“A skeptic among believers and a believer among skeptics”. I see a human being willing to think deeply and engage in real dialogue. And I am grateful for your example to us through reason empathy and grace.
Carlos - you exactly described what I felt as I read Iain’s article- so very grateful. His comments were the best explanation of the current situation I’ve ever read. Many thanks!!
Robin, thank you. And I agree. He brought a light to the situation in a way that it could be heard by all sides, a true attempt at conversation and dialogue.
Thanks for this follow up post. One thing I've taken up in recent years is not thinking about right or left (although I still love the term 'conservative') but looking for people who I call 'observers of reality.' They are often found on the right because of the way the world has been structured today but they also appear on the left. It's those who can look at and for what reality brings forth more than political opinions that I find interesting listening to today. Thanks for being one of them.
I was with you until the comment about Trump and Zelenskyy and the glaring no comment about Gaza. To me this is not about right and left (I don’t identify as such) it’s about life and death. Essentially, you carefully paved a road and then fell into the ditch, like a sheep who is removed from a crevasse by the farmer and leaps right back in. However much of what you said prior and after that glaring attachment to something you may feel is “right”, you provided tremendous food for thought. Historical context of Ukraine and Gaza is crucial for LH thinking to reach over to the right for some consequential guidance IMHO.
Well said. I was quite stunned by the comment about Trump and Zelensky after reading the rest of a wonderful essay. Just doesn't fit, really. How can one see all of the rest and not see that? Perhaps Iain needs to confer a bit with Matthias on the matter?
Mattias Desmet's views on Covid are also about life and death for many of us with autoimmune diseases and primary immune deficiencies. Without lockdowns, many people with chronic illness and disabilities wouldn't be here.
It's so hard hearing anti-lockdown views intellectually debated when it is so much more than philosophy/politics to you personally.
I am sorry to hear that you feel this way. Our feelings about lockdown were obviously shaped by our circumstances. I personally agreed with the proposals put forward by the Great Barrington Declaration authors to shelter and protect the vulnerable whilst allowing those at little risk (and the distribution was known early on) to circulate.
I gave up.my career to care for my terminally ill mother, in a town where I had no friends. She died just before covid appeared. I had to grieve alone, without the touch of any living being. It drove me to the brink of suicide. Twice. Prisoners in Victorian solitary confinement had more human contact than I did, and they had to change that system as so many killed themselves.
Please.be assured that most of us arguing against lockdowns were NOT callous; targeted sheltering would have protected you and others like you to the same extent that lockdowns did, without the enormous negative societal costs.
I agree fully. But not just for the immuno compromised. Without lockdown millions more would have died. Covid is a Level 3 Biohazard with proven long-term impacts on heart, brain, lungs, immune system. Society wishes, and is encouraged, to see it as a cold. Also rhe lockdowns in UK and Ireland were soft. In Italy there were times when 250 metres were imposed and enforced. My dearest friend's life has been upended by Long Covid after a singe mild infection. Nobody knows how their body will react to the virus. Millions are suffering - and I mean suffering- with Long Covid throughout the world. Many will not agree with my views just as I will not agree with theirs. Best of luck to you Rikki-Lea.
There is no evidence at all that “millions more would have died.” The impacts on heart, brain, lungs and immune system that you ascribe to Covid are not “proven” at all, and are far more likely to be due to the mRNA shots. Long Covid is more likely to be caused by the mRNA shots than the virus. Covid is a moderately hazardous upper respiratory virus that has no mechanism to cause these sequelae, but the mRNA shots do.
I wonder why don't question the enormous increase in autoimmune diseases etc. This is surely not natural. Covid was an opportunity to question the current medical paradigm.
lock downs created more problems than they actually solved. many immune compromised were actually killed by the offered solutions to ‘protect them.’ dig deeper into this subject matter. i might surprise you.
Thank you. And: thank you. The image I share with my friends from across the aisle (this includes my boss, who sits right next to me (which members of my family find unimaginable)), is of a violin and its bow: the best music will not come into being unless (and until) the strings of each are properly tensioned. But the violin has no say over the tension of the bow strings, and vice versa: that’s our job, first, over here.
Iain, you are so generous with your detailed response. Even though Substack is the best of a bad bunch, the very nature of 'notes/comments' just brings out the insecurity in people. I wouldn't waste too much time here, you are far too profound for all the waffle.
If we have learned anything about the default mode network, it is that it maintains our sense of self, including our presuppositions and conceptual 'realities'. Psychology 101 says that hatred is a clear manifestation of projection. Changing ourselves and our views almost always requires a shock. In essence I share Dr. McGilchrist's overall assessment on human nature in how we should attend to things in a complex world. Perhaps rather than labeling people we should attend to greater pragmatism, in other words how can we best deal with the growing Orwellian bureaucracies that are leading us toward an existential financial crisis.
....existential financial crisis?.. and what about what is now recognized internationally as our ecocide? You know, our knowing destruction of our life-source, Mother Earth. And now here in the US of A we are paying the price for a misogyny-fueled election result. When will the outdated, systemic, heartless, patriarchal priorities and conditioning we are all still so programmed by -- and which today cause so much suffering and suicide for so many veterans, and so many men -- ever be fully recognized so we homo-sapiens might, together, actually adapt, and evolve?
Well said, and thank you for taking the time to express it so clearly. I hope it is able to land for some of those who were disturbed by your previous posts.
Not only wise, just about perfect. Have I ever read a post or article anywhere, where I respect and admire and agree with just about every word? I doubt it.
I will start out by confessing that according to politicalcompass.org (which is the site I believe you were referring to) I am so left-wing I am considered an anarchist. I too follow N S Lyons and Mattias Desmet. I consider anyone who would become hysterical at following either one to be deeply mired in tribalism and tunnel vision. How can people be sure what they think until they have experienced other people's ideas? And how do those two people translate somehow into Trump adulation?
As I said to a friend who was convinced after the election that Trump "was going to become a dictator" and "do away with democracy," what made him think that Trump was going to be more of a dictator and less democratic than Biden had already been? How could Trump be more of a fascist, more immoral, more corrupt, worse on Gaza, more insane on other foreign policy? It turned out, of course, that since Biden was on "his team," he had simply not paid any attention to anything Biden might have done that was reprehensible, nor paid attention to Harris's policy claims at all. And his team had told him that Trump was a unique threat, so without much thought, he believed it.
And as for democracy, was Trump not elected democratically, growing his supporters in virtually every metric, among women and every ethnic group? Is that not democratic? Or is only one party allowed to measure what democratic is?
Of course Trump is going to do very bad things, and we should criticize those things, even get out in the streets to protest those things. But we should all be able to agree that he is also likely to do some good things, like shine a light on government corrupt bureaucracies, maybe stop the idiotic war in Ukraine that has killed so many Ukrainian soldiers and civilians, a war provoked and fomented by the US after decades of continual overturning of governments in Eastern Europe and the Baltics, decades of deliberate lying to Russia, failure to follow any of our agreements, etc. Trump might usher in free speech and free discussion on many matters that have been illegally censored, even while quashing free speech in other areas, for which he should be rightly denounced.
I'm with McGilchrist here: is this the 19th c. Catholic Church? Do we have an Index of Forbidden Writers now with whom we Dare Not Engage, for fear they might pollute our minds? Is Mattias Desmet the Balzac of the 21st century?
Although I found Desmet to be an interesting and nuanced thinker when I saw him in London with Iain in October, I am still disturbed by Desmet’s choice to put Tucker Carlson’s plug on the front page of his book. Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump both represent a profound lack of Truth, Beauty and Goodness, whatever disruption they May be providing. I understand and appreciate Iain’s views and clarifications here, but both these men are glaring assaults to the values and integrity I believe Iain’s work represents. I sincerely hope this doesn’t represent an acceptance of ugliness and scorn for truth and diminishing of values that will be with us for a very long time.
How many Tucker Carlson interviews have you watched, Jennifer? Did you watch his interview with Jeffrey Sachs, for example? Matt Taibbi? Mike Benz? Did you ever wonder why Carlson is so popular with so many people? Or do you just think everyone who values Carlson's perspective is "ugly" and "scorns the truth"? What is Carlson's view on Ukraine? On Gaza? As for Trump, do you think Trump is more lacking in Truth, Beauty and Goodness than Joe Biden? Than Adam Schiff? Than John Fetterman? Than Hillary Clinton? How do you think we arrive at Truth? How do you think we arrive at a synthesis between right and left brain inputs?
Iain urges us to get *past* this low-level analysis; these petty polarizations. Aim higher, Josh. You're slinging mud in a ghetto, while your overloads manage your "opinions" like the strings on puppet.
Aim higher, friend.
I think this is the one where fellow Canadian gets us past useless left-right polarizations:
Thanks for pointing a finger to the moon, which you could have just as well also posted directly to the original poster. Perhaps you sense where your pointers will be appreciated.
I would not have commented at all if there was a thumbs down option besides the like option, and the repeated know-it-all ravings were just too much to let stand.
I actually only quoted the post itself by inverting questions into self-evident statements.
Whatever good may come out of the current administration, there are some things that are beyond "opinion" to any decent human being.
Dear Linda, I have actually never commented in a section like this before in my life. Because Iain’s work is of deep personal importance to me, I have been thinking a lot about these feelings I have since October, and felt animated (and relieved) to read his nuanced and interesting answer to these queries. Reading your comments reminds me of the great divide in narrative we are experiencing, which I am really aware of as an American with the distance of living in Europe. I feel that Iain’s work reminds us that the nature of life is transformative, driven by things like love, and that truth indeed is complex and ever-changing. I am sorry if you or anyone else felt personally attacked by my comments. And I hope we (humans on this planet) will be able to transform into a more cohesive whole, whatever this current time brings. I would also like to mention that my sister is currently co-heading the American Embassy in Bujumbura, Burundi, where the citizens are dealing with a massive economic crisis, war at their border and real starvation. My sister loves her job and feels a real sense of purpose as a diplomat representing American values overseas. She also knows that our institutions are imperfect (as we humans are). The changes underway for her are dramatic and painful. In that situation, I wonder about the How. However, I am sure we do share values, some strong and powerful ones, if we are both in this community. Perhaps we will meet one day at one of Iain’s events and could have a conversation about that. I would welcome that! Thank you for reading and wishing us all more harmony as we navigate this wild flow of life.
If we could all at least be civil, right? I see Tucker as an above-average interviewer, a welcome platform for interesting guests, and a bit prone to snarly if not petty at times. He's only human. I'm sure there is some ideological daylight between him and Desmet, but what specifically makes him seem unsuitable for the book endorsement?
I think you cannot accuse Douglas of being "woke" or leftist.
And in this courageous article Douglas shows what it really means to think for yourself - which currently many right-wing supporters (as left-wing supporters in recent years) are missing these days.
A legitimate set question would be: What has been happening in Russia since the collapse of the soviet union? Where did all the oligarch's money come from? What has happened to journalists, opposition leaders and personal liberty in Putin's Russia? What the effect of Putin's foreign policy been on the economy and security of other nations? On the valuation of truth, beauty and goodness, Iaian's three traditional values.
IF that were true, which I think is transparently not the case because his M.O. was to behave as an actual journalist, why would it be "ugly" in your personal view. I emphasize the word personal so that mainstream black & white talking points regarding the war are avoided as much as possible. Talking points that are thoroughly based on a complete distortion of very recent history.
A shout from one of those places you believe to be overturned by US foreign politics - Lithuania. We fought nail and teeth to come back to the West, where we belong by our own cultural standards, religion and history. If it wasn't for our own will, no amount of foreign influence would have made us risk everything and declare independence in 1990. That choice hurled us out of a relative safety of Gorbachevs late Soviets and into massive economic crisis. Later we practically begged ourselves into NATO for safety and since joining we did our best to adhere to the standards of defence financing. Ralaxing into pretend safety Iain is talking about never happened here. I believe the same can be said for our Baltic sisters - Latvia and Estonia. It was not a Western expansion, we simply grabbed the slim chance presented by geopolitical changes and returned where we belong.
It seems to me, people from powerful countries tend to overestimate the influence of their governments and underestimate the nuanced and shifting reality of local culture and politics in countries that are supposedly influenced. I won't pretend to know the exact situation in todays hot spot - Ukraine - but there is reason to believe local urges had at least as much sway as western meddling. Ukrainians have plenty of historical and cultural reasons to try and split from their abusive "big brother" for good.
If you are "not going to pretend to understand" Ukraine, perhaps best not to conflate that situation to yours in Lithuania.
What you may really be saying is, "I'm too lazy to bother" to read the history of a conflict threatening nuclear extinction.
Not a great look for a partisan of what many consider the Baltic Chihuahuas. And didn't y'all fight with the Nazi's against Russia, your sworn eternal enemy?
As an antiwar American, I've got very little sympathy for ancient European conflicts. Just saying..
I love the muddled memories coagulating into a sense of difference less oppression and opportunity.
One of the things that stood out from Lyon’s Pro Vance piece - there’s little understanding in it that in calling out Europe under the free speech banner he was basically giving a green light to Russian “free speech” (hybrid war) in Romanian elections, pressure on Moldova (offering money for pro Russian activism via Russian bank accounts)followed swiftly by an immediate betrayal of Ukraine.
Overnight USAs enemies became allies and their allies became enemies. Conducted by an authoritarian state that doesn’t even pretend to have the moral cover of Marxism any longer. It might well shock Europe into funding defence and embracing national pride. But there a cost. It’s always complex but I feel that the anti nato isolationism has little understanding that nations have their own desire for freedom.
It’s good to be reminded of moments of true liberty in the face of uncertainty
There is a cost indeed. I'm painfully aware of it as a mother of a teenaged son, who will be of drafting age soon. Here in the region bordering the state of perpetual aggression, this awareness sometimes threatens to turn into hopelessness. Especially when witnessing how easily big players change course in international politics.
I can appreciate the concern of Russian interference, particularly by Romanians, Georgians, and the Baltic peoples, and think a Trump administration may be a poor messenger, but I would be careful not to rush to judgment in defending the EU/ROM government position. Contra the BBC and NYT, the government has to date not produced any evidence supporting Russian financing or connection with the Tiktok campaign that elevated Georgescu. Similarly, they haven't produced any evidence of the crimes he's been charged with. With that in mind, I think it's prudent to consider that it's at least possible this is the type of totalitarianism Iain references: an (initial) democratic election was annulled, the opposition candidate charged with crimes, and the court has barred said candidate from future offices, all without producing the type of substantive evidence those extreme measures demand.
It may be that Georgescu is everything his critics and the government say he is, and that he is guilty of the alleged crimes, but it also may be that he is innocent, and that if elected his influence would be more like an Orban or a Meloni (or a Trump). This shouldn't be a partisan issue, though most Left leaning Western outlets are framing it as 'far right concern.' I'm not far-right, but I am concerned, and so should everyone else who believes in democracy.
You can read more about the situation here, which is a better (Left) source than NPR or the BBC:
Yes, thank you for sharing. I lived through something similar, only a few years older during the Velvet Revolution, (Czechoslovakia 1989) with the added 'bonus' of my parents being dissidents so saw how the revolution sausage was made. It is particularly galling to see people believing Russia is anything but a brutal expansionist, neo-imperial dystopia ruled by a former KGB officer who's been in power for 20 odd years, with no tradition of democracy, freedom and individual rights. The fools and useful idiots, the lot of them.
I was an anarchist by that measure for *such* a long time!
lovely people, punks and anarchists. still have good friends among that existing underground society, that those uninitiated dont even know exist all around them, all over the globe.
I agree with you Linda. You very diplomatically don't point out that we evidently don't agree with Iain on Ukraine v Russia.
I respect Iain tremendously for his substantial contribution to understanding the human mind and the present conjuncture of human development and history, and also for the his personal public character, however I'm not with him on this one and I also find his views about war and peace and the military to be a little too conventionally conservative and potentially reactionary. We all have our blindspots though, and maybe these are some of his.
Indeed. I was also surprised by his objection to Trump's contempt for the person of Zelensky. Whatever one's take on the conflict (I won't belabour you with mine) that contempt seems entirely warranted despite the endless adulation bestowed on him in the West.
Indeed. I find Iain McG's olde worlde manners and values charming but every now and again (and this is an example) he reveals, as far as I'm concerned, an unworldliness, an naivete, and an instinctive 'clubhouse' conventional Anglo-Saxon, British conservatism about the contemporary world politically. He is very much imo of his class and time and occupational biography. I don't think he has explored outside his limited, small world enough.
A particular example of this in this particular piece is his criticism of young Western people's propensity to not be willing to fight (and die) for their country. He makes all sorts of value laden, critical personal judgements about that, just like the local pub reactionary. But what he should be doing is looking at it in a structural political and philosophical way. Does he honestly believe the society and way of life that young people in the West have inherited is worth their dying for? To change it yes, but to save it for their Masters?!!! Ffs Iain needs to get out of his zone of interest.
I would add that I am guessing he is perhaps not aware of the context that Zelensky had delayed signing this agreement a couple of times prior to requesting that he do so specifically by invitation to the White House. He clearly had no intent to sign then either, but attempted to use the opportunity to thoroughly upend the proposal-- undoubtedly with the encouragement of EU leaders as well as the dems in the U.S. I also think Iain might understand any general contempt more readily if he understood that the vast majority of Ukrainians want him out of power and I would speculate that many of them likely feel greater contempt toward him than we can understand.
Do you have a valid source regarding Ukrainians wanting Zelensky out of power? I aspire to hear all sides of an issue. However, since February, 2022 my main source has been a Ukrainian scholar (who in the 80s fought for the USSR against afghanistan and has followed Putin's statements re Ukraine assiduously since 1989).
He was already unpopular before Russia invaded because he did nothing, and was seemingly powerless, to do anything about bombings in Donetsk and the civil conflict created by the Kiev puppets installed by the U.S. Undoubtedly he was rallied around because of Russia's incursion but it's really been no secret Ukraine never had a chance in this war. . . he's operating as a martial law dictator after canceling elections and previously canceling political opposition, jailing his main opposition, closing down all media opposed to, or even questioning gov't actions, causing independent journalists to flee if not be captured and jailed, etc. . . I have no specific link but he has virtually no support from anyone other die-hard extreme nationalist types who think all Russians should be exterminated. It's probably in the teens if not the single digits, but how can there ever be an accurate assessment in terms of media? Not possible. Do some uncomfortable research if you're unaware of any of the easily verifiable info in terms of the overall recent history leading up to, and since, Maidan, and Zelensky's authoritarian actions since 2022. I will not be responding any further. Good luck.
"a war provoked and fomented by the US after decades of continual overturning of governments in Eastern Europe and the Baltics, decades of deliberate lying to Russia, failure to follow any of our agreements"
Sorry, but this is so far from truth and naive look. As a person from East Europe I can tell you that Eastern Europe and Baltics have been fighting for more than 50 years to release themselves from the iron grip of communism and russian imperialism.
The biggest tragedy of all is that Russia itself has not gone through its own "Nuremberg Trials" and is still poisoning (metaphorically but also literally) many lives on this planet. And it is still big failed state that cannot live up to its geographical potential. Still mentally held in soviet imperial thinking, trying to brute force its failed ideas into the world.
Not everything is about US internal politics. People from US and Western Europe need to look past their internal lenses and see the things as they are: that Russia invaded and caused thousands of deaths in the name of its absurd failed ideas.
Just because Russia hates what you hated (Biden? left-leaning politics? covid vaccines?) doesn't mean it's your friend. Russia hates Western Civilization - the one that you're trying to defend - and is just using whatever useful to pursuit its own goals (imperialism).
Suggest you read Scott Horton's massive immaculately sourced book (500 pages of references, many US government documents) on the subject, Glenn Diesen's book on the subject, foreign policy experts John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs on the subject, independent journalists Glenn Greenwald and Aaron Mate on the subject and countless others. The truth is not in doubt.
So I suggest you better read how geopolitical "realists" like Mearsheimer or Sachs have been debunked.
There is plethora material on that topic - to start simple you can go from Kamil Kazani here on substack and then go onto other plentiful critics of "realists" thinking - please just read material from people from East Europe, from people who grew up there and better understand that geopolitical situation and motivations.
"Realists" ignore internal politics, treat international politics like a physics of billard balls, not able to see how idiosyncratic interplay of local cultures, internal politics, material situation affect political decisions like waging war on another country.
And there is the question of "independent" journalists who being right on one topic, try to be oracles on everything else, way outside their competence - and that's assuming their good faith, where we can say they fall prey to Dunning-Kruger effect. Because, no doubt, some of those have more grim agenda...
I know a number of people from Eastern Europe because I live in a university town. Perhaps you'd like to compare the number of governments the US has overturned in the last 80 years versus the number of governments Russia has overturned in the last 80 years. Also, I wonder if you think Scott Horton's primary sources from the US archives and the archives of past presidents are made up. No one is saying Putin is a great guy or that Russia is not a repressive government. No one claims the countries in the former Soviet Union were treated well, or that Moscow did not persecute dissidents. However, it's also true that Ukraine is a massively corrupt country, that much of the aid the US has sent them has been given to oligarchs including Zelensky himself, and that Putin did not fully invade the country until right-wing Nazis had been attacking ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine for eight years. He tried diplomacy over and over. It is also true that the US engineered the 2014 coup in Ukraine, and has trained and funded the neo-Nazi Azov battalion ever since, after having trashed every agreement they've ever made with Russia since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Vladimir Putin first and foremost leads imperial politics. His main primary goal is to restore Soviet Empire, whose collapse he treats as "greatest geopolitcal catastrophy of 20th century".
Vladimir Putin led Second Chechen War which took more than 100k lives.
Putin invaded Georgia in 2008. Putin annexed Crimea in 2014 and instigated so called "separatists" war in East Ukraine - so the war is really going on for 11 years.
Countless independent journalists have been threatend, poisoned, killed effectively killing any indepedent journalism (and thinking) in this country.
Dubrovka and Beslan terrorist attacks had catastrophic rescue actions, and still likely they have been initiated by FSB to justify subsequent falling into dictatorship by Putin who consolidated power in the years after.
And finally, he (himself) started a war three years ago that already took hundreds of thousands human lives. So the Russia is here aggresor, Ukraine is just fighting for survival.
So having facts set up, we can go further.
What are the reasons for invasion?
NATO expansion? Neo-nazi Azov movements? Being lied by other countries? West not keeping agreements to the Russia?
Sorry but it's none of these. (And especially the last one is laughable - Putin (former KGB agent) and Russia who have great record of lies, deception suddenly care about truth).
Russia propaganda is famous for its creativity and coordinated spread of viral memes into the minds of poor Westerners trying to make sense of things. Thus videos of Mearsheimer clip circulating suddenly Twitter in February 2022. Thus amplifying some singular stories (which did happen) and trying to make always the same picture - "poor Russia" which had to invade the other because it had no choice. (actually this inferiority complex of russians drive a lot of their motivation. it's sad that they do not have enough reflection to see that maybe their economical and political decision are leading them always to the same despair?)
So coming to the main topic - what's the reason for 2022 Russia's invasion?
The answer lies in... domestic policy, raw materials, energy.
Domestic policy - Ukrainians had seen its country eternally stuck in coruption, dysfunctional. All true. Yet it was not despite Russia proximity but BECAUSE of Russia's proximity that they could not have fully developed as a country. Many Ukrainians were travelling around the Europe. They've been to Poland, Czechia, Hungary - countrier that were poorer than Ukraine in 1990. And they saw that all those countries have improved significantly where Ukraine could not release from the chains of corruption and oligarchs. Also many Ukrainians have been to Russia. And they see the same problems in their big neighbour. The same problems, just on the bigger scale - bigger corruption, more powerful oligarchs and the even bigger inequality and especially grim view of the russian province which is famous for it's third-world development level.
So majority of Ukrainians (though not all of them to be true), especially younger ones, wanted to go more on the West. Not Russia direction. 2004, 2013 - it was not big CIA conspiracy. These were just people tired of what they see.
And here lied the biggest threat to Russia and Putin dictatorship - if Ukraine pivot to the Western Europe was successful that would undermine and threated his power in Russia. So he could not let Ukraine do what it wanted to do - because power of imitation and memetics would give again many Russians power to rise up against the dictatorship in Russia (Russians did try to protest a couple of times but did not succeed).
Raw materials, energy - this is more complex situation but generally Russia in recent years was losing its upperhand in energy provision to Europe. Which in the long-term would mean accelerated economic decline and further domestic problems. Because Russia is essentially an "avocado economy" - even though it has plenty of fuels, raw materials and many bright people (mathematicians, engineers) it is a malfunctioning country that is not able to produce car of washing machine.
Here is article from 2019 (!) from polish blogger which correctly foresaw the Russian invasion and its reasoning:
In short - Russia was losing all on all fronts (technological, economical, demographical) and then only advantage it has is a demonstration of power.
Which they try to demonstrate - with mixed results.
So whatever reasons you got on this war from your twitter/facebook newsfeed or from your favourite podcaster, is at best half-truths.
Dig deeper - look at the geopolitcs, read Gulag Archipelago by Solzhenitsyn or Kolyma Tales by Shalamov, read something from russian oppositionists, or even read anti-woke journalists like Konstantin Kisin or Douglas Murray.
Whatever bad or corrupt you can find on Ukraine - be sure that if you look on Russia you would find the same (corruption, nationalists, nazis).
In the end - I know that politics and geopolitics is a nasty thing. Probably some nasty deal behind the closed door needs to be done, to avoid losing more human's lifes. I get that man should not know how sausages or politics is being made, as Bismarck famously said. All clear.
I just care about educating people. I just care about them leaving their superficial view of the world and learn that maybe their simple dichotomy of the world - like woke vs anti-woke is not always good lens to look at things. That sometimes you need to drop your left-hemispheric fixation on applying the same abstraction everywhere and you need to use more of a right hemisphere to see things as they are, in their own idiosyncratic way.
As it is here in this terrible unprovoked full-scale invasion.
So i'm leaving you in this conversation with this message.
I don't hope that you will be convinced today, next week or next month. But maybe some seed will be planted in your mind. Maybe after some time you will give a shot, try to leave your current information bubble and maybe curiosity will lead you to some new richer view of world. Which I wish you with all my heart.
Interesting. I know well arguments by Mearsheimer or Sachs.
There are other good sources already mentioned here - from experts and people actually knowing Russia's political system - living in Russia, Finland, Poland, Latvia, Ukraine, etc.
But you probably don't like what they say so you will call them "naive", "mainstream", "propaganda" because it does not fit your simplistic view of the world as game of Risk - or something like Sid Meier's Civilization.
Who cares about domestic policy, energy policies, cultural memetics and influences! Everything is just turn-based strategy game, right?
All you need is to have your expert called "realist", or any other "truth seeker" and then it must be true, right?
Similar as "social science" - by putting word "science" now suddenly it becomes "science".
I, and several Ukrainian scholars I know personally, have read much of Diesen, Mearsheimer, Sachs, Greenwald and Mate on the subject. The scholars (who have carefully studied over 400 years of Russia-Ukraine relations - and yes, I'm aware Ukraine was not a 'nation state" over the centuries, as we currently define 'nation') to a person agree in their assessment that not only do these writers have many if not most of their facts wrong, there is simply no way to objectively consider their writings to be presented in good faith.
A human condition. Ukraine is under totalitarian control itself controlled by Nazis white supremacist. Biden openly blackmailed Ukraine into changing a judge for 1 billion dollars. The US and NATO broke their condition of Ukraine independence by encroaching up to Ukraine and was enticing them to join. For Russia that would have meant that if Ukraine and its Nazis controlled government had attacked Russia and they were part of NATO that by default Russia would be at war with the USA if Russia defended itself against an attacking Ukraine. So Russia chose to preemptively invade before Ukraine was a nato member. The agreement broken by NATO would necessitate the Russian response. Now NATO uses the preemptive invasion by Russia against Russia. It was a great art of war tactic by the USA and NATO but those gullible to propaganda and not trained in the art of war are making themselves into dunning Kruger dunces. Follow the money.
Dear Mcgilchrist, Thank you from the bottom of my heart. This article thrilled me.
I am just a simple moderately educated human without any supporting documents but YES i consider myself just as this ... "I am a tiresome, contrary sort of bloke. (in my case, lass) I sometimes say I am the sceptic amongst believers, and the believer amongst sceptics. Do you recognise that, perhaps, in yourselves? For the most part YES
"I can’t help it; and I think it is what keeps one closer to truth and intellectually alive."
Agree totally, I cant imagine being so one-sided to close the door on somebody like Mattias Desmet, a brilliant poetic, soulful genius IMHO. His book the Psychology of Totalitarianism was an eye-opener, and a relief to me during a time of distress i.e, there was an explanation of what was potentially (and probably truly) happening around the world during Covid.
I look forward to reading more from you and from him, and plan to share this post as widely as I can, problem I have, the people who I want to read it stopped listening to me and will say politely they don't have time or interest.
“A skeptic among believers and a believer among skeptics”. I see a human being willing to think deeply and engage in real dialogue. And I am grateful for your example to us through reason empathy and grace.
yes, wholeheartedly agree!
Carlos - you exactly described what I felt as I read Iain’s article- so very grateful. His comments were the best explanation of the current situation I’ve ever read. Many thanks!!
Robin, thank you. And I agree. He brought a light to the situation in a way that it could be heard by all sides, a true attempt at conversation and dialogue.
I suspected as much! Witch! Witch! Witch!
Very well said.
O brother, well done.
you're in my puny prayers.
-mb
Thanks for this follow up post. One thing I've taken up in recent years is not thinking about right or left (although I still love the term 'conservative') but looking for people who I call 'observers of reality.' They are often found on the right because of the way the world has been structured today but they also appear on the left. It's those who can look at and for what reality brings forth more than political opinions that I find interesting listening to today. Thanks for being one of them.
'observers of reality'
I like that!
I was with you until the comment about Trump and Zelenskyy and the glaring no comment about Gaza. To me this is not about right and left (I don’t identify as such) it’s about life and death. Essentially, you carefully paved a road and then fell into the ditch, like a sheep who is removed from a crevasse by the farmer and leaps right back in. However much of what you said prior and after that glaring attachment to something you may feel is “right”, you provided tremendous food for thought. Historical context of Ukraine and Gaza is crucial for LH thinking to reach over to the right for some consequential guidance IMHO.
Well said. I was quite stunned by the comment about Trump and Zelensky after reading the rest of a wonderful essay. Just doesn't fit, really. How can one see all of the rest and not see that? Perhaps Iain needs to confer a bit with Matthias on the matter?
Mattias Desmet's views on Covid are also about life and death for many of us with autoimmune diseases and primary immune deficiencies. Without lockdowns, many people with chronic illness and disabilities wouldn't be here.
It's so hard hearing anti-lockdown views intellectually debated when it is so much more than philosophy/politics to you personally.
I take immunosuppressant medication and I am anti-lockdown. I respect other’s rights to hold a different view based on their own situation.
I am sorry to hear that you feel this way. Our feelings about lockdown were obviously shaped by our circumstances. I personally agreed with the proposals put forward by the Great Barrington Declaration authors to shelter and protect the vulnerable whilst allowing those at little risk (and the distribution was known early on) to circulate.
I gave up.my career to care for my terminally ill mother, in a town where I had no friends. She died just before covid appeared. I had to grieve alone, without the touch of any living being. It drove me to the brink of suicide. Twice. Prisoners in Victorian solitary confinement had more human contact than I did, and they had to change that system as so many killed themselves.
Please.be assured that most of us arguing against lockdowns were NOT callous; targeted sheltering would have protected you and others like you to the same extent that lockdowns did, without the enormous negative societal costs.
Thank you for reading my point of view.
I agree fully. But not just for the immuno compromised. Without lockdown millions more would have died. Covid is a Level 3 Biohazard with proven long-term impacts on heart, brain, lungs, immune system. Society wishes, and is encouraged, to see it as a cold. Also rhe lockdowns in UK and Ireland were soft. In Italy there were times when 250 metres were imposed and enforced. My dearest friend's life has been upended by Long Covid after a singe mild infection. Nobody knows how their body will react to the virus. Millions are suffering - and I mean suffering- with Long Covid throughout the world. Many will not agree with my views just as I will not agree with theirs. Best of luck to you Rikki-Lea.
But somebody had to keep working to maintain society. What about those people?
There is no evidence at all that “millions more would have died.” The impacts on heart, brain, lungs and immune system that you ascribe to Covid are not “proven” at all, and are far more likely to be due to the mRNA shots. Long Covid is more likely to be caused by the mRNA shots than the virus. Covid is a moderately hazardous upper respiratory virus that has no mechanism to cause these sequelae, but the mRNA shots do.
or maybe both "virus" and shots contained snake venom, spread two different ways. https://thedrardisshow.com/the-antidote
a fellow canadian, David Cayley, who had a heart condition and wondered if the v was safe for him,
reflected quite thoughtfully on this question:
https://www.davidcayley.com/blog/2020/12/3/pandemic-revelations-1
and concerning life:
https://www.davidcayley.com/blog/2021/6/11/concerning-life-1?rq=concerning life
Why should everyone else be locked down? It was never difficult to isolate oneself if that was considered appropriate.
I wonder why don't question the enormous increase in autoimmune diseases etc. This is surely not natural. Covid was an opportunity to question the current medical paradigm.
lock downs created more problems than they actually solved. many immune compromised were actually killed by the offered solutions to ‘protect them.’ dig deeper into this subject matter. i might surprise you.
Agreed
Thank you. And: thank you. The image I share with my friends from across the aisle (this includes my boss, who sits right next to me (which members of my family find unimaginable)), is of a violin and its bow: the best music will not come into being unless (and until) the strings of each are properly tensioned. But the violin has no say over the tension of the bow strings, and vice versa: that’s our job, first, over here.
Well said, thank you for this.
Thanks, Iain. Integrity is all too rare and is certainly not the preserve of any particular group.
Iain, you are so generous with your detailed response. Even though Substack is the best of a bad bunch, the very nature of 'notes/comments' just brings out the insecurity in people. I wouldn't waste too much time here, you are far too profound for all the waffle.
On the other hand ...
If we have learned anything about the default mode network, it is that it maintains our sense of self, including our presuppositions and conceptual 'realities'. Psychology 101 says that hatred is a clear manifestation of projection. Changing ourselves and our views almost always requires a shock. In essence I share Dr. McGilchrist's overall assessment on human nature in how we should attend to things in a complex world. Perhaps rather than labeling people we should attend to greater pragmatism, in other words how can we best deal with the growing Orwellian bureaucracies that are leading us toward an existential financial crisis.
....existential financial crisis?.. and what about what is now recognized internationally as our ecocide? You know, our knowing destruction of our life-source, Mother Earth. And now here in the US of A we are paying the price for a misogyny-fueled election result. When will the outdated, systemic, heartless, patriarchal priorities and conditioning we are all still so programmed by -- and which today cause so much suffering and suicide for so many veterans, and so many men -- ever be fully recognized so we homo-sapiens might, together, actually adapt, and evolve?
Well said, and thank you for taking the time to express it so clearly. I hope it is able to land for some of those who were disturbed by your previous posts.
Thank you for this...I hope my own inspiration will lead me more into the wide open circle, you have well illuminated in the right hemisphere.
Not only wise, just about perfect. Have I ever read a post or article anywhere, where I respect and admire and agree with just about every word? I doubt it.
I will start out by confessing that according to politicalcompass.org (which is the site I believe you were referring to) I am so left-wing I am considered an anarchist. I too follow N S Lyons and Mattias Desmet. I consider anyone who would become hysterical at following either one to be deeply mired in tribalism and tunnel vision. How can people be sure what they think until they have experienced other people's ideas? And how do those two people translate somehow into Trump adulation?
As I said to a friend who was convinced after the election that Trump "was going to become a dictator" and "do away with democracy," what made him think that Trump was going to be more of a dictator and less democratic than Biden had already been? How could Trump be more of a fascist, more immoral, more corrupt, worse on Gaza, more insane on other foreign policy? It turned out, of course, that since Biden was on "his team," he had simply not paid any attention to anything Biden might have done that was reprehensible, nor paid attention to Harris's policy claims at all. And his team had told him that Trump was a unique threat, so without much thought, he believed it.
And as for democracy, was Trump not elected democratically, growing his supporters in virtually every metric, among women and every ethnic group? Is that not democratic? Or is only one party allowed to measure what democratic is?
Of course Trump is going to do very bad things, and we should criticize those things, even get out in the streets to protest those things. But we should all be able to agree that he is also likely to do some good things, like shine a light on government corrupt bureaucracies, maybe stop the idiotic war in Ukraine that has killed so many Ukrainian soldiers and civilians, a war provoked and fomented by the US after decades of continual overturning of governments in Eastern Europe and the Baltics, decades of deliberate lying to Russia, failure to follow any of our agreements, etc. Trump might usher in free speech and free discussion on many matters that have been illegally censored, even while quashing free speech in other areas, for which he should be rightly denounced.
I'm with McGilchrist here: is this the 19th c. Catholic Church? Do we have an Index of Forbidden Writers now with whom we Dare Not Engage, for fear they might pollute our minds? Is Mattias Desmet the Balzac of the 21st century?
Although I found Desmet to be an interesting and nuanced thinker when I saw him in London with Iain in October, I am still disturbed by Desmet’s choice to put Tucker Carlson’s plug on the front page of his book. Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump both represent a profound lack of Truth, Beauty and Goodness, whatever disruption they May be providing. I understand and appreciate Iain’s views and clarifications here, but both these men are glaring assaults to the values and integrity I believe Iain’s work represents. I sincerely hope this doesn’t represent an acceptance of ugliness and scorn for truth and diminishing of values that will be with us for a very long time.
How many Tucker Carlson interviews have you watched, Jennifer? Did you watch his interview with Jeffrey Sachs, for example? Matt Taibbi? Mike Benz? Did you ever wonder why Carlson is so popular with so many people? Or do you just think everyone who values Carlson's perspective is "ugly" and "scorns the truth"? What is Carlson's view on Ukraine? On Gaza? As for Trump, do you think Trump is more lacking in Truth, Beauty and Goodness than Joe Biden? Than Adam Schiff? Than John Fetterman? Than Hillary Clinton? How do you think we arrive at Truth? How do you think we arrive at a synthesis between right and left brain inputs?
Carlson's perspective is "ugly" and "scorns the truth"
Trump is more lacking in Truth, Beauty and Goodness than Joe Biden
Trump is more lacking in Truth, Beauty and Goodness than Adam Schiff
Trump is more lacking in Truth, Beauty and Goodness than John Fetterman
Trump is more lacking in Truth, Beauty and Goodness than Hillary Clinton
but also remember,
Iain urges us to get *past* this low-level analysis; these petty polarizations. Aim higher, Josh. You're slinging mud in a ghetto, while your overloads manage your "opinions" like the strings on puppet.
Aim higher, friend.
I think this is the one where fellow Canadian gets us past useless left-right polarizations:
Thoughts on the Pandemic: http://lindapannozzo.ca/blog/?fbclid=IwAR1jBKOr_Ac9IbHEA18y3lmyjfNvfD-ef-wjbRArCjTQD74sNkbY-rYtACI
Thanks for pointing a finger to the moon, which you could have just as well also posted directly to the original poster. Perhaps you sense where your pointers will be appreciated.
I would not have commented at all if there was a thumbs down option besides the like option, and the repeated know-it-all ravings were just too much to let stand.
I actually only quoted the post itself by inverting questions into self-evident statements.
Whatever good may come out of the current administration, there are some things that are beyond "opinion" to any decent human being.
ah, brother, forgive me.
pray to God for me the sinner.
yours;
-mark basil
The whole truth of any matter can never be known. We all fill the gaps with our beliefs.
You way of thinking, as expressed here, is incompatible with free inquiry and the pursuit of truth.
I, as a US citizen and retired tax lawyer, would tell you that you no very little about any of these people if this is what you believe.
Dear Linda, I have actually never commented in a section like this before in my life. Because Iain’s work is of deep personal importance to me, I have been thinking a lot about these feelings I have since October, and felt animated (and relieved) to read his nuanced and interesting answer to these queries. Reading your comments reminds me of the great divide in narrative we are experiencing, which I am really aware of as an American with the distance of living in Europe. I feel that Iain’s work reminds us that the nature of life is transformative, driven by things like love, and that truth indeed is complex and ever-changing. I am sorry if you or anyone else felt personally attacked by my comments. And I hope we (humans on this planet) will be able to transform into a more cohesive whole, whatever this current time brings. I would also like to mention that my sister is currently co-heading the American Embassy in Bujumbura, Burundi, where the citizens are dealing with a massive economic crisis, war at their border and real starvation. My sister loves her job and feels a real sense of purpose as a diplomat representing American values overseas. She also knows that our institutions are imperfect (as we humans are). The changes underway for her are dramatic and painful. In that situation, I wonder about the How. However, I am sure we do share values, some strong and powerful ones, if we are both in this community. Perhaps we will meet one day at one of Iain’s events and could have a conversation about that. I would welcome that! Thank you for reading and wishing us all more harmony as we navigate this wild flow of life.
If we could all at least be civil, right? I see Tucker as an above-average interviewer, a welcome platform for interesting guests, and a bit prone to snarly if not petty at times. He's only human. I'm sure there is some ideological daylight between him and Desmet, but what specifically makes him seem unsuitable for the book endorsement?
Linda, please have a look at this Douglas Murray article:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-maga-movement-is-wrong-on-ukraine/
I think you cannot accuse Douglas of being "woke" or leftist.
And in this courageous article Douglas shows what it really means to think for yourself - which currently many right-wing supporters (as left-wing supporters in recent years) are missing these days.
Carlson’s support for Putin is particularly ugly
"Support"? Because he interviewed him?
He’s on the record as openly supportive of Putin, Jacqueline.
He’s not exactly Jeremy Paxman.
He has questioned why we are told to hate Putin. A legitimate question which does not constitute support. Why are we afraid to question our betters?
A legitimate set question would be: What has been happening in Russia since the collapse of the soviet union? Where did all the oligarch's money come from? What has happened to journalists, opposition leaders and personal liberty in Putin's Russia? What the effect of Putin's foreign policy been on the economy and security of other nations? On the valuation of truth, beauty and goodness, Iaian's three traditional values.
All interesting questions but I'm a good deal more concerned about my own team than someone else's.
Sounds like the question is who do you trust.
IF that were true, which I think is transparently not the case because his M.O. was to behave as an actual journalist, why would it be "ugly" in your personal view. I emphasize the word personal so that mainstream black & white talking points regarding the war are avoided as much as possible. Talking points that are thoroughly based on a complete distortion of very recent history.
A shout from one of those places you believe to be overturned by US foreign politics - Lithuania. We fought nail and teeth to come back to the West, where we belong by our own cultural standards, religion and history. If it wasn't for our own will, no amount of foreign influence would have made us risk everything and declare independence in 1990. That choice hurled us out of a relative safety of Gorbachevs late Soviets and into massive economic crisis. Later we practically begged ourselves into NATO for safety and since joining we did our best to adhere to the standards of defence financing. Ralaxing into pretend safety Iain is talking about never happened here. I believe the same can be said for our Baltic sisters - Latvia and Estonia. It was not a Western expansion, we simply grabbed the slim chance presented by geopolitical changes and returned where we belong.
It seems to me, people from powerful countries tend to overestimate the influence of their governments and underestimate the nuanced and shifting reality of local culture and politics in countries that are supposedly influenced. I won't pretend to know the exact situation in todays hot spot - Ukraine - but there is reason to believe local urges had at least as much sway as western meddling. Ukrainians have plenty of historical and cultural reasons to try and split from their abusive "big brother" for good.
Thanks for sharing this. I agree
HEARD!!!!
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DG8i7pBOscg/?igsh=MXVuZzJ4dXB2ZzRoYw==
Nicely expressed.
I will put a shout out again, that we give proper due thanks to Substack for making this particular kind of honest communication possible:
"Social media is breaking our brains" Substack creator on why this platform was made:
https://manorthey.substack.com/p/social-media-is-breaking-our-brains
https://youtu.be/n37bNmVggtU
If you are "not going to pretend to understand" Ukraine, perhaps best not to conflate that situation to yours in Lithuania.
What you may really be saying is, "I'm too lazy to bother" to read the history of a conflict threatening nuclear extinction.
Not a great look for a partisan of what many consider the Baltic Chihuahuas. And didn't y'all fight with the Nazi's against Russia, your sworn eternal enemy?
As an antiwar American, I've got very little sympathy for ancient European conflicts. Just saying..
At the risk of being a nuisance, I'll share a short piece on how "overturning of governments in Eastern Europe and the Baltics" looked from the inside. https://open.substack.com/pub/gilumon/p/when-the-voices-reached-heaven?r=3alveq&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web If you have few minutes, please read, it's important for us to be heard, otherwise we are seen as mute pieces on the big game board.
This is so important, as well as very touching – thank you, Alma, for sending this link. Iain
Thanks for sharing Alma.
I love the muddled memories coagulating into a sense of difference less oppression and opportunity.
One of the things that stood out from Lyon’s Pro Vance piece - there’s little understanding in it that in calling out Europe under the free speech banner he was basically giving a green light to Russian “free speech” (hybrid war) in Romanian elections, pressure on Moldova (offering money for pro Russian activism via Russian bank accounts)followed swiftly by an immediate betrayal of Ukraine.
Overnight USAs enemies became allies and their allies became enemies. Conducted by an authoritarian state that doesn’t even pretend to have the moral cover of Marxism any longer. It might well shock Europe into funding defence and embracing national pride. But there a cost. It’s always complex but I feel that the anti nato isolationism has little understanding that nations have their own desire for freedom.
It’s good to be reminded of moments of true liberty in the face of uncertainty
There is a cost indeed. I'm painfully aware of it as a mother of a teenaged son, who will be of drafting age soon. Here in the region bordering the state of perpetual aggression, this awareness sometimes threatens to turn into hopelessness. Especially when witnessing how easily big players change course in international politics.
I can appreciate the concern of Russian interference, particularly by Romanians, Georgians, and the Baltic peoples, and think a Trump administration may be a poor messenger, but I would be careful not to rush to judgment in defending the EU/ROM government position. Contra the BBC and NYT, the government has to date not produced any evidence supporting Russian financing or connection with the Tiktok campaign that elevated Georgescu. Similarly, they haven't produced any evidence of the crimes he's been charged with. With that in mind, I think it's prudent to consider that it's at least possible this is the type of totalitarianism Iain references: an (initial) democratic election was annulled, the opposition candidate charged with crimes, and the court has barred said candidate from future offices, all without producing the type of substantive evidence those extreme measures demand.
It may be that Georgescu is everything his critics and the government say he is, and that he is guilty of the alleged crimes, but it also may be that he is innocent, and that if elected his influence would be more like an Orban or a Meloni (or a Trump). This shouldn't be a partisan issue, though most Left leaning Western outlets are framing it as 'far right concern.' I'm not far-right, but I am concerned, and so should everyone else who believes in democracy.
You can read more about the situation here, which is a better (Left) source than NPR or the BBC:
https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/romania-calin-georgescu-voided-tiktok-election
(Edit) and:
https://www.racket.news/p/timeline-romania-overturns-presidential/comment/99494237
Interesting read. Thanks for sharing. Certainly gives a lot more detail.
Yes, thank you for sharing. I lived through something similar, only a few years older during the Velvet Revolution, (Czechoslovakia 1989) with the added 'bonus' of my parents being dissidents so saw how the revolution sausage was made. It is particularly galling to see people believing Russia is anything but a brutal expansionist, neo-imperial dystopia ruled by a former KGB officer who's been in power for 20 odd years, with no tradition of democracy, freedom and individual rights. The fools and useful idiots, the lot of them.
Ooo!
I was an anarchist by that measure for *such* a long time!
lovely people, punks and anarchists. still have good friends among that existing underground society, that those uninitiated dont even know exist all around them, all over the globe.
ha! silly Typicals. cant see for looking. ;)
I agree with you Linda. You very diplomatically don't point out that we evidently don't agree with Iain on Ukraine v Russia.
I respect Iain tremendously for his substantial contribution to understanding the human mind and the present conjuncture of human development and history, and also for the his personal public character, however I'm not with him on this one and I also find his views about war and peace and the military to be a little too conventionally conservative and potentially reactionary. We all have our blindspots though, and maybe these are some of his.
Indeed. I was also surprised by his objection to Trump's contempt for the person of Zelensky. Whatever one's take on the conflict (I won't belabour you with mine) that contempt seems entirely warranted despite the endless adulation bestowed on him in the West.
Indeed. I find Iain McG's olde worlde manners and values charming but every now and again (and this is an example) he reveals, as far as I'm concerned, an unworldliness, an naivete, and an instinctive 'clubhouse' conventional Anglo-Saxon, British conservatism about the contemporary world politically. He is very much imo of his class and time and occupational biography. I don't think he has explored outside his limited, small world enough.
A particular example of this in this particular piece is his criticism of young Western people's propensity to not be willing to fight (and die) for their country. He makes all sorts of value laden, critical personal judgements about that, just like the local pub reactionary. But what he should be doing is looking at it in a structural political and philosophical way. Does he honestly believe the society and way of life that young people in the West have inherited is worth their dying for? To change it yes, but to save it for their Masters?!!! Ffs Iain needs to get out of his zone of interest.
I would add that I am guessing he is perhaps not aware of the context that Zelensky had delayed signing this agreement a couple of times prior to requesting that he do so specifically by invitation to the White House. He clearly had no intent to sign then either, but attempted to use the opportunity to thoroughly upend the proposal-- undoubtedly with the encouragement of EU leaders as well as the dems in the U.S. I also think Iain might understand any general contempt more readily if he understood that the vast majority of Ukrainians want him out of power and I would speculate that many of them likely feel greater contempt toward him than we can understand.
Good description of the war master
Do you have a valid source regarding Ukrainians wanting Zelensky out of power? I aspire to hear all sides of an issue. However, since February, 2022 my main source has been a Ukrainian scholar (who in the 80s fought for the USSR against afghanistan and has followed Putin's statements re Ukraine assiduously since 1989).
Please send a link if you can.
Is this incorrect?
https://www.dw.com/en/what-ukrainian-opinion-polls-say-about-volodymyr-zelenskyy/a-71774172
He was already unpopular before Russia invaded because he did nothing, and was seemingly powerless, to do anything about bombings in Donetsk and the civil conflict created by the Kiev puppets installed by the U.S. Undoubtedly he was rallied around because of Russia's incursion but it's really been no secret Ukraine never had a chance in this war. . . he's operating as a martial law dictator after canceling elections and previously canceling political opposition, jailing his main opposition, closing down all media opposed to, or even questioning gov't actions, causing independent journalists to flee if not be captured and jailed, etc. . . I have no specific link but he has virtually no support from anyone other die-hard extreme nationalist types who think all Russians should be exterminated. It's probably in the teens if not the single digits, but how can there ever be an accurate assessment in terms of media? Not possible. Do some uncomfortable research if you're unaware of any of the easily verifiable info in terms of the overall recent history leading up to, and since, Maidan, and Zelensky's authoritarian actions since 2022. I will not be responding any further. Good luck.
"a war provoked and fomented by the US after decades of continual overturning of governments in Eastern Europe and the Baltics, decades of deliberate lying to Russia, failure to follow any of our agreements"
Sorry, but this is so far from truth and naive look. As a person from East Europe I can tell you that Eastern Europe and Baltics have been fighting for more than 50 years to release themselves from the iron grip of communism and russian imperialism.
The biggest tragedy of all is that Russia itself has not gone through its own "Nuremberg Trials" and is still poisoning (metaphorically but also literally) many lives on this planet. And it is still big failed state that cannot live up to its geographical potential. Still mentally held in soviet imperial thinking, trying to brute force its failed ideas into the world.
Not everything is about US internal politics. People from US and Western Europe need to look past their internal lenses and see the things as they are: that Russia invaded and caused thousands of deaths in the name of its absurd failed ideas.
Just because Russia hates what you hated (Biden? left-leaning politics? covid vaccines?) doesn't mean it's your friend. Russia hates Western Civilization - the one that you're trying to defend - and is just using whatever useful to pursuit its own goals (imperialism).
Suggest you read Scott Horton's massive immaculately sourced book (500 pages of references, many US government documents) on the subject, Glenn Diesen's book on the subject, foreign policy experts John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs on the subject, independent journalists Glenn Greenwald and Aaron Mate on the subject and countless others. The truth is not in doubt.
So I suggest you better read how geopolitical "realists" like Mearsheimer or Sachs have been debunked.
There is plethora material on that topic - to start simple you can go from Kamil Kazani here on substack and then go onto other plentiful critics of "realists" thinking - please just read material from people from East Europe, from people who grew up there and better understand that geopolitical situation and motivations.
"Realists" ignore internal politics, treat international politics like a physics of billard balls, not able to see how idiosyncratic interplay of local cultures, internal politics, material situation affect political decisions like waging war on another country.
And there is the question of "independent" journalists who being right on one topic, try to be oracles on everything else, way outside their competence - and that's assuming their good faith, where we can say they fall prey to Dunning-Kruger effect. Because, no doubt, some of those have more grim agenda...
I know a number of people from Eastern Europe because I live in a university town. Perhaps you'd like to compare the number of governments the US has overturned in the last 80 years versus the number of governments Russia has overturned in the last 80 years. Also, I wonder if you think Scott Horton's primary sources from the US archives and the archives of past presidents are made up. No one is saying Putin is a great guy or that Russia is not a repressive government. No one claims the countries in the former Soviet Union were treated well, or that Moscow did not persecute dissidents. However, it's also true that Ukraine is a massively corrupt country, that much of the aid the US has sent them has been given to oligarchs including Zelensky himself, and that Putin did not fully invade the country until right-wing Nazis had been attacking ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine for eight years. He tried diplomacy over and over. It is also true that the US engineered the 2014 coup in Ukraine, and has trained and funded the neo-Nazi Azov battalion ever since, after having trashed every agreement they've ever made with Russia since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Well said. Realpolitik is an ugly, nasty piece of work but, like tarring roofs, someone has to do it.
I'm sorry but you're still not getting it.
Let's again start with the facts.
Vladimir Putin first and foremost leads imperial politics. His main primary goal is to restore Soviet Empire, whose collapse he treats as "greatest geopolitcal catastrophy of 20th century".
Vladimir Putin led Second Chechen War which took more than 100k lives.
Putin invaded Georgia in 2008. Putin annexed Crimea in 2014 and instigated so called "separatists" war in East Ukraine - so the war is really going on for 11 years.
Countless independent journalists have been threatend, poisoned, killed effectively killing any indepedent journalism (and thinking) in this country.
Dubrovka and Beslan terrorist attacks had catastrophic rescue actions, and still likely they have been initiated by FSB to justify subsequent falling into dictatorship by Putin who consolidated power in the years after.
And finally, he (himself) started a war three years ago that already took hundreds of thousands human lives. So the Russia is here aggresor, Ukraine is just fighting for survival.
So having facts set up, we can go further.
What are the reasons for invasion?
NATO expansion? Neo-nazi Azov movements? Being lied by other countries? West not keeping agreements to the Russia?
Sorry but it's none of these. (And especially the last one is laughable - Putin (former KGB agent) and Russia who have great record of lies, deception suddenly care about truth).
Russia propaganda is famous for its creativity and coordinated spread of viral memes into the minds of poor Westerners trying to make sense of things. Thus videos of Mearsheimer clip circulating suddenly Twitter in February 2022. Thus amplifying some singular stories (which did happen) and trying to make always the same picture - "poor Russia" which had to invade the other because it had no choice. (actually this inferiority complex of russians drive a lot of their motivation. it's sad that they do not have enough reflection to see that maybe their economical and political decision are leading them always to the same despair?)
So coming to the main topic - what's the reason for 2022 Russia's invasion?
The answer lies in... domestic policy, raw materials, energy.
Domestic policy - Ukrainians had seen its country eternally stuck in coruption, dysfunctional. All true. Yet it was not despite Russia proximity but BECAUSE of Russia's proximity that they could not have fully developed as a country. Many Ukrainians were travelling around the Europe. They've been to Poland, Czechia, Hungary - countrier that were poorer than Ukraine in 1990. And they saw that all those countries have improved significantly where Ukraine could not release from the chains of corruption and oligarchs. Also many Ukrainians have been to Russia. And they see the same problems in their big neighbour. The same problems, just on the bigger scale - bigger corruption, more powerful oligarchs and the even bigger inequality and especially grim view of the russian province which is famous for it's third-world development level.
So majority of Ukrainians (though not all of them to be true), especially younger ones, wanted to go more on the West. Not Russia direction. 2004, 2013 - it was not big CIA conspiracy. These were just people tired of what they see.
And here lied the biggest threat to Russia and Putin dictatorship - if Ukraine pivot to the Western Europe was successful that would undermine and threated his power in Russia. So he could not let Ukraine do what it wanted to do - because power of imitation and memetics would give again many Russians power to rise up against the dictatorship in Russia (Russians did try to protest a couple of times but did not succeed).
Raw materials, energy - this is more complex situation but generally Russia in recent years was losing its upperhand in energy provision to Europe. Which in the long-term would mean accelerated economic decline and further domestic problems. Because Russia is essentially an "avocado economy" - even though it has plenty of fuels, raw materials and many bright people (mathematicians, engineers) it is a malfunctioning country that is not able to produce car of washing machine.
Here is article from 2019 (!) from polish blogger which correctly foresaw the Russian invasion and its reasoning:
https://www.krzysztofwojczal.pl/geopolityka/europa-wschodnia/rosja-europa-wschodnia/do-2022-roku-rosja-wywola-wojne-w-europie-lub-na-bliskim-wschodzie/
In short - Russia was losing all on all fronts (technological, economical, demographical) and then only advantage it has is a demonstration of power.
Which they try to demonstrate - with mixed results.
So whatever reasons you got on this war from your twitter/facebook newsfeed or from your favourite podcaster, is at best half-truths.
Dig deeper - look at the geopolitcs, read Gulag Archipelago by Solzhenitsyn or Kolyma Tales by Shalamov, read something from russian oppositionists, or even read anti-woke journalists like Konstantin Kisin or Douglas Murray.
Whatever bad or corrupt you can find on Ukraine - be sure that if you look on Russia you would find the same (corruption, nationalists, nazis).
In the end - I know that politics and geopolitics is a nasty thing. Probably some nasty deal behind the closed door needs to be done, to avoid losing more human's lifes. I get that man should not know how sausages or politics is being made, as Bismarck famously said. All clear.
I just care about educating people. I just care about them leaving their superficial view of the world and learn that maybe their simple dichotomy of the world - like woke vs anti-woke is not always good lens to look at things. That sometimes you need to drop your left-hemispheric fixation on applying the same abstraction everywhere and you need to use more of a right hemisphere to see things as they are, in their own idiosyncratic way.
As it is here in this terrible unprovoked full-scale invasion.
So i'm leaving you in this conversation with this message.
I don't hope that you will be convinced today, next week or next month. But maybe some seed will be planted in your mind. Maybe after some time you will give a shot, try to leave your current information bubble and maybe curiosity will lead you to some new richer view of world. Which I wish you with all my heart.
Linda has listed some good sources. But you probably don't think you like what they say so they're "debunked".
Doesn't add much to the discussion. Why don't you actually try out Scott Horton on this topic?
Interesting. I know well arguments by Mearsheimer or Sachs.
There are other good sources already mentioned here - from experts and people actually knowing Russia's political system - living in Russia, Finland, Poland, Latvia, Ukraine, etc.
But you probably don't like what they say so you will call them "naive", "mainstream", "propaganda" because it does not fit your simplistic view of the world as game of Risk - or something like Sid Meier's Civilization.
Who cares about domestic policy, energy policies, cultural memetics and influences! Everything is just turn-based strategy game, right?
All you need is to have your expert called "realist", or any other "truth seeker" and then it must be true, right?
Similar as "social science" - by putting word "science" now suddenly it becomes "science".
I, and several Ukrainian scholars I know personally, have read much of Diesen, Mearsheimer, Sachs, Greenwald and Mate on the subject. The scholars (who have carefully studied over 400 years of Russia-Ukraine relations - and yes, I'm aware Ukraine was not a 'nation state" over the centuries, as we currently define 'nation') to a person agree in their assessment that not only do these writers have many if not most of their facts wrong, there is simply no way to objectively consider their writings to be presented in good faith.
A human condition. Ukraine is under totalitarian control itself controlled by Nazis white supremacist. Biden openly blackmailed Ukraine into changing a judge for 1 billion dollars. The US and NATO broke their condition of Ukraine independence by encroaching up to Ukraine and was enticing them to join. For Russia that would have meant that if Ukraine and its Nazis controlled government had attacked Russia and they were part of NATO that by default Russia would be at war with the USA if Russia defended itself against an attacking Ukraine. So Russia chose to preemptively invade before Ukraine was a nato member. The agreement broken by NATO would necessitate the Russian response. Now NATO uses the preemptive invasion by Russia against Russia. It was a great art of war tactic by the USA and NATO but those gullible to propaganda and not trained in the art of war are making themselves into dunning Kruger dunces. Follow the money.
Dear Mcgilchrist, Thank you from the bottom of my heart. This article thrilled me.
I am just a simple moderately educated human without any supporting documents but YES i consider myself just as this ... "I am a tiresome, contrary sort of bloke. (in my case, lass) I sometimes say I am the sceptic amongst believers, and the believer amongst sceptics. Do you recognise that, perhaps, in yourselves? For the most part YES
"I can’t help it; and I think it is what keeps one closer to truth and intellectually alive."
Agree totally, I cant imagine being so one-sided to close the door on somebody like Mattias Desmet, a brilliant poetic, soulful genius IMHO. His book the Psychology of Totalitarianism was an eye-opener, and a relief to me during a time of distress i.e, there was an explanation of what was potentially (and probably truly) happening around the world during Covid.
I look forward to reading more from you and from him, and plan to share this post as widely as I can, problem I have, the people who I want to read it stopped listening to me and will say politely they don't have time or interest.