Apartheid Regime in Russia

Modern Russia under Putin is effectively an apartheid regime. Russian state effectively belongs to Putin and his clique of friends who have special privileges that common people do not. The rest of the people are treated worse than black people in Apartheid South Africa. The difference with South Africa is that in Russia it is not based on race, but rather on closeness to regime and its leader Putin. 

The difference in treatment is not officially announced policy but a de facto reality. Most of the time it remains hidden by the system, but there are few glaring examples of clearly biased two tier treatment.

The most glaring example, that sometimes exposes deeper biased treatment is misuse emergency beacons by the officials. In other countries it is used only by ambulances or police during an emergency. Sometimes it also used by presidential motorcades, but rarely so and only in official capacity.

In Russia however presidential style blue emergency beacons are used by even low rank officials as they routinely drive on the opposite side of the road home from work or the other way around. Police respects these emergency lights and make normal drives give way to this official. Even when this leads to accidents on the road, an official with an emergency beacon is never treated as offender. 

There is more information on this in Wikipedia article on protest against this practice: Society of Blue Buckets. Blue buckets are a way for people so satirize and protest this practice by mounting blue sandbox buckets on the roofs of their cars so that it looks like an emergency services beacon (pictures and more info here).

This however does expose government officials and elites' attitude to rules and society in general: common people must obey rules, but not us. We are special and can do whatever we want, even drive on the opposite line daily and if someone crashes into us, they will go to prison for traffic offence, not us.

It's like this in other spheres in life too. Government officials and people close to power are treated as special, while everyone else is subjected to a second-class treatment. Privileged elites are never held responsible for breaking law and even if they kill a commoner deliberately it will be treated as commoner's fault by a corrupt legal system. And if you protest against that its prison and accusation of being a foreign spy. <irony>Because why would locally oppose to this system, they must be paid by Soros or Department of State</irony>

Why some countries are Individualist and others Communitarian

Migrant countries are typically individualist. After all most people here either forgone their countries of origins and left for Australia or are descendants of such people. Desire for personal wellbeing prevailed over the bonds to the community.

Also, community and family bonds cannot just be created with a flip of fingers. It such things have provided for you since childhood, you grow accustomed to relying on them and to contribute to them yourself. You normally do not think about it, just do it. However, if you think about it, you contribute precisely because you can expect them to take care of you when you need it, you can trust in them.

However, in a society where community and family did not provide or help enough, or worse betray your trust and hopes, you grow self-reliant and cynical. It is not possible to trust in what have betrayed you before. If society did nothing for you, why do you need to do anything for them. Same with family. 

In that regard Australia is a country created by people betrayed by their previous societies. That is one thing that unites us. From original convicts who were driven to steal by poverty in 19th century UK and then punished for that, to current migrants escaping dishonest thieving dictators from Russia, China and the like.

So, for people who grew up in self-reliant societies it's not possible to trust in community or family. It is however possible to seek benefits from members of such communities. That is why a lot of men marry Asians and women Africans nowadays.

How Rightists Actively Create their own Arch-Nemesis, the Left

Rightist have only themselves to blame for the rise of the left.

The rightist problem is that they want to breed huge underclass to serve them. Due to their naivety, they assume this underclass will be perpetual servants to them while remaining second class citizens forever. However, they only reason to believe so hinges on religion and moral.

However, underclass is not stupid and eventually realizes that moral and rightist values are against their self-interest. Then they start voting for leftists to tax the rich (rightists) to feed themselves.

When that happens rightist cry "socialism" and blame what not but not themselves for this. However ultimately it is rightists own fault it ended up like this. Their own stupidity and naivete led to this outcome.  

So, when rightist make another baby without making sure they will have enough land and wealth to inherit or another clear pathway to prosperity, they create future leftist who will vote to tax their own stupid parents and pay themselves welfare out of these money. 

Congratulations rightists, now go and breed more leftists you will later bitch about in 20 to 30 years' time. After all the only thing history teaches us is that is does not teaches anything.

Plus, a little picture to think of: BTW I am LibCenter.

How to Create European Army

Local armies but with central European command that integrate them together. Individual national units know who their European superiors and fellow units in a super unit. They train to fight together as a unit with them. For example, Central European core would consist of 2 Polish regiments, one Czech and one Hungarian and so on. Bigger countries can have cores and bigger formations entirely of their own regiments, while smaller Countries with smaller armies would instead form 1 regiment together with smaller neighbors. So on and so on.

Finally, some small countries can specialize in certain types of warfare, such as mines or reconnaissance. That way they do not have to split their limited troops between different roles and can pull them together into one large unit.

To do that a European command has to be created first. Individual militaries submit to them list of their units with sizes and equipment. Command later composes pan-European structures and gives them to individual nations to review in case someone wants to be in a different unit with some other countries instead. After all structure is approved, training can begin.

Nato already does that, so there is no particular need to invent much, just do the same thing but with EU only armies and command.

Why Stereotypes Russians Believe in Makes Putin Favor Dealing with Either Latvia Like or Belarus Like Countries

  

People and nations are complicated things, to make them easier to understand people simplify and dumb them down to one or few easy to understand and use stereotypes. 

Americans do this too. For example, they like to think that Mexicans are lazy, eat beans, have small curvy mustaches and wear ponchos and sombreros. Far not every Mexican match any of these stereotypes but they persist. They also provide colorful contrast with say Canadians, whom Americans like to see as very liberal and progressive. They also believe that you can get free healthcare the moment you cross the border. That is not true, but cartoons like Simpsons and Family Guy keep showing that over and over again.

Why they do it? Simple, colorful and contrasting stereotypes are entertaining and easy to remember. These stereotypes however do shape people's worldview, as some actually believe in them. As much as they are untrue, certain people do base their opinions and even decisions on them.

Fundamentally from a psychological point of view, all these stereotypes are reflection of America's own internal psyche and desires. Stereotypes about Canada reflect the country, progressive Americans wish the Unites States were. Stereotypes about Mexicans let, conservatives to think better about themselves and justify their own better quality of life compared to Mexicans. 

Truth is Mexicans are not poor because they are lazier than Americans but admitting that would shatter the conservative psyche and mindset, destroy they self-justification for being better off than Mexicans. Without it they will start thinking they did not earn or deserve the lifestyle they have. That will crush their psycho and ego. It is the same for admitting that poor are poor not because they are lazy, but due to back luck and poor hand in life. So, they do not admit that and stick to their stereotypes like their life depends on it, because psychologically it does.

In the same way admitting that Canada does not give healthcare to anyone who cross the border would shatter progressive people hopes and dreams about some charitable paradise on earth that loves everyone unconditionally.

Because of that both stereotypes persist to reinforce people's psyche, mentality and worldview.

It is the same with Russia. The country is also full of various stereotypes that many people believe or choose to believe to. Just like for the US, for Russians these stereotypes reinforce the psyche and justify their believes and actions. There are few who are able to accept the truth, but majority indulge themselves in delusions instead.

Putin does indulge these delusions. In fact, pretty much everything he done ever since he became president 25 years ago was pamper to these delusions. His actions do not make any sense in the Western countries because they do not share the same delusions as Russians do. Because of that countless people wrote countless books, essays and such, trying to understand reasons behind Putin's actions. It's like when you think that some obscure traditions from a primitive tribe, like putting bones in their noses a stupid and savage but at the same time would defend your own ones no matter how strange they are like for example circumcision for Jews and Muslims.

I wrote a series of articles about stereotypes that prevail in Russia. Here is one about Europe and you can search more on my blog. In this article I will cover two countries that fit these stereotypes best, Latvia and Belarus. Because they fit stereotypes best, Putin has much easier time dealing with them than with say Ukraine that falls somewhere between the stereotypes and because of that cause conflict of understanding in average Russian's mind.

Latvia

Publicly relationship between Latvia and Russia could not be worse. Russian government accuse Latvia of violating human rights of Russophone residents, closing Russian language schools and treating them as second-class citizens. Russia further accuse Latvia of being Nazi sympathizer, honoring SS veterans and holding public parades for them, plotting genocide of local Russophones and what not.

There is some limited truth to these claims, but official Russian opinion grossly exaggerates the situation. For example, there is indeed a special non-citizen status that many Russophones have and a special passport to denote it. However, those with non-citizen status can obtain full Latvian citizenship and more than a half of the Russophones did so already. 

However, this non-citizen status is symbolic, and Russian TV will not stop rave about how racist, Russophobe there Latvians are with their "Nazi apartheid" regime.

That does not prevent Russian government from equating this practice with South African apartheid and Nazi policies. Despite being so horribly oppressed, most Russophones prefer their life in Latvia even if they dislike certain policies of Latvian state. They do not want to leave Latvia and move to Russia instead, even if Russia willing to give them citizenship no questions asked.

Despite that Russian government persists with these rather groundless accusations. Why? Because this is expedient for propaganda. Many Russians tend to believe that West think of them being savage barbarians who can never be as civilized as proper Europeans are. People actually want to be in Europe but believe that Europe will not accept them as one of their own. Inferiority complex.

Putin strokes this inferiority complex for his personal needs: offended by such a scornful and humiliating rejection by Latvians on behalf of the entire Europe, upset and full of "righteous indignation" Russians will in turn their back on the West and rally behind Putin as their savior and protector. Nationalism and Putin's popularity will take a hike and his position on the top will be secure once more.

Because of that the worse Latvians treat their Russophone population, the better it is for Putin. 

If Latvians instead decided to befriend Russophones and bring them into Europe, then Russians would turn to Europe. They will begin to question Putin's anti-Western ways, and he will lose power; Anti-Western nationalists would lose ground for their hatred of Europe. 

Because friendship with the West would mean end of political and possibly even biological life for Putin, he is opposed to that. To stay in power Putin needs a Russophobe Western country constantly hurting Russian feelings in one of the other ways. Latvia and to some extend Estonia fulfils this role.

Latvians even "play the ball" with Putin and in turn accuse Russia of illegally invading and occupying them prior to WWII, blame them for human rights violations during Soviet times, accuse them of trying to erase Latvian language and culture, demand large reparations as compensation for the occupation as well as claiming Pytalovo (Petsamo) rayon of Pskov Oblast as rightful part of Latvia.

Latvian claims are substantiated, USSR did only/mostly bad things to Latvia, USSR deprived them of independence, send many Latvians to Siberia, flooded country with people from other parts of USSR and many more. It would be reasonable for Latvia to ask for a compensation or at least an apology. However, Russians prefer to look at it as if USSR did only/mostly good to Latvia and Latvia fails to be grateful enough for what USSR did for them.

Publicly Putin several times ridiculed these claims and absurd and preposterous and even infamously promised Latvians "ears of dead donkey" instead. Privately however he is happy that Latvians constantly stocking anti-Western sentiment in Russia but constantly hurting Russian people feelings and keep people loyal to him.

Because of that behind the doors relationship between Latvia and Russia are better than public ones. Rich Russians buy expensive properties in Riga, driving construction boom and injecting lots of money into Latvian otherwise dysfunctional economy. Latvians enrich themselves with laundering Russian money, sure they hate Russians as well, but not their money. Around half of Latvian economy is so opaquely named "unclassified transactions". They even hold annual Russian musical festival in Jurmala, just short drive away from Riga, for Rich Russians to enjoy, but away from general public, both Russophone and Latvian, who would be puzzled why two sworn enemies are hanging out in such a friendly manner.

In Russian psyche Latvia fulfils role of an evil and treacherous boogeyman who betrayed Russia like Judas betrayed Jesus. According to official Russian government interpretation of history USSR "saved" Latvia from genocide and extermination by Nazis and Latvia "thanked" Russia by siding with its enemies, treating Russians like second class citizens, and destroying Russian monuments of WWII while honoring people who collaborated with Nazis.

This boogeyman is just what Putin need to sell his anti-Western ideology to people. Without the boogeyman like that People would question if Europe and the West really as Russophobe as Putin claims they are, and Putin's rule will fall apart. 

Belarus

The other extreme of this spectrum is Belarus. Belarus actually borders Latvia and even looks much like Latvia or Lithuania, but average Russian perceive them as two polar opposites. If Latvia is Russophobe hateful Nazi snob, then Belarus is Russia's best and almost only friend and brother in this cold hateful Russophobe world.

Back in Soviet times Soviet government used to portray USSR as whole and Russian people in particular as heroes who save weak and downtrodden people of the world from imperialism, capitalism, exploitation, racism, abuse and what not. Socialist countries, including Soviet Socialist Republics were portrayed as such saved countries. USSR propaganda never stopped saying how greatly all these "liberated" nations are happy that USSR saved and protected them. Many were sold to this idea of being "valiant heroes of the world" and grew attached to it, priding themselves for being "the force of good, contributing to fairness and justice in the world".  Even some people outside of USSR got sold on this ideology and defected to USSR or spied for it, even if defectors to the West were much more numerous.

However, when USSR collapsed and Warsaw pact and even Soviet Socialist Republics became independent, many started openly criticizing USSR and call it occupier and oppressor. Many Russians got a psychological crisis of sorts. "Are we the bad guys, Hans?" Many could not believe it or accept it. They desperately wanted someone to refuse all these "groundless accusations" and reaffirm that they were good guys just as Soviet propaganda use to tell them.

Here where Belarus and Lukashenka came in. Back in 90s, when Russian questioned their role int the world Lukashenka helped to affirm Soviet propaganda. On Behalf of Belarus and its people, he assured Russians that they were indeed heroes USSR told them they were. His message was something like that: "Even if various ungrateful treacherous Baltics chose to forget what USSR did for them and now shit in Russia in exchange for dirty American money, Belarus is not like that. Belarus remembers what Russia did for it and will never betray Russia and will fight together with Russia against Americans and NATO to the bitter end."

That is awfully hypocritical of a country that pays for Russian gas 6 times less neighboring Lithuania. Greedy and cynical Lukashenka would not remain as loyal if gas was the same price as for Lithuania. 

However Russian psyche needed someone "friendly" like Belarus and Yeltsin embraced Lukashenka to deflect from himself some of the blame for "destroying USSR" and give people something to believe in. Putin kept this special treatment of Belarus, even if more sober heads would point out that this "loyal brother" would be completely useless in case war with NATO and subsidizing him cost budged a lot of money. Lending him Russian riot police from all over the country to suppress protestors against his continuous rule is also a hassle as they are needed in Russia to prevent Russian opposition from overthrowing Putin himself.

However emotional and political cost of abandoning this "loyal brother" is too high and so Lukashenka and Belarus continue their role as Russia most loyal puppet, while using this emotional sentiment to extract various material concessions from Russia.

From Russian psychological perspective Belarus is Russia's little brother that Russia must protect because Russia is not the kind of hero who abandons family to their fate. If Russia would abandon even Belarus, many people In Russia would face psychological crisis. A lot of Russian identity is built around this concept of being hero of the oppressed and being protective older brother for Ukraine and Belarus.

Conclusion

In Russian psyche Belarus is Russia little brother whom Russia protects. In contrast Latvia is an ungrateful swine who now shits on a hero who saved them from genocide by Nazis. It's simple and convenient with these two. Russian government knows how to handle either of them and mostly happy with the role each of them play in post-Soviet reality and in keeping Putin in power.

Dealing with these two extremes is much easier for Russian government than with something that falls in between these extremes. Because Latvia is too Russophobe for anyone pro-Western in Moscow to reasonably suggest that it's something Russia should imitate. Belarus in contrast is too authoritarian and anti-western for such pro-Western people, so they do not wish to imitate it. 

That is how Putin wants it to be. He does not want any countries to be democratic enough for Russian Liberals to imitate, yet at the same time not Russophobe enough for Russian patriots to hate with burning passion. 

There are two extremes and an uncanny valley in the middle. Unfortunately, Georgia, Armenia, Ukraine and Moldova do fall into this uncanny valley. Because of that Putin wants each of them to move to one or the other extremes. Among them Ukraine has a peculiarly unique place in Russian psyche, I will cover it in a separate article.

Final Word

As much as many in the EU want to see Russia join the block as long as Putin is in power it is unlikely. He is too cunning and alert to simply let EU communicated to Russians directly and convince them they can easily join the EU and live in Moscow like in Milan. That will work if EU could actually reach to common Russians, but Putin is too vigilant to let EU's message reach common Russians. Because of that unless EU has a way to bypassing this deliberate information blockade, they should postpone Russia for the time being and instead focus on Eastern partnership instead.

Unique Place Ukraine Has in Russian Psyche and What to do About It

In Russian psyche Belarus is Russia little brother whom Russia protects. In contrast Latvia is an ungrateful swine who now shits on a hero who saved them from genocide by Nazis. It's simple and convenient with these two. Russian government knows how to handle either of them and mostly happy with the role each of them play in post-Soviet reality and in keeping Putin in power.

What is a Ukraine then, someone who used to be like Belarus but now became someone like Latvia instead. This mind splitting question breaks usual stereotypes, people of Russia used to. They do not know what to think and how to treat Ukraine. They are as shocked as Obi Wan Kenobi at the end of Episode III could not believe that Anakin would go Sith and kill the Jedi kids.

How could Ukraine have betrayed them? Are they being controlled by Americans? Did Americans imported Nazis or brainwashed local population using some psychogenic Oranges or something? These questions sound like batshit insane conspiracy theory for pretty much any normal human being. However, Russians, who were fed stories about three brotherly nations during the Soviet times, having hard time reconcile reality of Ukraine with their distorted by Soviet propaganda image of it.

In reality nationalism and independent identity was always strong in Ukraine, most people clearly saw themselves as distinct from Muscovites (as they call Russians). They never liked Russia and did not saw themselves as part of Russian world or nation. Even if Ukrainian (and Belarusian for that matter) languages are closer to Polish than to Russian.

However Soviet propaganda managed to completely hide these facts from Russians. Now they are puzzled why Ukraine wants to join NATO, many do not believe it's a genuine will of Ukrainian people and instead prefer to think that someone drags Ukraine away from Russia against Ukraine's will.

That puts even Putin and Russian government in a very confusing position. Not doing anything will make people question his ability to protect Russia and its relatives and friends. Doing anything will attract sanctions and all sorts of problems.

To the extend Putin and his propagandists themselves made this situation even worse by exploiting Ukraine in their propaganda. Constant stories about Nazis in Ukraine terrorizing common people of Ukraine helped Putin to keep Russians distracted from various internal problems such as corruption. 

However, that eventually came to bite him in the ass when Russian public started to think that Russia could not simply let situation in Ukraine be and has to "save" Ukraine from these Nazis.

Because of that Putin faces a difficult question of how to explain the public what happened to Ukraine is without destroying the house of cards and stereotypes that brainwashed them into supporting him in the first place.

For the lack of better ideas, he started special military operation to "save" Ukraine from Nazis, despite being fully aware that Nazis were invented by Russian TV and instead of them Russian military will have to fight Western trained and armed Ukrainian military. 

Soldiers were not told that however, they were told civilians would welcome them and they will only have to fight out of control Neo-Nazi street thugs. Only after the invasion they had to somehow come to terms with the fact that Ukrainian military is fighting them and everything they were promised by the command failed to materialize.

Meanwhile public in Moscow still expects a Russian victory over those mythical Neo-Nazi thugs. Since they do not exist Putin can simply withdraw troops at any time and say mission accomplished and order is restored. 

It will be almost Black Adder clever:

-We will fight Nazis in Ukraine

-But there are no Nazis in Ukraine

-Then we can just withdraw at any time and declare a victory. No one will be able to claim that we failed to defeat the Nazis since none are there to begin with.

However, that still leaves an issue of Ukraine's unique role in Russian psyche. If old Soviet are propaganda stories about three brotherly nations will remain intact, then Russian public might once again find themselves concerned with the fate of Ukraine and new Russian government will commit to another war to boost their ratings.

Poland has a similar legend, invented during Cold War era: three Slavic bothers, Lech, Czech and Rus were said to be progenitors of modern Slavic nations of Poland, Czechia and Russia. With that untrue legend USSR and Polish communists wanted to make Polish people more friendly towards their Russian "brothers". It had limited success in making Poland Russia friendly, but a lot of people ended up believing the story even if not being pro-Russian as a result of it.

In eastern version of this story the three brotherly nations are instead Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, their ties are mentioned and glorified by extensive Soviet propaganda. Legacy of this propaganda is partially responsible for the current war in Ukraine.

Solutions

So, what can be done to dispel this myth and protect the Ukraine from any further incursions from Russia? The most straightforward solution can be to simply stop mentioning it in propaganda. However public memory is finicky thing, and this myth will not disappear overnight.

Something cleverer would be to say that Galicians took control over the Ukraine and all Ukrainians have long fled to Russia and Russian occupied areas. That will eliminate any further desire to save Ukraine but will instead fuel irredentism to retake Ukraine back from Galicians.

A while back I suggested that a buffer state made out of some Russian and Ukrainian lands would be able to diffuse tensions between the two. That seem ever so unlikely now that war gone so far.

Russia can instead shift definitions and instead started to call Kuban area Ukraine, that way Kubanian Ukraine will be part of Russia, and its people would be brotherly. Many Ukrainian nationalists claim Kuban as part of Ukraine, so it is not too much of a stretch. Originally name Ukraine was only used for Slobozhanshina area that consist of modern Kharkiv and Sumy oblasts of Ukraine as well as Belgorod oblast of Russia. They can also unliterary rename Ukraine Galicia at least for use in Russia itself even if Ukraine and the world will not accept this change.

On its end Ukraine too can consider a name change. In my article about name of Ukraine I mentioned how Ukraine used to be called Rus before and how Russia stole that name. For better or for worse, names get stereotypes attached to them. Even if Ukraine is not named after being a borderland of Russia, it will not stop Russians from claiming it was and insisting that its Russia because of that. Change of name can lead towards change in perception of Ukraine's place and role in the world.

Ideally new name of Ukraine should sound as foreign in Russian language as possible. That way less people would think it's part of Russia and nationalists will have harder time claiming it's just a region of Russia.

As to what name Ukraine should take, I have some ideas. Ukraine can adopt its original name again either as Rus or Dniprovska Rus with a spelling different from Russian one. Alternatively, Ukraine can call simply call itself Dniprovska Republica or Podniprovska Republica. Ruthenia based on Rusyn minority in Zakarpattia oblast can also be considered, this name if fundamentally based on the same original Rus name. Kyiavia can be considered as well. Galicia often used by Russians themselves but can be considered as well. 

Possibly Dniprovska Republica is the best of these, but possibly a better idea can exist.

Alternatively, Ukraine can go full Latvia and ban Russian language and issue non-citizen passports to Russophone population. As Diethard Reid mentioned in Code Geass "masses desire tears" so this cruel betrayal of Russian people feelings could be just what Putin needs for his propaganda. However, some confirmation that it will not result in even more military action is in order before this can be considered. 

Also, people of Ukraine are much better integrated into society compared to Latvia as most able to speak both Russian and Ukrainian languages. In contrast in Latvia Russophone and Latvians do keep to themselves and rarely interact with the other group. 

However actual situation on the ground does not matter for Propaganda. If Putin can turn it into another Latvia style Nazi bashing in front of TV, then he will likely be content and leave Ukraine alone.

Why Juche is not Anarchism

Juche is just an excuse for leaders to maintain their grip on power. The only aim it has is to make sure their grip on power will not be challenged by anything internal or external. It serves Kim Jong Un needs at expense of everyone else in North Korea.

It is useful if you are Kim Jong Un or someone close enough to him to benefit from it all, but for everyone else it is misery and suffering.

Juche is just as self-serving and up their own ass, as some small business idiots who want $0 tax and $0 minimum wage. Arrangement that does not work and only serve the interest of a petty dictator of a little corner shop.

When you try corner shop dictator ideology in a country, you get North Korea. NK GDP is on corner shop levels.

Fundamentally it not even makes Kim Jong Un independent as he is dependent on China and Russia for pretty much anything.

From purely anarchist perspective Juche does nothing to eliminate authority of any boss of any level over his subordinates. Thus, it is not an anarchist ideology.

It is nor anarchism if it does not remove bosses.

It is more anarchist if you can live by "do not tell me what to do" principle and less anarchist if you cannot.

Differences between American and Russian Militaries

Some people might think that all militaries are alike. On superficial level they are, they typically have these three branches: army, navy and air force, sometimes additional ones as well, they have roughly comparable ranks with few variations here and there and so on. 

However, while some militaries, particularly from culturally similar nations, are indeed operate in a similar way and do not have differences beyond surface ones, that is not the case for all of them. 

Some militaries organized and function completely differently from the others. These differences are the reason why for example Korean war ended with the current DMZ. North of that line Chinese military had advantage in infantry numbers over the US one. Northern mountains and forests make equipment and organization nearly pointless. South of that line however it's the US who had the advantage in Air Force that dominated over the open plains of the south. Differences between Chinese and American militaries are the reason for such outcome. If both militaries functioned mostly the same, then one of them could have prevailed completely and we would have unified Korea.

In this article I will examine differences between Russian and American militaries.

I will begin with the US. Sure, Americans are familiar with how their military operate, but I will still outline it here to make contrast with Russian military starker.

American military recruits enlisted personnel by offering them various material insensitive, money but also a paid university education after serving certain number of years. America trains their soldiers well and want to retain them in their military ranks for as long as possible. 

People who enlist are typically poor with few opportunities and they enlist to use military to get ahead in life. Because of that they tend to be well motivated to excel at what they do and want to meet their standards in order to get that coveted free University Education at the end.

American military has a partially unique and very extensive system of NCOs, even similar militaries do not have as many NCO ranks as the US. NCOs are promoted from enlisted privates who show greater ability to lead compared to their peers. NCOs serve not only as commanders of small units such as squad and fireteam, but also as co-commanders of larger units together with commissioned officers. They share hardship of military life with soldiers, thus earning their respect, but at the same time stay in contact with higher command, serving as an intermediary between officers and soldiers.

Americans say that NCOs (noncommissioned officers) are the backbone of the military. Through NCOs American military main strength lie in capable and motivated soldiers organized in small units commanded by NCOs.

In contrast American commissioned officers tend to be people who want to become a famous military leader one day. They admire famous historical military leaders and want to be like them one day. They join specialized military academies in hope of one day leading the US troops in a future famous battle. That is why fresh graduates are often called butter bar, they have stary eyes and hopes of glory and no idea how anything works.

Later as they get promoted, they in practice become cogs of military bureaucracy as well as control and command. They mostly pass on orders from general staff to the NCOs and reports back up. Most of their dreams of glory die there.

However, some of them got promoted to generals they have to play complex DC politics, occasionally hoping that some evil dictatorship somewhere on Earth will give them their so coveted shot at that military glory.

That mindset is what lead American military command to conclude that Putin wants to restore the Empire by conquering the Ukraine. That is what they would do in his place.

To sum it up American military operates by general staff dreaming of glory and big victories and NCOs figure out how to achieve it on the ground. Of course, generals make battle plans and without them military will not get too far, but NCOs have a much greater impact than in many other militaries.

Now for something completely different I will explain ins and outs of Russian military. In Russia only top officers and generals really understand how any of that works. Bottom ranks are kept deliberately ignorant and dependent on the higher ones.

Common soldiers are recruited mostly from the dumb and indifferent. A lot of people in Russia avoid draft by obtaining medical condition that would preclude them from service. This in practice ensures, that only those who are too dumb to obtain one or too indifferent to bother with it, get conscripted into military. 

It's like that quote from Pirates of the Caribbean second movie where Mr Gibbs was recruiting sailors for Jack Sparrow to sacrifice to Davy Jones and one guy told him he does not care if he lives or dies. Perfect or typical Russian soldier is just like that guy. At least it is the type, command typically works with.

Command is afraid that too smart soldiers will mutiny or defect. That is why they recruit only idiots. 

They also do not train them as much as Americans would. Better training can also increase chance of mutiny or desertion. 

Soldiers in Russian military are intended for exploitation by their superior offices in peace time and to die for their country in war time. 

Because of that command deliberately keeps them dependent on themselves. They do not train them to survive in wilderness on their own. A soldier who can survive on their own can defect and the one who cannot have no choice but to obey command orders to be fed.

They also threaten them with court martial and swift death sentence for disobeying any orders. They confiscate their identity documents and replace them with special military ones to help police track them down if needed.

Finally, officers keep weapons and ammunition under key and lock to prevent soldiers from using them without command explicit orders. When they give them guns, officers are always there to supervise them.

Officers also do not see reasons to tell their troops even things like who they are fighting or where they ever are. North Korea whose army is created in Soviet and Russian image also does that. 

This "work for food", constantly under threat of punishment army is as unmotivated as one can expect. However, most of them are either too helpless to do anything about it or too indifferent to even have an independent thought in their heads. That ensures at the very least they stay where they are and obey their orders when officers are giving them.

One exception to this rule is VDV troops. Every recruit who is loyal enough to Russia, motivated to fight and dumb enough to believe in Russian propaganda is assigned to this branch of military. They have much better training, better fed and in general are treated much better and other solders. 

There are no NCOs like they are in the American military. Closest thing to an NCO is a Praporschik rank that only exist in Russian and some other post-Soviet militaries. However, his role is more of looking after supplies and he clearly does not share hardships of soldiers ranks.

Soldiers are promoted to ranks such as sergeant, but these are automatic promotions due to length of service and do not account for any adequacy or ability to command. Newly minted sergeants mostly use their authority to abuse privates in an infamous dedovshchina phenomenon.

To compensate for all this lack of ability or motivation in lower ranks, commissioned officers and generals are actually somewhat capable. Officers of rank of colonel and above had to know how to not only keep all this from falling apart but also how to run it with at least some efficiency. Surprisingly enough Russian military has just that capable generals.

Unlike the US, in Russia commissioned officers typically do not join military for glory. At the very least those who do not end up promoted high. 

Instead, most generals and colonels are motivated opportunity to abuse authority and exploit soldiers under their command for personal gain. The infamous "building mansions for generals". Most Russian generals greatly enriched themselves by abusing their military authority.

This de-facto spoils system keeps generals loyal to the system and Putin personally. It keeps them motivated to make sure this regime will survive because new leaders might reign into the spoils thing. 

It also keeps them motivated to actually win and even innovate to achieve results.

Because of internal issues and structure, Russian military can only be top heavy. This internal culture is what produces all of Russian military characteristics. Including inflexibility and over reliance on top officers and generals. Only people high enough in rank to seriously benefit from spoils system can be trusted with any significant authority and control.

That is why Russia relies on fighting methods that work with these constrains. A lot of trenches, minefields, a lot of artillery. 

Russia cannot have effective fireteams and squads as there require soldiers to be motivated and loyal.

Artillery on the other hand can be operated by dumb numb dying slaves, micromanaged by commanding officers. Dying slaves can dig trenches too.

All that is both constrain Russia in what it can do on the battlefield as well as gives any of its opponents a good idea of what to expect when you fight against them.

Germans successfully used these weaknesses against USSR during Operation Barbarossa. Ever since these days things have not changed on fundamental levels. The only difference is that command takes more precautions, and their artillery can now fire at higher distances, making reaching them in a blitzkrieg dash harder. They are however just as vulnerable to sudden infiltrations as before. Ukrainian Kharkiv offensive showed just that. Catch them off guard and they will show no resistance. 

How to Fight Russian Propaganda

I mentioned in my writings many times how truth about War in Afghanistan led towards dissolution of USSR and victory of the free world over communist oppression. Simple and elegant, poetic even. I also said that the same kind of truth can defeat Putin's regime as well as China and North Korea.

It's simple, but perhaps misleadingly simple. After all these autocrats spent a lot of time and effort building their house of lies and tailoring the narrative to the one most favorable to them. Undoing it with truth sounds simple, but there are pitfalls to avoid. 

Just plain refuting Putin and everything he says will not do it. In fact, it may even make things worse. Think like those people who grew to trust him and everything he says. When you just say he is a liar and truth is something else instead, it's your word vs his. Why they should trust you and not him. What proof do you have that you are telling the truth and not him. On his end Putin would further shore up his house of lies by saying Americans and Westerners "make their fake news up to destroy Russia from within". 

Plain clash of narratives is doomed to fail. Putin spent years before War in Ukraine even begun, building his narrative, undoing this from the get-go would be near impossible. Much like convincing religions people that god is not real. You know it is a lie, but they refuse to believe you and refuse to listen.

Things such as who is bad guy and who is good guy is fundamentally a narrative. Narratives that clash with each other and not backed by any facts would ultimately devolve into who you trust. If Putin manages to take information war to this conflict of narrative where he has strong advantage, he might win the information war and that can even translate into victory on the ground.

That is how USSR won Vietnam war. Viet Cong was not better at fighting compared to Americans. However, USSR managed to win information war. They consistently portrayed it as anti-imperialist war of Vietnamese people against Western imperialism and destroy all support for war in Western countries. In the end the US was forced to withdraw its troops from South Vietnam, and it was overrun by communists.

Putin does the same thing in Ukraine as well. He portrays Ukrainians are corrupt Nazi who steal western money to erode support for Ukraine in western countries. If he manages to win information war again, Ukraine can become second Vietnam. It's imperative for the cause of free and just world, that we make sure it becomes second Afghanistan instead.

Fortunately, there is a way to get the message right. Voice of America managed to destroy the USSR not by a deliberate effort to destroy it, but rather unintentionally by simply reporting daily what was really going on in Afghanistan. This reporting was not meant to win Cold War, no one could have predicted it would do what it managed to achieve. The reporting only meant to inform people in Russian language of things that happen to their troops in Afghanistan daily. That reporting however managed to produce a much greater outcome that anyone could have imagined.

Because it was unintentional no one in America spent enough time thoroughly analyzing how Voice of America have contributed to collapse of USSR. To put it simply, they were telling the truth. However more details are needed to better characterize what kind of truth it was.

Voice of America was simply reporting facts as they happen. It was free of any narrative or interpretation, just the facts. In this "free from interpretation" lies the key. It was facts that hard or impossible to influence by narrative. Facts that Soviet propaganda machine could neither spin into favorable narrative, nor refute outright.

Voice of America did not try to talk about whether Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was right or wrong thing to do. Instead, it simply reported what happened there every day. How mujahedeen fought, how Soviets back, how people on all sides of conflict were dying there daily. How much misery it all brough to all sides. 

That worked because Soviet public was not prepared or even informed of the reality on the ground or the real cost of war. They thought it was just a humanitarian aid operation, that does not involve actual fighting or dying. That is what Soviet government have told them it was. They believed that until casualties became so high, Soviet government could no longer hide the corpses. Voice of America helped to expose these casualties of war that Soviet government was so eagerly stuffing under the rug and pretending there are none.

In this crucial aspect situation in Ukraine is similar. Putin calls it Special Military Operation and heavily censor the footage from Ukraine for exact the same reasons. They once again mislead public in Russia about the reality on the ground and the real cost of war. People are dying daily, and Putin's propaganda machine pretends it's not even happening. They show public images of school and hospitals in occupied territories, rebuild by Russian Army without specifying how Russian Army destroyed them in the first place. 

Meanwhile realities of war and daily casualties on all sides are deliberately ignored, even specifically prohibited from being displayed or mentioned anywhere.

Just as during the war in Afghanistan, Russian public is not prepared for real war or casualties. Thus, informing them of these costs will help shift public opinion in Russia. Once enough people know how people on all sides of conflict in Ukraine are fighting and dying daily, things will start to shift, and Putin's house of lies will start crumbling.

To achieve these outcomes, a plain footage of war with few if any commentary, would be much more effective than commented and narrated one. When there are no comments, it is much harder to accuse creators of peddling the narrative or misleading public.

One last note. USSR used to consistently portray Soviet people are heroes and good guys of the world who constantly fight imperialism and help poor and oppressed. People are so get used to that that it would be hard for them believe that they are the bad guys here. Because of that any narratives that portray them as villains would be labelled by people like Dmitry Kiselev as "lies" and ignored by public.

Once again this too can be used against Putin by providing footage of realities of war. It will disprove the narrative Putin so painstakingly created to justify his war. Once public in Moscow realize Putin is not saving anyone from Nazis but fighting an offensive war, support for war will evaporate and Putin's rule with it.

After all there is no footage that show Russian military as heroes saving common people of Ukraine from any Nazis, so Putin cannot prove he is telling the truth. There is only footage of Russian army fighting and dying from attacks of the Ukrainian military.

Hopefully Trump's administration has enough smart people to be able to turn tables on Russia in this information war and win bigly.

Salaries and Social Status in USSR

Officially USSR proclaimed equality of all people, but as one joke says, some were more equal than others.

In practice there was a complex hierarchy based on perceived value of one's work. On top of the official social pyramid were actually factory workers and miners. Government pampered them a lot and called them best and most important and so on. They were even paid better too, especially miners. Miners and factory employees had highest standing and highest official salaries.

That however did not mean they had highest quality of life or standards of living. Some other groups had better living standards for reasons I will explain below.

In contrast cleaners, street swipes and such had low standing and were indeed seen and dumb and uneducated.

Another sector that was look down upon was retail. They were seen as speculates who only peddle goods and do not produce anything.

Hard to tell where construction workers would be in that hierarchy, but likely somewhat below of factory workers.

White collar workers still had better working conditions and, in some cases, could steal shit so they often had it better.

In general one's ability to steal something from a warehouse or such had a much greater impact on standard of living and quality of life than official salary. Official salaries only ranged from 120 to 330 rubles or so.

Some white-collar workers however were seen as more important than the others, for examples military engineers who design weapons.

In general, there was a complicated hierarchy of how valuable or important was one's work seen.

Party members had the best lifestyle though. Their official salaries were small, and they had to pay a party membership fee out of it. However, they had a lot of perks of office to compensate for that: state cars, chaffers, premium government accommodation and summer houses, party owned seaside resorts, even special stores for party members only and so on. Because of all these perks Communist Party was the wealthiest organization in the USSR.

All that compromised politics as politicians were focused on making sure they will not lose out in shifting web of informal alliances rather than represented people or stood for anything. Because if they lose out and removed from office, they will lose all these juicy perks and become dirt poor.

Another group who had real high income and standards of living were smugglers of western goods. They could make a lot of money and be underground millionaires. There was risk however if they were exposed, as western goods were illegal. Some smugglers were even sentenced to death and executed. Smuggling Levi's jeans where as bad as smuggling cocaine as far as Soviet law was concerned.

Prices in USSR

A meme on reddit inspired me to write about pricing of the goods in the politicized economy of the USSR.

they priced goods cheap (cheaper than market value) because people like lower prices more than higher prices and government wanted to be popular and brag how they care more about working class by offering them goods at cheaper prices compared to fat cat greedy capitalist who bleed people dry to buy themselves another mansion

that had a predictable (for an economist) economic outcome of there being constant goods shortage (deficit was a word used a lot in USSR, every Joe Shmoe knew it): empty shelves in most stores and ques. When something good suddenly appears in stores it gets bought out almost immediately and only some unpopular shit sticks around.

however, government managed to take credit for low prices without being blamed for shortages. People were not economically savvy enough to associate artificially low prices with constant goods shortages, so even Gorby built his popularity on keeping prices down.

In 1991, when Yeltsin ended price regulation, prices gone up, but shortages ended. Some die hard commies still blame him for "robbing the people" by doing that. The country went from people have money to buy, but there is nothing to buy; towards there are goods to buy now, but people do not have (enough) money to buy them.

Second Cold War

Over the past 10 or so years we often see various events of backsliding of democracy and freedom, both imaginary and real. Often these events did not receive significant attention. After Spring of Nations or 89 and collapse of USSR Western world thought that freedom have won. It is only a matter of time before the last remaining enclaves of tyranny will finally liberalize and democratize. In 2000s even Chinese Hu Jintao committed towards limits on Presidential terms in power. There was of course no way for the defeated autocrats to somehow crawl back into power. 

That ended up an overly optimistic outlook. Couple of decades later in 2025 authoritarian forces in Russia, China and some countries around them managed to rebuild themselves and now want to preserve their autocratic rule over what is left of their former empire. Now Russia interferes in Georgia and Kyrgyzstan to impose autocratic rule there. China destroyed democracy in Hong Kong and now wants to do the same in Taiwan.

I too often was overly carefree of many actions by Putin and the other autocrats, believing they merely cling to power with lies and cheap tricks. After all they have their money in western tax heavens and their kids live in Western countries. There is no way they would want to destroy Western liberal order; all they want to keep their autocratic rule in their particular jurisdiction. 

That autocratic rule is bad in itself. In the past I wrote many articles, exposing how Putin's propaganda machine works and how one can dismantle it by hitting its weak points.

However, their continued persistence with the war in Ukraine and interference in Kyrgyzstan and Georgia suggests something else. Either Putin was out to restore autocratic neo-USSR (Eurasia) all along or people who wants that managed to sideline all other groups in power and now free to pursue their agenda.

Either way it is a dangerous turn of events that heralds beginning of the Second Cold War. Western Intelligence Agencies should start seeing Russia and China as enemies once again and begin working on defeating them in this new confrontation. 

This can be challenging. Sure, they are smaller and less rich now. However, they no longer have rebellious Warsaw Pact countries to deal with. Areas they control now are at average more backwards and more accepting towards tyranny. 

In contrast West is divided and confused due to wokeism and undue Russophilia in some circles. Current threats should not be underestimated.  Sure, there were communist sympathizers in the US even during Vietnam war and that did not destroyed democracy in the US. However, these anti-war protests managed to do what Viet Cong could not do on the battlefield, make US withdraw and leave Saigon government unable to defend itself. 

Unlike during USSR times, this time Russia does not limit itself to only pushing left wing ideologies but instead supports all malicious and destructive ideologies no matter where they stand on ideological spectrum. Various pro-Russian thugs, such as Antifa, radical ecologists, wokes, certain traditionalists and many more destroying West from within, like mite eats away at tree trunk. Intelligence Agencies should step up their game to stop these destructive actions.

West still have some allies in Russia itself as well as some other countries currently ruled by dictators of Eastern Club. However, levels of repression in Eastern countries prevent them from significantly challenging current regimes.

Dictators of the East can be defeated, however. Just like the last time West should break through the information blockade, censorship and propaganda to destroy them. China has this Great Firewall precisely because they fear that certain information available on the internet can destroy CCP's grip on power, that is why they get out of their way to suppress this information and prevent anyone living in China from seeing it.

Thus, the path for victory is simple, just bypass the firewall and let people access this "dangerous" information. Then see them rebel against their overlords, just like what Lelouch did to Chinese Federation in season 2. I even wrote several articles about exact structure of propaganda myth perpetrated by each of these countries and what exact information can take each of these regimes down. 

In Russia Alexey Navalny was trying to do just that and spread just such dangerous information to Russian public, that is why Russian police killed him. However, if anonymous sources would spread information about Putin's corruption and abuses, then Russian police will have no one to arrest.

Eastern Autocracy can be defeated, and I hope victory comes the sooner the better.

On Peace in Ukraine

 

Donald Trump victory in the US elections sparked renewed conversation about peace in Ukraine. Together with talks about peace there also surfaced a much murkier and more confusing topic about terms of any such peace. Different sides of conflict all have different views as to what a fair peace deal will look like, such differences in views might very well preclude any peace from being made.

I already predicted that instead of any negotiated peace the current situation with de-facto zones of military control on the ground would become de-facto reality. This is not the peace any of the sides really want but it's the only one either of them can achieve. 

Current de facto line of control would become a new frontier or a de-facto border between not just Russia and Ukraine but also between European Union and Western world on one hand and the eastern Eurasian Russian Chinese one. A new frontier of the Second Cold War. Kind of like Korean DMZ. I will cover Second Cold War in a separate article, here I will talk about Ukraine in particular.

This de facto military line of control is not perfect, but it is better than de-jure borders or any of the maximalist aims, professed by either side.

Letting Russia keep the territory it occupied may seem like a loss to Ukraine. However, a real loss would be losing sovereignty and being turned into a Moscow puppet, just like Belarus is. Losing some borderlands is much better than letting Moscow tell Kyiv what to do.

Both pro-Russian and pro-European side tend to overestimate their popularity and underestimate that of the opposing side. Everyone thinks that everyone else is much like their own neighborhood and if there are any different people, they are but a small minority. In reality the country is much more diverse than that.

Yanukovich era Minister of Education, Tabachnik, once proposed to make Galicia (West Ukraine) into its own country. He erroneously thought that pro-Western sentiment is limited to just that area of the country and by making it independent from the rest of Ukraine he can solve the political division and turn the rest of Ukraine into second Belarus. 

Reality is that pro-European sentiment spreads much further east than just Galicia. Even areas as far as Poltava, Sumy and Kremenchug are very pro-European and majority there speaks Ukrainian language daily. Even some mostly or partly Russophone cities like Dnipro or Odesa, would prefer EU over Eurasia. Donbas is rather unique it its Russophone monolingualism and Ukrainian language can be heard frequently in Dnipro, Odesa and even sometimes in Kharkiv.

On the other hand, pro-Ukrainian (European) side thinks that the whole conflict only happened because of history of Russification mixed with Russian propaganda aimed at advancing Russian Imperialist ambitions against Ukraine. They think that Ukraine already lost a lot in the past and it would be unfair to give Russia any more land that they already grabbed. Theya also thinks that if Putin's propaganda can be stopped, country can be united once again. Past Russification can be undone, and Ukraine will be happy and united again.

Reality is that Donbas, Crimea and Azov Sea coast were settled by Russian Empire in 19th century and almost no one there can understand Ukrainian language. It is areas with mixed population like Dnipro and Zaporizhya that de facto divide Ukraine pro-Russian and pro-European sides of the country. Even politicians such as Yulia Timoshenko and Volodymir Zelenskiy did not spoke Ukrainian language when they were children and learned it at later times in life.

In the past I wrote several articles about why current post-Soviet borders are not good and what better borders there could be in this region. I liked some here and you can find more if you search my blog.

Not only that, but current de-facto border has its advantages to Ukraine.

Back before Euromaidan and any wars with Russia when Ukraine had control over all of its de-jure territory, Ukrainian politics were dominated by constant geopolitical strife. Half of the country wanted to integrate with European Union and the other half with Russian Eurasia instead. Politics were dominated by this geo-political division. 

If Ukraine regains back all of its de-jure territories, this geo-political split will likely once again dominate politics in Kyiv. Pro-Russian people from currently Russia occupied lands will vote for anti-EU, pro-Russian parties that will work to prevent Ukraine from joining the EU and NATO. Someone like Yanukovych could again win election. That would mean that Ukraine will forever be stuck in a geo-political limbo between East and West. That is something that benefits neither west, nor Ukraine itself. 

Ultimately Ukraine needs to rid itself of its anti-European ballast and finally join EU and NATO. As much as you can argue that Donbas and Crimea are brainwashed by Putin and his TV, there is no simple and easy way to undo this brainwashing, Russian TV is free to air and broadcasting towers from Russia reach far into its neighbors' territory. All the Russophones who want to watch Russian propaganda are always able to tune it. As stupid as it is to believe Putin's lies about Banderites and Nazis in Ukraine, people of Donbas and Crimea choose to do so. It's time to stop trying to save them and simply let them join Russia they love so much.

On the other hand, Russia should not be allowed to dictate Kyiv what to do. People of Ukraine from Lviv to Kremenchug did choose Europe over their ties with Moscow. Euromaidan is definitive proof of that. It's an ultimate democratic expression of popular will. It will be unfair to betray these people who fought for freedom and their free choice of their future. 

Ukraine is Europe. Ukraine is not Eurasia or some brotherly nation of Russia. Thus, Ukraine should be allowed to join EU and NATO and Russia absolutely should not receive any Finlandization style concessions on this. 

Sovereignty of Ukraine should be guaranteed by Western military presence. Border between Ukraine and Russia occupied areas should be reinforced and patrolled by European or UN troops to prevent further fighting.

Ukraine joining European Union will benefit both sides enormously. It will improve quality of life in Ukraine while Europe will benefit from skilled and educated workforce that Ukraine has. It will also improve security of both sides. Ukraine will stop being vulnerable to Russian incursions and Europe will become bigger and its negotiation position with other international players will be stronger.

One last issue that remains are people who ended up on the wrong side of the East-West divide. There are some pro-Russian people left in Odesa and Kharkiv, on the other hand there are many pro-European people in Russian occupied areas as well as in Russia's core lands itself. 

A population swap should be arranged so that those who want to live in Europe could move to Ukraine while those who want to live in Russia could move there instead. Anti-Putin Liberals from Russian occupied areas as well as from Russia itself can take place of pro-Putin Eurasians in Odesa and Kharkiv.

Ultimately differences between different parts of Ukraine can only be solved by a fair division so that each side of the geopolitical divide can get their own country and move towards their desired objectives. Then each side can finally stop fighting tug of war and start building its future.

Hopefully these objectives can be achieved in the coming peace talks or at the very least on the ground. Glory to Ukraine.