Nobody interested in the Russia-Ukraine conflict?

Post Reply New Topic

If you haven't noticed, I'm not against using Fox or Skynews.
My objection is to only/always use them. Or do so while still calling yourself a centrist.

I simply believe that any narrative is biased and therefore needs to be hedged against by opposing narratives.
I don't think there is any essential difference between the left and the right of the Anglo-circle media on the Russia/China issue.
But you're choosing a set of sources with a clear monolithic bias(even an obvious affiliation of interest), with a clear lack of others. That is, you don't even have the same choice of other Anglo-circle media, although most of them I don't agree with, too.

Believe me, if there is one here from China, "used their critical thinking skills, their life experience and their *living through the event* to make their own assessment.". At the same time, they only choose a series of interest-related media in China as a means of understanding the world. You will have a violent conflict with them.

"Expand your sources of information" is a pretty sincere suggestion. But you seem to be irritated by this advice every time.

I've not followed Georgia close enough but I'm familiar with 2004 Ukraine. The elections were repeated - this time inviting international observers - and this time Yushchenko won. The fraud was extremely likely. Since then, Ukraine always invites OSCE observers to their elections - and, mind it, it did not prevent pro-Russian Yanukovych from winning the next one.
The "colorful revolutions" are about people wanting to live the Western lifestyle, having real democracy and individual freedoms. Poland had one, too - earlier, in late 1980s. And Putin's Russia opposes them... to the point of starting wars.

The anti-missile plans for Poland were canceled exactly because of pressures "not to alienate" Russia. That was the dominating narrative in the 2000s in West Europe: "let's not alienate poor Russia".
We can see where it has lead us :/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_revolution

I am neutral/skeptical about the Colour revolution.

China had a crazy moment related to this in about 2000-2014. Many of these leaders later turned out to have financial dealings with the U.S. government.
A lot of the propaganda during this period was extremely distorted, and it just deceived most people who had insufficient information. America/West is described here as paradise. Possess all kinds of unimaginable noble morality, even racial nobility. And, wildly proving that we, who have produced a polity different from the West, are racially or culturally flawed.

Most Chinese people may only feel this wave from the media, but I got it straight from my family. While this ultimately shaped my political knowledge probably beyond my peers, it wasn't a pleasant memory.
It is likely that the expansion of anti-American sentiment and nationalist influence in China since 2016 has actually been an overcompensation for this collective trauma.

Last edited by SkinnedWolf on 28 May 2022, 8:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

I think both Russia and China misunderstand what "the West" is.
It's not an organization. It contains countless organizations but each of them is optional.
It does not have any chain of command and leadership emerges only in some projects.

It's a... lifestyle. Lifestyle of states.

I am sure that the West in the Chinese context is actually basically referring to the United States. Large countries and small countries have different ways of organizing, and individual European countries really don't have much reference. And for historical reasons, separating China's political structure is a taboo.

In an "East" cultural context, this "lifestyle" is not so compatible. Democracy in both Japan and South Korea seems to function "atypically", and the pressures of life for ordinary people there seem to be indistinguishable from China's urban areas.

I think it's a cultural tendency. And in some sense Eurocentric. So Poles and Chinese will have very different perceptions about it.
If there is outside interference in this cultural shift, the means of reversing old cultural tendencies may not always be glorious. And to the people, it may be to fool or cause pain.

I think "color revolutions" in their original form are endemic to East Europe. Trying to create them in China ended in a fiasco, trying to support them in Middle East ("Arab Spring") ended in catastrophes.
But here, it was genuine. Even if there were some external powers supporting them (along with other external powers suppressing them), people genuinely wanting better democracy are the driving factor.

Too often, geopolitics don't pay enough attention to local cultures.

My whole experience with East Asia was one week in 2004 in South Korea, so I don't find myself competent in this topic. It was when I realized how much cultural differences mean. I remember thinking:
Wow! If capitalism and democracy planted on Korean culture looks like that, then I understand how North Korea is possible!
Very strong top-down hierarchies, worship of the leader, high level of control in every aspect of live. I also thought:
Okay, I don't wish anyone anything bad but if someone tried to make me live like that, I'd fight like a demon against it!

Awesome tutorial.

A lot of times, a regime that really cares about the local people needs to adapt to the local culture, rather than brutally trying to "democratize" the local area.

We also often observe how East Asian immigrants do not know how to integrate into the order in those democracies, and do not know how to use the rules to assert their rights. So we get "Model minority". This is actually a manifestation of maladjustment and being bullied.

I wouldn't espouse the current establishment, but I would argue that "Chinese characteristics" make sense.
The extension of a polity with a strong European historic background to other places is often disastrous.


It's not that I have no intention of changing my country's system, but there's a dangerous dividing line between that and favoring demonizing my own system.
I understand that people who live happily think their system may be quite superior. But therefore demonizing other systems or fanatically trying to spread one's own system to other regions is not really an act of thinking about other people.

I sometimes think about how much of these attacks on "unfree world" and overtly biased narratives overlap with white supremacy or Eurocentrism. Many times, to demonize a regime supported by the locals is actually to demonize the local culture.
At least in China, it has been a long-standing phenomenon. Chinese people making false accusations against China and expressing their dislike of China abroad often get attention and even funding. But expressions of love for China often get screams of "no independent thinking" or "extreme nationalism", as well as being canceled. Because it seems to shatter the fantasy of a small group of Westerners.

I think the West is learning it the hard way in Middle East.

Americans are often unaware of cultural diversity even within the West itself. Like that the race thing is not the same in Europe.
Learning more from West-aligned non-Westerners (Korea, Singapore, Turkey...) could probably help build some bridges.

But, well, right now we have to make a clear boundary: setting Europe on fire again is absolutely unacceptable. No margins for cultural differences because it's our culture. It's repeating the bad things of our culture, that the West more or less has managed to ascend from - imperialism, fascism, genocide. We know from inside why those are bad.

I would simply try to prevent other areas from being the price of "learning" too. Especially the area where I live.
China increases its military power. To what extent is this out of fear of being another Middle East? And this is actually what happened in the entire modern history of China.

I wouldn't over-comment Russia's relationship with Europe. But I would say that abuse of this logic is dangerous.

Yeah, I see this logic. From this perspective, it makes sense.
But I'd prefer China not to become a neighbours-invading empire, either.
The age of empires should me universally proclaimed over... for the sake of survival of this planet.

Boundaries, boundaries again. We need to set them and respect them.

BTW, I think Xinjiang problems show that Chinese state also struggles with cultural differences - Central Asia is kind of Asian Middle East. Tooth-breaker of civilizations.

Xinjiang's problem is more special.

I would not say that the cultures of Central Asia and East Asia themselves are inextricably linked. There will inevitably be cultural clashes here.
But another problem is that the US is funding/sanctuary local extremist forces. And Turkey's relationship with this is more subtle and complicated.

And some of the problems appear to be just a continuation of the Afghan problem.
The struggle between the Soviet Union and the United States in the 1980s has affected the pattern of the entire Islamic world to this day.

It's sad how this Iron Curtain between Christian whites has drawn all races and religions into it.

Afghanistan has a nickname of "Graveyard of Empires". I believe "Afghan problem" can be traced way further back in history than just end of Cold War.
And, yes, I think "Afghan problem" is an epicentre of something that could be called "Central Asian problem". Neither the West, nor Russia, nor China can feel safe in Central Asia, despite all struggling for influence there, each in their own ways.

^I don't comment on how China's process is on this issue. Because some parts are definitely controversial. And I'm not really sure about every detail.
But judging from the current results, it seems that most locals are satisfied.

At least terrorist attacks, high crime rates, low educational attainment and limited female autonomy are objective issues that need to be addressed rather than cultural differences that can be tolerated.

^ That could be also said about American occupation in Afghanistan.

Anyway, I was pointing out that Central Asia has its own characteristics and let's not underestimate its importantce. Central Asian extremists have their own networks that quite successfully use external support and evade external control.

^So far, China has only dealt with its own domestic affairs, and the United States seems to be everywhere. The latter may therefore cause more concern in non-Western countries that are not aligned with the United States.
But external interference in Afghanistan can be a necessary evil. In cases where historical legacy has distorted the local culture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone#Aftermath
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hccc-worldhistory2/chapter/the-united-states-and-the-mujahideen/