscow to encourage
our foes to cozy up to the Russian military?
Is it really a surprise that Soviet apparatchiks climbed back into the
bureaucracy? Did they ever leave in the first place? My recollection
is that the same thing happened when the Bolsheviks seized power. The
question for me, which no one has, perhaps can, answer is: to what
degree are these members of the old nomenklatura died in the wool
U.S.-haters and to what extent are they acting on what they see as
Russia's national interest? My own guess is that their belief in
communism is nil, but they, like the Chinese, see U.S. power as in
itself a threat to Russian aspirations. That doesn't, ultimately, make
them all that different from the French who, by the way, were sedulous
suppliers of nasty goods to Saddam as well. Russia probably gets more
of a pass because expectations aren't as high for it as they are for
our quondam western European buddies.
Bukovsky: Mr. Heilbrunn throws so many arguments, (and so many
mistakes with them), that I don't know where to start. I am
overwhelmed. Perhaps, the old cliché about disgruntled Russian nuclear
scientists selling the secrets to a rogue regime (or a terrorist
organization) is a good beginning. Now, Mr. Heilbrunn, scientists in
Russia are no more disgruntled than any other group. But they have a
better way out of poverty than most. The best and the brightest among
them are already in the US universities (as well as in Canada,
Germany, Japan etc). Besides, nuclear scientists in Russia were never
allowed to have any contacts with foreigners. Finding a reliable
contact with potential buyers is a huge problem for them. Finally,
there is no such thing as nuclear secrets. If you give me enough of
weapon grade plutonium, I will make you a nuclear device in my
bathroom. The buyers, therefore, are not looking for "secrets", they
are looking for material (or for reactors which produce such
material). Neither is in the hands of a scientist, they are government
property being guarded by the government. Indeed, so far we have not
heard of a single case of a scientist selling them. It is the
government, Mr. Heilbrunn, who does. The government and its numerous
institutions like GRU, Army, FSB but never a scientist. [...]
Now, if Russia did remove nuclear material from Iraq, it was not
because the Russian authorities needed it, and certainly not because
they did not want it to be lying around unguarded, but because they
did not want it to be found by your authorities. First, because it is
quite easy to identify where it came from in the first place; second,
because it would give US administration a perfect justification for
their military action in Iraq. Of course, we don't know for sure
whether they did it or not. But they've had plenty of opportunities:
there were numerous visits by Russian generals, politicians and
intelligence officials prior to the outbreak of war. Some were secret,
others were open. Some, as we know, removed the most sensitive
documents from the archives, others might have removed nuclear or
bacteriological material. Logistically, it is not as difficult as one
might think. [...]
I am afraid, Western complacency has no excuse whatsoever. Why is it
deemed necessary to always suck up to Russia, whether it is strong and
dangerous (like in the Soviet time), or weak and irrelevant as it is
now? It must be some sort of a mental disease among the Western
foreign policy establishment. Can anyone explain to me why is Russia
invited to the G7 meetings? G7 is supposed to be consisting of the
most economically developed countries. What is Russia doing there,
with the GDP smaller than the profit of General Electrics? But, no, we
must massage their ego, mustn't we?
Mr. Heilbrunn, I hope you realize that we are talking about
nomenklatura (and KGB in particular) seizing absolute power in the
country. Please agree that it is much more than just a "continuity".
Heilbrunn: [...] On the issue of continuity -- I'd be curious what
word you would apply to it? I can understand why you think the
nomenklatura is regaining power, but do you really believe that
industrial and criminal bosses present no obstacles? Or do you think
they're becoming one and the same? The argument of the optimists about
Russia is that this is just a phase the country is going through with
different groups jockeying for power.
Bukovsky: Mr. Heilbrunn, of course they are becoming one and the same.
According to recently released figures, about 30% of top Russian
bureauocrats at any level are former KGB officers. A few months ago, I
read on one of the Russian sites about a great social event: a
well-known mafia kingpin Mikhas threw a wedding party for his
daughter. A list of the wedding guests reads like who's who in Russia
(including two FSB generals). One can hardly be optimistic about a
country where Prime-Minister (Mikhail Kasyanov) is popularly known as
"Misha-2%" because he takes 2% from every transaction he endorses, and
where the President is known to be involved with organized crime (see
Newsweek, August 2001). Am I supposed to believe this is just growing
pains? It took the US about 60 years to subdue Cosa Nostra which was
just a kindergarten as compared to current Russian situation. [...]
Yarim-Agaev: [...] The Lugar-Nunn program well illustrates major
deficiencies of American policy toward Russia. The idea of this
program is to subsidize the Soviet bio-weapon industry thus keeping
its scientist from working for terrorists and rogue states, while this
industry would turn into something peaceful. No American program
toward Russia can be value neutral, and this one clearly sends a wrong
message. I feel it personally since still in 1970s in the Soviet Union
I publicly refused to take part in any classified research. With such
an open protest I risked more than my scientific carrier, but I felt
it was important to define a moral position on this issue. Many
scientists were sympathetic to my stand. Not daring to challenge the
system openly, they avoided participating in any military research.
Cooperation with military machines became an important dividing issue
in Russia's scientific community. Now America rewards the side which
helped to arm its enemy. It is wrong not only from the moral
standpoint, but strategically as well, because most pro-democratic and
pro- American Russian scientists were just on the other side. Thus,
America empowers its enemies and abandons it friends, which is very
characteristic for its Russia's policy in general.
Even if the practical considerations justifying Lugar-Nunn program
were correct, they would have not outweighed those negative moral and
strategic effects. Yet the main practical result of the program is
also negative -- it keeps alive the most hostile and dangerous Soviet
institutions, which otherwise would have gone bankrupt. And our
politicians do not have control over those institutions. They do not
have even free access to them. How then can they be sure that most of
their money gets to individual scientists, rather than sticks to the
hands of the top bureaucracy? How do they know whether those
institutions stopped developing new bioweapons? And what would happen
if they learn that those weapons are still produced and sold to our
enemies? Would they stop the program? Hardly. Because it is necessary
to subsidize the Soviet bio-weapon industry to keep its scientist from
working for terrorists and rogue states. This is a trap, because our
subsidy is nothing but a ransom to blackmailers. This is a palliative
rather than a solution. [...] So far our programs effectivelyimpede
this process since we empower in Russia the institutions which are
most hostile to market reforms.
Interlocutor: Thank you Yuri. And also, let me ask you: is it ideology
or national interest that moulds Russia's policy today?
Yarim-Agaev: Does ideology or national interest determine Russia's
policy? The answer is --neither. Nobody, including Russian communists,
believes in communism -- and hardly anyone who truly cares about
Russia would get to power at the top. Three other factors actually
determine the behavior of top Russian politicians: personal profit,
adherence to old Soviet institutions and the Soviet mindset. This is
quite an odd and contradictory mix, which also contains a substantial
dose of anti-Americanism. We all agree that the communist ideology is
dead, but its remnants are still entrenched in its old institutions of
the KGB, the military-industrial complex, etc. The head is cut but the
limbs continue to move according to old reflexes. Those old structures
still remain the main milieu for the majority of Russian politicians
and greatly dominate their behavior. Created and shaped by the most
rigid ideology, those communist institutions have little ability to
evolve. My personal encounters with them confirm that they are still
as anti-democratic and anti-American as they were before. Ironically,
we help to prolong their existence. We believe that it is better for
us if a scientist or a spy stays within those structures. This is our
new model of containment: we subsidize the most anti-American
structures to keep people from hurting us. Do I need to quote any
fables to that effect? Should we get surprised when this policy
backfires? [...] Heilbrunn: In terms of these comments made by Mr.
Yarim-Agaev, now we're getting somewhere. [...] And, yes, competitor
is giving Russia too much credit -- spoiler state is right-on.
Interlocutor: Thanks Jacob. I am happy Yuri touched on the theme of
supposed "Russian greatness." I think the Russians' delusions about it
lie at the center of a lot of what we are talking about. [...]
What is this pathological and hilarious hatred of everyone and
everything outside of being Russian when Russia is, aside from the
beauty of the Russian soul and its literature, a complete and utter
political, social and economic basketcase? It's Russia that fertilized
the genocidal Soviet regime, not the West. It's Russia where
Russian-speaking people had to stand in 4-hour lines just to buy bread
throughout the 20th century, not America.
So: why a belief in "Russian greatness" and a hatred of foreigners
[...] Heilbrunn: Jamie, your thunderous blast is correct, but few
countries like to look in the mirror that closely. [...] Russian
communism? Escaped largely unscathed. No Nuremberg-style trials. An
addled communist party that stumbles on. Incompetent leadership until
Putin emerged. All nations need some uniting myth. [...]
Bukovsky: [...] We have got 73 years of communism not because of some
genetic defect in our character, and neither did Chinese, Cubans,
Estonians, Armenians, Ethiopians or Hanty-Manci. But what we observe
today is definitely some deformities caused by those horrible 73
years. What do you expect, if three generations were born and brought
up in the country where they were indoctrinated from cradle to the
grave in believing that their political system and the way of life is
the best in human history? And then, suddenly, it all collapses in
front of them, leaving them destitute and virtually homeless. Of
course, they have inferiority complex at best, or became schizophrenic
at worst. But it is even more complicated, more horrible. Thus, for
the last 30-40 years of the Soviet Union's existence no one, virtually
no one believed in the ruling ideology. The huge multi-national
country was living in a constant falsehood, constant lies, but
overwhelming majority has never admitted it to itself. And this is the
whole point: the West is doing them enormous disservice by massaging
their ego, by playing these games with seriously sick people. [...]
Instead, they constantly create myths. Thus, many believe that the
West wants them to be weak, or even deliberately undermines their
greatness. Why? It is still better than to be irrelevant. [...]
Yarim-Agaev: Yasha, let me try to apply my rationalism to your
impressionism. First, both Russian literature and Russian vodka are
very important contributions to our civilization. Second, I am pretty
sure that most émigrés, whom you met, are Russian Jews. So, their
social behavior is not determined by Russian ethnicity or religion,
but by the political-economic environment in which they were brought
up, which was more Soviet than Russian.
This is important, since the "Russian greatness" which we are talking
about is actually the "Soviet greatness". Look at its manifestations:
Stalin's and KGB anniversaries, celebration of Soviet achievements,
attempts to maintain the Soviet position in the world. Russian leaders
pump up these feelings because it helps them to legitimize their
position: if the Soviet Union was so great, so were those who loyally
served it. Also, many of those people are skillful in propaganda, but
unable do anything constructive. So, they produce a great circus to
make up for the lack of bread. Ironically, America helps now to prop
up the same Soviet greatness, which it fought for fifty years. Our
politicians are seriously mistaken if they think that they have to do
it to show their respect to Russian national pride. This is the Soviet
pride, not the Russian pride. Maybe the support of those reactionary
views pleases old Soviet bureaucrats and the mob, but it really
insults and turns away the thinking part of Russian population.
Actually, such American policy undermines the position of
pro-democratic forces in Russia who must understand that it is in
their county's best interest to humbly withdraw from the international
scene and to take care of its domestic affairs.
Interlocutor: [...] Why don't we end this symposium on a two-fold
question: (a) what do you think is the future of Russia? (b) if the
U.S. were shrewd and wise, what policy would it pursue toward Russia?
Heilbrunn: The future of Russia is bleak unless it can team-up with
the European Union. If the EU takes off as an economic power, a big
if, Russia could benefit. It needs to use Kaliningrad as part of its
opening to the West; at the moment, the place is a toxic dump. But
overall, it's hard to be very optimistic about Russia. David Satter
has a sober piece in the National Interest about what he calls the
low, dishonest decadence of Russia. [...] Nor is Russia all that much
of a threat to the U.S. The cold war is over. Russia has never been
less viable as a state, no matter how many former members of the
nomenklatura pine for the past. [...] Pipes: (a) I think Russia will
come to resemble a typical Latin American country: in form, democratic
and capitalist, in content semi-despotic and semi-capitalist. (b) We
should be friendly but not overly so and not reward Russia more than
she deserves.
Bukovsky: In my view, the Russian crisis is far from over. I expect a
protracted period of further fragmentation with all the consequences
it entails. We still cannot be sure whether it will ultimately survive
or not, but in any case, it will take another 30-50 years. The main
concern for the West is to contain the contamination Russia spreads
while rotting: corruption, organized crime, weapons of mass
destruction, etc. There are also some humanitarian concerns which the
West will be forced to address, like in former Yugoslavia. Otherwise,
Russia is of no interest to the West, and will not be for the best
part of this century.
Yarim-Agaev: I do believe that Russia will eventually become a
democratic country. If democracy can prevail in Iraq, why it cannot in
Russia? [...] To me the main question is not whether Russia will
eventually get to democracy, but how fast and how easy. The answer to
this question also depends on American policy. The best way to
facilitate Russia's democratization is to stop supporting reactionary
forces there and to render our support to true democrats. The sooner
they will come to power the better American-Russian relations will be.
Michael Petukhov
> Dynamite discussion. Enjoy.
>
> Trident
>
> ****************************************************************
>
> Johnson's Russia List, #7234
> 22 June 2003
> davidj...@erols.com
> A CDI Project
> #12
>
> www.Frontpagemagazine.com
>
> June 20, 2003
> Symposium: The Future of U.S.-Russian Relations
> By Jamie Glazov
>
> Interlocutor: Welcome gentlemen to Frontpage Symposium. It has become
> pretty clear that Putin's Russia is no friend of the United States.
> Russia's despicable behaviour vis-à-vis Saddam before and during the
> Iraqi war demonstrated that fact.
Hm... Sounds like it was just discovered by genius Mr. Jamie Glazov.
>
> There are those who would argue that the Soviet system still holds
> power in Russia. In other words, despite 1991, the communists still
> control Russia and they hold no good intentions toward America or the
> West. And this is confirmed, arguably, by Russian mischief in Iraq.
> And God knows what the Russians are up to in North Korea.
Yet another brilliant idea by genius Mr. Jamie Glazov. how many to come?
>
> So let's begin with this question: is America's alliance with Russia a
> serious blunder for American foreign policy? Is it time for the U.S.
> to see Russia as an enemy?
Why enemy so quickly? It seems it is novelty for genius Mr. Jamie Glazov
that there are millions of halftones between a full ally and a full enemy.
Sorry I'll stop here. I am too tired of the stupidity of genius
Mr. Jamie Glazov and his colleagues participating in this so
to speak "Symposium".
BTW who pay for this bullshit business to all those bullshiters -
"experts", "political analists", "professors of politology" etc?
US goverment does I guess. In other places it is called corruption...
Michael
> response to either its hostile action toward us or a threat of such ?
captain!
"Trident" <wyn...@idirect.com> wrote in message
news:8b72a662.03090...@posting.google.com...
> response to either its hostile action toward us or a threat of such -
Michael Petukhov
> there is a great deal of arrogance in these men.
>
Moreover this arrogance is based on great deal of personal
stupidity which is so typical for "scientists" in political
"scieneces" regardless of personalities and politcal directions.
Their main "scientific" method and of course conclusions are
always based on their subjective political believes which never
contradict to political believes of those who pay for their
"research". One God knows why it is still called a "science".
Michael
Trident
I cannot speak for the rest of the members of the discussion group,
but I can tell you that what Richard Pipes says carries with it a high
degree of confidence. The man knows his stuff. His credentials are
impeccable. I also cannot imagine he keeps company with idiots.
What they say may come off as arrogant, after all they are passing
judgement on a whole society, I remind you that Russian/soviet
societies is their area of expertise. That is what they are payed to
do: expose the ugly truth, warts and all.
I also think they are guided by honorable intentions, namely to see
Russian society evolve into something positive and non-threatening to
the rest of the world. If you think everything is rosey and swell
with Moscovy then I suggest it is you give your head a shake.
Trident
Trident
Gentlemen, gentlemen,
I cannot speak for the rest of the members of the discussion group,
but I can tell you that what Richard Pipes says carries with it a high
degree of confidence. The man knows his stuff. His credentials are
impeccable. I also cannot imagine he keeps company with idiots.
What they say may come off as arrogant, after all they are passing
judgement on a whole society, I remind you that Russian/soviet
societies is their area of expertise. That is what they are payed to
do: expose the ugly truth, warts and all.
I also think they are guided by honorable intentions, namely to see
Russian society evolve into something positive and non-threatening to
the rest of the world. If you think everything is rosey and swell
with Moscovy then I suggest you give your head a shake.
Trident
The Black Monk
> > "captain!" <killspam...@deadspammers.net> wrote in message news:<K485b.883049$ro6.17...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca>...
> > > there is a great deal of arrogance in these men.
> > >
> >
> > Moreover this arrogance is based on great deal of personal
> > stupidity which is so typical for "scientists" in political
> > "scieneces" regardless of personalities and politcal directions.
> > Their main "scientific" method and of course conclusions are
> > always based on their subjective political believes which never
> > contradict to political believes of those who pay for their
> > "research". One God knows why it is still called a "science".
> >
> > Michael
>
> Gentlemen, gentlemen,
>
> I cannot speak for the rest of the members of the discussion group,
> but I can tell you that what Richard Pipes says carries with it a high
> degree of confidence. The man knows his stuff. His credentials are
> impeccable.
True. It must also be remembered that the guy is Polish born and thus
does operate with an anti-Russian bias (not that many of these Russian
posters aren't equally or more biased). His prediction that Russia
would go the way of Latin America is a well reasoned guess (with its
highly educated people it could never become a Mexico or Peru but in a
worst case scenario could turn out like Argentina - am I the only one
who sees the similarities between Russian and Argentine literature
btw?). However it is rather doubtful.
> I also cannot imagine he keeps company with idiots.
Some of those people were quite intelligent but that Jamie Glazov guy
was indeed rather stupid.
> What they say may come off as arrogant, after all they are passing
> judgement on a whole society, I remind you that Russian/soviet
> societies is their area of expertise. That is what they are payed to
> do: expose the ugly truth, warts and all.
> I also think they are guided by honorable intentions, namely to see
> Russian society evolve into something positive and non-threatening to
> the rest of the world. If you think everything is rosey and swell
> with Moscovy then I suggest you give your head a shake.
Russia certainly has big problems but in many respects it is more
healthy than the West, especially western Europe. A higher, and
growing (3 years in a row)birthrate, rapid economic growth (6% or so
this year, over 5% over the last four years), abundant natural
resources, and an educated population, much of it ready and hopefully
seeking a positive idealism. I overheard some auto company bigshots
sitting next to my table at the Taras Bulba restaurant in Moscow (US
autocompanies own/will soon own a plant?) say that if Russia gets its
act together the US doesn't stand a chance. The Russians, they said,
are smarter and stronger than westerners. They are just dazed and
confused (for now?).
I doubt that Russia will be democratic in a Western sense, though,
because with the exception of some of the intelligensia and people who
think like them - maybe 10-15% of the population - the people don't
want democracy. They do not want totalitarianism either, there is
little chance of another Stalin coming to power. But a "Father Tsar"
- a strong paternalistic state able to get a handle on corruption and
threats to power at home and project power abroad - is something a lot
of Russians do pine for. Something like the Asian (rather than Latin
American) semi-democracies with large industrial clans ultimately
controlled and managed by the powerful central government whose
purpose is to increase national strength.
When, or if, this system crystallizes Russian strength will return.
And Ukraine had better get its act together before this happens.
best regards,
BM
captain!
"The Black Monk" <cherni...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c21219d5.03090...@posting.google.com...
i'll say. too much variety in it's resource base.
russia, like canada, only needs to be patient. one day the rest of the world
will come to it. (hopefully without guns)
>
> > I also cannot imagine he keeps company with idiots.
>
> Some of those people were quite intelligent but that Jamie Glazov guy
> was indeed rather stupid.
>
> > What they say may come off as arrogant, after all they are passing
> > judgement on a whole society, I remind you that Russian/soviet
> > societies is their area of expertise. That is what they are payed to
> > do: expose the ugly truth, warts and all.
>
> > I also think they are guided by honorable intentions, namely to see
> > Russian society evolve into something positive and non-threatening to
> > the rest of the world. If you think everything is rosey and swell
> > with Moscovy then I suggest you give your head a shake.
>
> Russia certainly has big problems but in many respects it is more
> healthy than the West, especially western Europe. A higher, and
> growing (3 years in a row)birthrate, rapid economic growth (6% or so
> this year, over 5% over the last four years), abundant natural
> resources, and an educated population, much of it ready and hopefully
> seeking a positive idealism. I overheard some auto company bigshots
> sitting next to my table at the Taras Bulba restaurant in Moscow (US
> autocompanies own/will soon own a plant?) say that if Russia gets its
> act together the US doesn't stand a chance. The Russians, they said,
> are smarter and stronger than westerners. They are just dazed and
> confused (for now?).
they are no smarter than anyone else. they are tough though. no denying
that.
>
> I doubt that Russia will be democratic in a Western sense, though,
> because with the exception of some of the intelligensia and people who
> think like them - maybe 10-15% of the population - the people don't
> want democracy. They do not want totalitarianism either, there is
> little chance of another Stalin coming to power. But a "Father Tsar"
> - a strong paternalistic state able to get a handle on corruption and
> threats to power at home and project power abroad - is something a lot
> of Russians do pine for. Something like the Asian (rather than Latin
> American) semi-democracies with large industrial clans ultimately
> controlled and managed by the powerful central government whose
> purpose is to increase national strength.
to sum that paragraph up, russia needs to find a russian made solution to
their problems.
i wish them luck. it won't be easy.
Aida Lott
"The Black Monk" <cherni...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c21219d5.03090...@posting.google.com...
US companies already partially own many auto plants in Russia.
Heresay third party conversations between a couple of drunks is hardly
overwhelming testimonial.
Russia has natural resources and cheap labor...but not as cheap as China,
India, etc. The US is currently shipping boatloads of programming jobs to
India, not Russia. Probably the worst degree one could aspire to right now
is computer sciences. The Russian HR-1 visa business has pretty much dried
up since 9/11 i.e. no more "brilliant" VB programmers getting into the US
anymore.
fatso
So how can you explain a certain Roman Abramovitch, a guy aged 38 only,
who is a billlionaire by anyone's reckoning, just having reaked havoc in
the
english football? (Bought a famous club for 160 mln pounds sterling, screwed
up
footballers payment structure having bought up all good and sundry). The
point
I try to make is that I do not envy the wealth arrived at
with honest toil and effort. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are OK to me. But
this
Abramovitch is just a tip of an iceberg.
Plutocrats who stole all what was worth stealing in Russia. The new
revolution is
coming, mate. The new redistribution of wealth, the new terrror nad rough
and
reeady justice to be meted out by ordinary russkies to those who stole from
them.
And this Roman Abramovitch, a clever guy, knows it and started to transfer
his
wealth abroad. Soon to be followed by yelping and hurt British Petroleum and
american auto-makers of your casual aquientance.
fatso
"Aida Lott" <ir...@crabbypeople.com> wrote in message
news:iYw5b.171183$yg.44...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
Aida Lott
"fatso" <fatso...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:5KA5b.21$5X3....@newsfep2-gui.server.ntli.net...
US automakers are well aware that they could be "taken" in Russia. So they
are only testing the waters, not jumping in with both feet.
As you know, in Russia, anybody with enough security guards (thugs) can take
over whatever business they want. They are not real big on law and order but
prefer the law of the jungle.
The Black Monk
> Babai, you live in a different part of the world.
> So how can you explain a certain Roman Abramovitch, a guy aged 38 only,
> who is a billlionaire by anyone's reckoning, just having reaked havoc in
> the
> english football? (Bought a famous club for 160 mln pounds sterling, screwed
> up
> footballers payment structure having bought up all good and sundry). The
> point
> I try to make is that I do not envy the wealth arrived at
> with honest toil and effort. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are OK to me. But
> this
> Abramovitch is just a tip of an iceberg.
> Plutocrats who stole all what was worth stealing in Russia. The new
> revolution is
> coming, mate. The new redistribution of wealth, the new terrror nad rough
> and
> reeady justice to be meted out by ordinary russkies to those who stole from
> them.
> And this Roman Abramovitch, a clever guy, knows it and started to transfer
> his
> wealth abroad. Soon to be followed by yelping and hurt British Petroleum and
> american auto-makers of your casual aquientance.
You are quite astute in noting this. The few Americans, for instance,
who even know about such events write about the lack of "respect for
private property" when these thieves find their property expropriated
(almost all Jewish - from Berezovsky to Khodorovsky to Lebedev to
Abramovich; the only non-Jewish powerful business group in Russia is
the Alfa group, run by former KGB people, therefore non-Jewish; how
the KGB/FSB was purged of Jews during Khrushchev's time is an
interesting story told me by a officer from that organization once).
However the "revolution" in Russia is not from below but from above.
When Putin came to power he met with these thieves he told them,
essentially, that both he and they knew that their wealth was stolen,
that it essentially belongs to the Russian people. One of many
examples of this theft concerns the loathsome Khodorovsky character
from Yukos, the latest "victim" of Putin's "antidemocracy". One of
the super-profitable assets this guy owns is a mine in some northern
hellhole of a town. By law the sahres in the mine were distributed to
the workers during privatization. However they were told by the
directors, working with Khodorovsky, that although the shares were
theirs by law, if they wanted to work there they would have to turn
them over to Khodorovsky's interests, or rather his goons.
At any rate Putin explained to the assorted thieves that for the good
of Russia he did not want to simply hang them from the lampposts.
This might damage the investment climate, you see. The thieves could
keep it as long as they behaved as responsible trustees. However, one
by one, whenever each of these thieves decided to overplay their hand
- to use money stolen from the Russian state/the Russian people
against the interests of the Russian people, they found where the true
power was. The latest thief who has been punished is Khodorovsky. He
tried to use his ill gotten money to oppose Putin's tax reforms.
While America this sort of bribery, er lobbying is standard practice
in Russia it is increasingly no longer the case. Unlike in the USA
where big business interests (think Haliburton) increasingly controls
government policy at the expense of the national interests, in Russia
the situation is reversing itself.
So yes, Abramovich and those like him know in which direction the wind
is blowing and getting the hell out.
regards,
BM
btw, I am removed by two degrees of seperation from this guy
Abramovich. A friend of mine is a friend of a nice Jewish girl who
was supposed to marry him. Both parents were pushing for it (what
Jewish parent would not want a Jewish match for their child?) but they
did love each other. Actually he might be a good son after all, his
wife is Jewish I think.
captain!
"The Black Monk" <cherni...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c21219d5.03090...@posting.google.com...
are you jewish? you seem to be quite fond of them.
fatso
> are you jewish? you seem to be quite fond of them.
>
>
Fond of them?!
I got an impression that our Babai tries to prove above the
truthfulness of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion- and he might
well have succeeded.
fatso
captain!
are you jewish as well fatso? surely only a real, orthadox jew would have
any idea what the "protocols of the elders of zion" is. perhaps the two of
you should get together and celebrate hannukah this year.
>
fatso
the money, the influence. Have suitable gravitas even,
so different from your sly, mongoloid russian features.
Regard me as a Jew if it pleases you, mate.
fatso
"captain!" <killspam...@deadspammers.net> wrote in message
news:SaW5b.899465$ro6.18...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
captain!
"fatso" <fa...@tesco.net> wrote in message
news:a9Y5b.112$u_3....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
> I wish I was, mate. Would be proud to be jewish, have
> the money, the influence. Have suitable gravitas even,
> so different from your sly, mongoloid russian features.
> Regard me as a Jew if it pleases you, mate.
if you insist.
Aida Lott
>
> "fatso" <fa...@tesco.net> wrote in message
> news:a9Y5b.112$u_3....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
> > I wish I was, mate. Would be proud to be jewish, have
> > the money, the influence. Have suitable gravitas even,
> > so different from your sly, mongoloid russian features.
> > Regard me as a Jew if it pleases you, mate.
>
>
> if you insist.
>
He's extending his influence by posting in SCR. Perhaps there is a throng of
SCR groupies congregating outside his house?
All night vigil? Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya.
fatso
Not THAT jewish as to know what "kumbaya" does mean,
perhaps you might be so kind and enlighten me?
However, am willing-always- to be friendly with jews.
E.G. take that moment when the jewish salesman in Brooklyn
called me "shmuck". Sorry, Sir, I have answered in my crisp english
accent, have never met your Mamasha, mate. You should have seen
his face! Just look now in the mirror yourself. Kind regards to Russian
Jewess, Aida, from a polish "honorary Jew"
fatso
"Aida Lott" <ir...@crabbypeople.com> wrote in message
news:F2a6b.40727$Ay2.8...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
captain!
> Aida, my dear
> Not THAT jewish as to know what "kumbaya" does mean,
> perhaps you might be so kind and enlighten me?
> However, am willing-always- to be friendly with jews.
> E.G. take that moment when the jewish salesman in Brooklyn
> called me "shmuck". Sorry, Sir, I have answered in my crisp english
> accent, have never met your Mamasha, mate. You should have seen
> his face! Just look now in the mirror yourself. Kind regards to Russian
> Jewess, Aida, from a polish "honorary Jew"
is this what happens when you try to make a joke fatso?
ummm....heh............heh....
Boris Goodenough
>
> "fatso" <fatso...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:gre6b.1$mi...@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
> > Aida, my dear
> > Not THAT jewish as to know what "kumbaya" does mean,
> > perhaps you might be so kind and enlighten me?
> > However, am willing-always- to be friendly with jews.
> > E.G. take that moment when the jewish salesman in Brooklyn
> > called me "shmuck". Sorry, Sir, I have answered in my crisp english
> > accent, have never met your Mamasha, mate. You should have seen
> > his face! Just look now in the mirror yourself. Kind regards to Russian
> > Jewess, Aida, from a polish "honorary Jew"
>
> is this what happens when you try to make a joke fatso?
> ummm....heh............heh....
>
Let him alone. Maybe he'll tell us again what a great guy he is. I wouldn't
want it to be on my conscience that the poor chump went out and killed
himself 'cuz he realized everybody was laughing at him.
fatso
to me the meaning of "kumbalaya" word. Now go and run to the lap of your
jewish grandma, whose omnipotent presence allowed you to escape Russia to
the West!
fatso
"Boris Goodenough" <ir...@crabbypeople.com> wrote in message
news:LXi6b.44977$Ay2.9...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
fatso
Just been to the local superstore in London. The story
in the popular daily about that jewish magnate, Roman
Abramovitch, highlighted in the fat screaming letters.
Apparently his mum dropped dead following a criminal
abortion in the back alley street. Could not afford to have
another cub added to her litter. Poor Jewess in a heartless
Russia, the article does seem to imply. No, I did not buy
the paper, its standard is well beneath my aristocratic pretences.
However, I do wish a robber baron, one Roman Abramovitch well.
The more he sucks out of that hapless land of Dostoyevski's Idiots,
the more he does disgorge at the feet of Chelsea Football Club,
the better for us here. And fuck them russkies, the morons, the subhumans,
the mongoloids long overdue for another crack of mongol/chinese whip!
fatso
"Boris Goodenough" <ir...@crabbypeople.com> wrote in message
news:LXi6b.44977$Ay2.9...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
captain!
> Still, you fucking russkie morons, you did not explain
> to me the meaning of "kumbalaya" word. Now go and run to the lap of your
> jewish grandma, whose omnipotent presence allowed you to escape Russia
to
> the West!
>
> fatso
>
lol
captain!
> babai,, stop the press!
>
> Just been to the local superstore in London. The story
> in the popular daily about that jewish magnate, Roman
> Abramovitch, highlighted in the fat screaming letters.
> Apparently his mum dropped dead following a criminal
> abortion in the back alley street. Could not afford to have
> another cub added to her litter. Poor Jewess in a heartless
> Russia, the article does seem to imply. No, I did not buy
> the paper, its standard is well beneath my aristocratic pretences.
> However, I do wish a robber baron, one Roman Abramovitch well.
> The more he sucks out of that hapless land of Dostoyevski's Idiots,
> the more he does disgorge at the feet of Chelsea Football Club,
> the better for us here. And fuck them russkies, the morons, the subhumans,
> the mongoloids long overdue for another crack of mongol/chinese whip!
>
> fatso
>
lol, fatso reads the tabloids. did you also read the latest about the alien
mutant baby while you were there your highness?
fatso, do you notice how the russians in the group just ignore your bait?
that is rare. believe me. they must not even think that you are important
enough to repond to. so much for being a prince or whatever it is you think
you are....
Boris Goodenough
"captain!" <killspam...@deadspammers.net> wrote in message
news:vcu6b.910472$ro6.18...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
fatso
Listen to the voices of Three Poets instead you Slav beasts of burden, you
morons:
fatso
--
Nie pozwol aby cham gownem prychal miast je sam polykac!
Hr.Mendewesz
---------------------------------------------------------
We are all in the gutter but some of us can see the stars
Oscar Wilde
----------------------------------------------------------
Kogda Krasavitsa na Khui brosaiet'sia
bud' ostorozhien-
trypier vozmozhien!
kamerjunker A. S. Pushkin
The Black Monk
> babai,, stop the press!
>
> Just been to the local superstore in London. The story
> in the popular daily about that jewish magnate, Roman
> Abramovitch, highlighted in the fat screaming letters.
> Apparently his mum dropped dead following a criminal
> abortion in the back alley street. Could not afford to have
> another cub added to her litter.
Kind of hard to believe, given that abortions were free and easy to
get in Russia. The average woman over there has had 3 or so in their
life; I once knew a girl whose mother had over 20!
> Poor Jewess in a heartless
> Russia, the article does seem to imply. No, I did not buy
> the paper, its standard is well beneath my aristocratic pretences.
> However, I do wish a robber baron, one Roman Abramovitch well.
> The more he sucks out of that hapless land of Dostoyevski's Idiots,
> the more he does disgorge at the feet of Chelsea Football Club,
> the better for us here. And fuck them russkies, the morons, the subhumans,
> the mongoloids long overdue for another crack of mongol/chinese whip!
Actually just as Western nukes allowed the tired West to continue to
exist (and to thwart the otherwise inevitable absorbtion of all Europe
into Russia) so Russian nukes will prevent any territorial ambitions.
Now, in the Far East, local Russians (cossacks who have lived there
for centuries) do hunt down and kill Chinese poachers/migrants in the
forests. The Chinese government, refering to its people there as
"criminals", does not protest such actions.
As for Russia...I would never wish Russian greatness at the expense of
Ukraine. Too much blood has been spilled in my family for such an
attitude (remember btw the quote from Dostoyevsky?). Once Kuchma is
out I can only hope for closer integration with Ukraine's western
neighbor. But the greatest threat to the world today - politically,
aesthetically - is indeed the crass bloated empire-building
materialism of the USA. If Europe has a future, it is among the Slavs
(principally, Ukrainians and Poles). But if these are lost one can
then at least hope for Russia to save humanity. I do not want to
sacrifice the future out of mere spite.
This btw was written by the German, Spengler, in a time before the
barbarian Stalin destroyed bolshevism but derailed Russia in the
process for a time (perhaps forever?)
"The Russians are by no means a people like the Germans and the
English. Like the Germanic tribes of the Carolingian age they contain
within themselves the potentialities of many future peoples.
"Russianism" is the promise of a future culture as the evening shadows
grows longer and longer over the Western world. The distinctions
between Russian and Western spirit cannot be drawn too sharply. As
deep a cleavage as there is between the spirit, religion, politics,
and economics of England, Germany, America, and France, when compared
with Russia these nations suddenly appear as a unified world. It is
easy to be deceived by some inhabitants of Russia who reflect strong
Western influence. The true Russian is just as inwardly alien to us as
a Roman in the Age of Kings or a Chinese long before Confucius would
be if they were suddenly to appear among us. The Russians have been
aware of this every time they have drawn a line of demarcation between
"Mother Russia" and "Europe."
For us, the primitive soul of Russia is an inscrutable something that
lies behind dirt, music, vodka, meekness, and a strange melancholy. We
naturally form our judgments subjectively, i.e., as the late, urban,
and intellectually mature members of a wholly different culture. What
we "see" in Russia is therefore not a soul just now awakening, which
even Dostoyevsky was helpless to describe, but our own mental picture
of it, which is formed by our superficial image of Russian life and
Russian history and is further falsified by the use of such very
"European" words as will, reason, and Gemut. Yet perhaps some of us
are able to convey a virtually indescribable impression of that
country that will leave no doubt as to the immense gap that separates
us.
This childlike, inarticulate, fearsome people has been confused,
wounded, tortured, and poisoned by having forced upon it the patterns
of a foreign, imperious, masculine, and mature "European" culture. Its
flesh has been pierced by European-style urban centers with European
ambitions, and its undeveloped consciousness infected by overripe
attitudes, philosophies, political ideas, and scientific principles.
In 1700, Peter the Great forced upon his people the Baroque style of
politics, complete with cabinet diplomacy, dynastic influence,
administration, and a Western-style navy. In 1800, English ideas,
basically incomprehensible to these people, made their entrance in the
guise of French writers who succeeded in confusing the minds of a
small intellectual minority. Even before 1900 the bookish Russian
intelligentsia introduced Marxism to their country, a complex product
of Western European dialectics of whose origin they were completely
ignorant. Peter the Great transformed the tsarist state into a major
power within the Western system, thus perverting its natural
development. And the "intelligentsia," themselves the product of the
Russian spirit after it was corrupted by foreign-style cities, then
entered the scene with their somber longing for indigenous
institutions that must arise in some far-distant future, thereby
distorting the primitive thought of their country into a kind of
barren, childish theorizing after the manner of professional French
revolutionaries. Owing to the Russians' boundless humility and
willingness to sacrifice, Petrinism and bolshevism have accomplished
some very real things in senseless and disastrous imitation of such
Western creations as the Court of Versailles and the Paris Commune.
But these institutions have affected only the surface of Russian
existence; each of them can disappear and reappear with unpredictable
swiftness.
As yet Russia has had only religious experiences, no social or
political ones. Dostoyevsky, in reality a saint who has been made to
appear in the nonsensical and ridiculous Western guise of a romancier,
is misunderstood if his social "problems" are considered apart from
his novelistic form. His true essence is sooner to be found between
than in the lines, and in The Brothers Karamazov he reaches a
religious intensity comparable only to that of Dante. His
revolutionary politics, on the other hand, originated within an
insignificantly small metropolitan coterie which no longer possessed
definite Russian sensibilities and, as far as family extraction is
concerned, can indeed hardly be called Russian at all. As a
consequence Dostoyevsky's political thought was caught between the
extremes of forced dogmatism and instinctive rejection.
Hence Russia's deep, formidable, atavistic hatred of the West, of the
poison in its own body. It can be felt in the inner suffering of
Dostoyevsky, in the violent outbursts of Tolstoy, and in the silent
brooding of the common man. It is an irrepressible hatred, often
unconscious and often concealed beneath a sincere inclination to love
and understand, a basic hatred of all symbols of the Faustian will:
the cities (Petersburg in particular) which intruded as vanguards of
this will on the rural calm of the endless steppes; the arts and
sciences, Western thought and emotion, the state, jurisprudence,
administrative structure, money, industry, education, "society"擁n
fact, everything. It is the primeval apocalyptic hatred that
distinguishes the culture of antiquity. All bolshevism contains
something of the dismal bitterness of the Maccabees, as well as of the
much later insurrection that led to the destruction of Jerusalem. Its
rigid dogmatism alone could never have supplied the impetus that
sustains the movement even to the present day. The subliminal
anti-Western instincts of Russia, at first directed against Petrinism,
have lent strength to bolshevism. But since bolshevism is itself an
outgrowth of Petrinism it will in time be destroyed in order to
complete Russia's liberation from "Europe."
The proletarian of the West wishes to reshape Western civilization to
meet his special desires; the Russian intelligentsia wishes, by
instinct if not always consciously, to destroy it. That is the meaning
of Eastern nihilism. Our Western civilization has long since become
purely urban; in Russia there is no such thing as "the masses," but
only "the people." Every true Russian, whether his occupation is that
of scholar or civil official, is basically a peasant. He is not really
interested in the second-hand cities with their second-hand masses and
mass ideologies. Despite Marxism, the only economic problems in that
country are rural problems. The Russian "worker" is a
misunderstanding. The only reality is the untouched, unharmed land,
just as in Carolingian Europe. We went through this phase a thousand
years ago, and thus we do not understand each other. We Western
Europeans are no longer capable of living in communion with the virgin
land. Whenever we go "to the country" we take with us the city with
all its spiritual aspects; and we take it there in our blood, not just
in our head like the Russian intelligent. The Russian mentally
transports his village with him to the Russian cities.
If we wish to understand this irreparable cleavage between Eastern and
Western "socialism" we must at all times distinguish the Russian soul
from the Russian political system, and the mentality of the leaders
from the instincts of those they lead. For what else is Pan-Slavism
but a Western-type political mask covering a strong sense of religious
mission? Despite all the industrial catchwords like "surplus value"
and "expropriation," the Russian worker is not an urban worker, not a
man of the masses as in Manchester, Essen, and Pittsburgh. He is
actually a ploughman and reaper who has left home, with a hatred for
the foreign power that has spoiled the true calling that his soul
still clings to. The ideological elements that make bolshevism work
are quite insignificant. Even if its program were turned on its head,
its unconscious mission for awakening Russia would remain the same:
nihilism.
Even so, bolshevism has an immense appeal for the fomenting
intellectuals of our cities. It has become a hobby for tired and
addled brains, a weapon for decaying megalopolitan souls, an
expression for rotting blood. The Spartacism of the salons belongs in
the same category as theosophy and occultism; it is for us the same
thing as the cult of Isis was, not for the Oriental slaves in Rome but
for the decadent Romans themselves. The fact that it made its entrance
in Berlin has to do with the monstrous sham of this Revolution. It is
relatively unimportant that empty-headed fools started founding
"peasant councils" in Berlin in imitation of the Soviet model, or that
no one noticed that rural affairs are the cardinal problem in Russia
while our headaches are strictly urban. In the face of socialism,
Spartacism has no future in Germany. But bolshevism is certain to
conquer Paris, for when mingled with anarchic syndicalism it can
satisfy the tired, sensation-hungry French soul. It will be the proper
form of expression for the taedium vitae of that giant city that is so
satiated with life. As a dangerous poison for refined Western
intellects it has a greater future than in the East.
In Russia it will be replaced by some new form of tsarism, the only
possible system for a people living under such conditions. Most
probably this tsarism will resemble the Prussian socialistic system
more closely than capitalist parliamentarism. Yet the future of the
unconscious forces of Russia lies not in the solution of political and
social quandaries but in the imminent birth of a new religion, the
third to emerge from the matrix of Christianity, just as
Germanic-Western culture unconsciously conceived the second form of
Christianity around 100 A.D. Dostoyevsky is one of the prophets of
this new faith; it is as yet nameless, but it has already begun to
enter with quiet, infinitely tender power.
For us citizens of the Western world, religion is finished. In our
urban souls what was once true religiosity has long since been
intellectualized to "problematics." The Church reached its fulfillment
at the Council of Trent. Puritanism has turned into capitalism, and
Pietism is now socialism. The Anglo-American sects represent merely
the nervous businessman's need for theological pastimes. There is no
more repulsive spectacle than the attempted of certain Protestant
groups to revivify the cadaver of religion by smearing it with
bolshevist offal. The same thing has been tried with occultism and
theosophy. And nothing is more deceptive than the hope that the future
religion of Russian can stimulate a revival of religion in the West.
There should no longer be any misunderstanding: with its hatred of
state, science, and art, Russian nihilism is also directed against
Rome and Wittenberg, whose spirit is present in all forms of Western
culture and thus an integral part of what this nihilism aims to
destroy. Russia will push this development aside and link up once
again, by way of Byzantium, directly with Jerusalem.
Bolshevism is a bloody caricature of Western problems that originated
in Western religious sensibilities....
------------------------------
regards,
BM
fatso
However, there is midnight here, tomorrow
a new day and must wake up to daily grind
of gambling on London Stock Exchane, one
of my pastimes I like the best. So the reality
must prevail, alas!
I just turned around in my computer room.
I sit on a splendid armchair with the footstool,
made in China, bought via TV auction for some
£82+ £11 delivery charge to my door.
Next to me is a document shredder, £20-,
purchased for me in a local shop by my secretary.
Wrist watch appropriate for a million-dollar-man,
£5+£8 delivery, sic! I prefer this beauty now to
another one by Seiko with 13 world patents, costing
me £350. Furthermore, somewhere close-by lies a
CD walkman,just under £50, special on-line offer,
bought by me for no reason at all, just to pack it with me
for a trip to Poland and give away. Then, in another room,
stand TWO globes, large and gilted, made with some 40
semi-precious stones each and worth, allegedly, two grand
each, bought in TV auction for the fraction of the price.
Just look at them, those beauties:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/k.robak/Gruby&Globusy.JPG
And here is my point: ALL those object, recently purchased,
were made in China. So get your grip on reality, babai.
The russkies are out. The Chinks are coming!!!!!
regards as always
fatso
captain!
"The Black Monk" <cherni...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c21219d5.03090...@posting.google.com...
well written and interesting to read, but mostly crap.
>
> regards,
>
> BM
captain!
> Babai, your sermon was lovely
>
> However, there is midnight here, tomorrow
> a new day and must wake up to daily grind
> of gambling on London Stock Exchane, one
> of my pastimes I like the best. So the reality
> must prevail, alas!
i didn't know that they allowed their janitors to gamble.
>
<snipped>
fatso
"captain!" <killspam> <snipped>
go back to your kitchen sink, you moron!
And mind that toilet, it's filthy again. Russkies drunk
too much and shat & puked all over it. Go and clean it now
before Shmuel the Boss comes and boxes your ears. Scram!
fatso
The Black Monk
> Babai, your sermon was lovely
Thank you...
I would say that China has America by the throat more securely than it
does Russia:
Consider the depths of our new dependency. Imports, 4 percent of GDP
for the first 70 years of the 20th century, are near 15 percent now,
and 30 percent of the manufactures we consume. Pat Choate, author of
Agents of Influence, gives the following levels of U.S. dependency on
foreign suppliers for critical goods:
Medicines and pharmaceuticals: 72 percent
Metalworking machinery: 51 percent
Engines and power equipment: 56 percent
Computer equipment: 70 percent
Communications equipment: 67 percent
Semiconductors and electronics: 64 percent
[I don't know what percentage of the above is Chinese, though over 60%
of US microchips are made in China - BM]
In July, the U.S. Business and Industrial Council reported that the
Pentagon officials responsible for procuring U.S. weapons had joined
with defense industries to oppose legislation requiring 65 percent
U.S. content. U.S. missile defense and the Joint Strike Fighter would
be imperiled if 65 percent of the components had to be made in the
USA.
While Americans are sacrificing the future for the present, China is
sacrificing the present for the future.
Beijing's boom began after it devalued its currency in 1994. While a
blow to Chinese consumers, devaluation gave Beijing a competitive edge
over the other "Asian tigers." Beijing then invited Western companies
to locate new factories there to tap its pool of low-wage labor. As
the price of access, Beijing demanded that Western companies transfer
technology to Chinese partners. What the companies do not transfer,
the Chinese extort or steal.
By offering excellent workers at $2 a day, guaranteeing no union
trouble, allowing levels of pollution we would not tolerate, and
ignoring health and safety standards, China has become the factory
floor of the Global Economy and surpassed the United States as the
world's first choice for foreign investment.
What analyst Charles McMillion calls "the world's most unequal trading
relationship," can be seen in the trade statistics. In 2002, the U.S.
trade deficit with China was $103 billion. In May, it was running at
$120 billion, the largest deficit between two trading nations in
history.
It is thus a myth to say President Bush is presiding over a "jobless
recovery." The Bush tax cuts and Bush deficits are creating millions
of manufacturing jobs —in China. America buys 14 percent of China's
production and delivers Beijing a trade surplus of 12 percent of its
entire GDP. American purchases probably account today for 100 percent
of China's economic growth.
The U.S.-China relationship cannot truly be described as trade. It is
rather the looting of America by China and its corporate collaborators
in the United States. Beijing understands what economic nationalist
Friedrich List wrote long ago: "The power of producing wealth is
infinitely more important than the wealth itself."
China has now amassed $360 billion in reserves from her trade
surpluses since 1990. Much of that is invested in U.S. bonds and
T-bills, earning Beijing billions in interest from the U.S. Treasury.
America may be the most advanced nation on earth, and China a
developing country, but you could not tell that from studying the
trade statistics.
In 2002, China ran up its largest trade surpluses with us in
electrical machinery, computers, toys, games, footwear, furniture,
clothing, plastics, articles of iron and steel, vehicles, optical and
photographic equipment, and other manufactures. Among the 23 items
where we had a surplus with China were soybeans, corn, wheat, animal
feeds, meat, cotton, metal ores, scrap, hides and skins, pulp and
waste paper, cigarettes, gold, coal, mineral fuels, rice, tobacco,
fertilizers, glass. Beijing uses us as George III used his Jamestown
colony.
One who has studied how China deals with craven capitalists who come
courting is columnist Terry Jeffrey. On inspecting the Web site of
Motorola, Jeffrey found this description of how it sees its future:
Motorola is moving toward … taking China as its home and development
base. Motorola Chinese Electronics … has increased its investment
several times in China without taking away a single dollar. The
company reinvested all the profits in China. … Since the very
beginning Motorola has brought forward the idea of trying to be a good
citizen of China, taking China as its home and thriving with the
Chinese people. … The development goal is to become a true Chinese
company.
The hilarity of Motorola's kowtow to the mandarins of the Middle
Kingdom aside, this passage reveals a hidden cost of globalization.
When U.S. companies go global, they shed their loyalty to America.
Consider Boeing, last surviving U.S. manufacturer of commercial
aircraft. Apparently, Boeing has gone beyond building plants in China
to make horizontal stabilizers and vertical fins for its fleet. On
Jan. 1, this story ran in the New York Times:
The State Department has accused two leading American companies of 123
violations of export laws in connection with the transfer of rocket
and satellite data to China during the 1990s. The Boeing company and
Hughes Electronics Corporation, a unit of General Motors, were
notified of the accusations last week.
----
Again, Russia may be inefficient but is at least self-sufficient
(rhetoric worthy of our clown Jesse Jackson, I know) for its needs.
And as Hitler, the Swedes, the Mongols, the French, and the Poles were
forced to see, the Russians when truly threatened do not fuck around.
They shot the remains of the Polish would-be tsar out of a cannon, did
they not?
best regards,
BM
> regards as always
>
> fatso
Boris Goodenough
Fatso,
It sounds like you are upset. Did the lid fall and hit you in the back of
the head while you were sipping?
captain!
lol, owned!
captain:1 , fatso:0
fatso
within 30 minutes of Stock Exchange
being open, ca £1800, kindly add some 40% if you wish to calculate in
dollars. I bet that will upset you a bit more!
fatso
"captain!" <killspam...@deadspammers.net> wrote in message
news:4uh7b.928843$3C2.21...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
captain!
> The daily grind made me last morning ca £1600 and again, this morning,
> within 30 minutes of Stock Exchange
> being open, ca £1800, kindly add some 40% if you wish to calculate in
> dollars. I bet that will upset you a bit more!
>
> fatso
the daily grind. would that be the daily hind-grind by any chance? you must
have had to fit in a lot of men to make that much money in 30 minutes.
either that or you were taking more than one at the same time :)
fatso
Type of daily grind which brings much nicer rewards.
To myself and to my unknown chinese brothers and
"na pohybel russkim" ! last night have bought via TV
Auction another millioner's adornement to my house,
worthy of russkie rober baron. A globe made of Mother
of Pearl, a real beauty. It took the chink 300 man-hours
to make it, it is worth, allegedly £4500 and I got it at the
reserve price of £295. All paid for by looting the London
Stock Exchange. You will never get that much as a rest
room attendant, whichever hovel you serve!
fatso
"captain!" <killspam...@deadspammers.net> wrote in message
news:vmt7b.122303$la.26...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
captain!
> No, mate.
> Type of daily grind which brings much nicer rewards.
> To myself and to my unknown chinese brothers and
> "na pohybel russkim" ! last night have bought via TV
> Auction another millioner's adornement to my house,
> worthy of russkie rober baron. A globe made of Mother
> of Pearl, a real beauty. It took the chink 300 man-hours
> to make it, it is worth, allegedly £4500 and I got it at the
> reserve price of £295. All paid for by looting the London
> Stock Exchange. You will never get that much as a rest
> room attendant, whichever hovel you serve!
>
> fatso
...so you bought an overpriced, mass-produced globe from an infomercial,
naively believing that it was hand made in china.
that sure is impressive.
fatso
Low Rents of Arabia.
> No, mate.
> Type of daily grind which brings much nicer rewards.
> To myself and to my unknown chinese brothers and
> "na pohybel russkim" ! last night have bought via TV
> Auction another millioner's adornement to my house,
What was that? A dictionary?
Low Rents of Arabia.
>
> "fatso" <fatso...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:lTw7b.565$ea6...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net...
> > No, mate.
> > Type of daily grind which brings much nicer rewards.
> > To myself and to my unknown chinese brothers and
> > "na pohybel russkim" ! last night have bought via TV
> > Auction another millioner's adornement to my house,
> > worthy of russkie rober baron. A globe made of Mother
> > of Pearl, a real beauty. It took the chink 300 man-hours
> > to make it, it is worth, allegedly £4500 and I got it at the
> > reserve price of £295. All paid for by looting the London
> > Stock Exchange. You will never get that much as a rest
> > room attendant, whichever hovel you serve!
> >
> > fatso
>
> ...so you bought an overpriced, mass-produced globe from an infomercial,
> naively believing that it was hand made in china.
> that sure is impressive.
>
Scarecrow got a brain and he didn't even have to pay for it.