Main Edition
US
FR
Victims or villains? Alexander Nemenov/AFP/ Getty Images
If you were a Russian mother, would you rather believe that your son gave his life heroically fighting Ukrainian Nazis, or that he died butchering innocent civilians? The former, most likely. It is not easy to admit — to oneself or to others — that you live in a country that has murdered tens of thousands of Ukrainians, or that has pointlessly sacrificed the lives of its own people.
Yet it is one thing to turn a blind eye to the truth, and quite another to be “brainwashed”. The West is fixated on the idea that “Putin’s war” is not Russia’s, and that the Russian people only support it because they have been “zombified” by a totalitarian regime. But this is missing the wood for the trees.
Independent polling claims that 75% of Russians approve of the war, a figure that has been relatively stable since March 2022 — despite a slight wavering when mobilisation was introduced in September. Similarly, Putin’s current approval rating remains at 80%, some 15-20% higher than it was before the invasion. Of course, opinion polls conducted in an authoritarian country must be treated with caution: a June 2022 study by political scientists Philipp Chapkovski and Max Schuab estimated that between 10-15% of Russian respondents may have lied to pollsters about supporting the war. But that still leaves a majority in favour.
Ever since Russia’s invasion of Crimea in 2014, ordinary Russians have been helping Putin to weave a narrative about the invasion. In those early days, people could easily access opposition and Russian-language Western media, but most preferred to listen to — and pass on — tall tales of Ukrainian Nazis under the spell of evil Westerners.
Russian TV news channels, which have long been the most trusted form of media, especially among older audiences, latched on to this popular opinion. It would be naïve to think they could get away with anything else, given that they rely on advertising revenue for income. Even today, producers schedule shows because they’re lucrative, not just because they uphold state propaganda (although they do need to stay on the Kremlin’s good side). Such was the demand for war propaganda following Russia’s invasion — from on high and below — that some channels ran pro-war content for up to 10 hours a day. After six months, however, audiences grew tired of the constant barrage and started to switch off, hitting advertising revenues. In response, the channels replaced some of the political propaganda shows with soaps, sports and lifestyle programmes.
Russians aren’t dependent on state television for all their news. Ordinary people can still read and watch almost all alternative sources using a VPN, which one in four Russians use. Even without a VPN, the Internet is mostly free, if manipulated, and the social media app Telegram acts as an uncensored news source for some 40 million Russians. Use of Telegram has tripled since the war began but, of the top 10 political channels, nine are virulently pro-war. Clearly, these are narratives that Russians are seeking out and choosing to believe.
As a specialist in Russian propaganda, I have analysed tens of thousands of pro-war Telegram posts and media articles, identifying three main narrative groups, or themes, all upheld by the belief that Ukrainians are in fact Russians, and that Ukraine is not a real country. The first group is rooted in Second World War mythology, arguing that Russians are not fighting against Ukraine but against Nazism, which has reappeared in Ukraine as evidenced by Kyiv’s alleged “genocide of Russian speakers”. The second casts Russians as “misunderstood angels” who are liberating Ukrainians. In this, Russia appears to be aping Western justifications for their wars in the Middle East: there is the same self-satisfied denialism of claiming to bring people freedom and rights by bombing them.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeAn intriguing somewhat contrarian view that has that awkward ring of truth to it.
And when I was reading the the bit about autocracies, apathy and disengagement I found myself wondering about the causes of such reactions which I am more frequently encountering here in the “land of the free”.
It’s almost as if there is some positive correlation relationship between bemoaning your country and leadership (rightly or wrongly), starting a war, and supporting the war.
Well stated. The punchline for me was: “Such tactics feed a sense of apathy: if everyone is lying, including the West, there is no point trying to work out the truth.”
This is precisely what the devil wants.
It’s almost as if there is some positive correlation relationship between bemoaning your country and leadership (rightly or wrongly), starting a war, and supporting the war.
Well stated. The punchline for me was: “Such tactics feed a sense of apathy: if everyone is lying, including the West, there is no point trying to work out the truth.”
This is precisely what the devil wants.
An intriguing somewhat contrarian view that has that awkward ring of truth to it.
And when I was reading the the bit about autocracies, apathy and disengagement I found myself wondering about the causes of such reactions which I am more frequently encountering here in the “land of the free”.
Great piece. The author is spot on about the great chasm between the Russian chattering classes and the general population. This is, in my opinion, one of the main reasons that throughout 23 years of Putin’s rule no credible political alternative has ever emerged. And , left unchecked, Putin has descended into tyranny.
I think that whether Russians are much more politically disengaged than the West is up for debate. I am sure that there are plenty of examples where turnout for Russian elections is higher than the Western, etc. The general population does not owe it to the political class to be engaged; it is the job of politicians to reach out to the public.
This assumes that we have a well informed citizenry, which is why the founders in the U.S. added “freedom of the press” to the very 1st amendment. In the West, at least, we don’t have that anymore. Thanks to the current business model, we only have 2 versions of every story or event, a blue one and a red one. And each points the finger at the other.
I think that you mean ‘in the USA’ rather than the ‘West’ as a whole. Although sadly the polarisation of debate in the USA is spreading to poison much of the rest of the world where free speech is valued.
On the things that matter to the corporatocracy, like profit from war, there is little distinction between a red story or a blue one.
And the Blue version of the story is propagated in most MSM organs – see the Trump-Russia ‘collusion’ story.
I think that you mean ‘in the USA’ rather than the ‘West’ as a whole. Although sadly the polarisation of debate in the USA is spreading to poison much of the rest of the world where free speech is valued.
On the things that matter to the corporatocracy, like profit from war, there is little distinction between a red story or a blue one.
And the Blue version of the story is propagated in most MSM organs – see the Trump-Russia ‘collusion’ story.
This assumes that we have a well informed citizenry, which is why the founders in the U.S. added “freedom of the press” to the very 1st amendment. In the West, at least, we don’t have that anymore. Thanks to the current business model, we only have 2 versions of every story or event, a blue one and a red one. And each points the finger at the other.
Great piece. The author is spot on about the great chasm between the Russian chattering classes and the general population. This is, in my opinion, one of the main reasons that throughout 23 years of Putin’s rule no credible political alternative has ever emerged. And , left unchecked, Putin has descended into tyranny.
I think that whether Russians are much more politically disengaged than the West is up for debate. I am sure that there are plenty of examples where turnout for Russian elections is higher than the Western, etc. The general population does not owe it to the political class to be engaged; it is the job of politicians to reach out to the public.
Simply shows how different Russians are from the West.
Note that, from the time of Peter the Great onward, they were never able to integrate into the larger West. Every attempt at modernization/industrialization has led to complete failure, whether in 1917, 1991, or 2023.
And this is a CULTURAL phenomenon, not something tied to any political leader or ideology. It’s in the Russian people themselves, not something imposed by the various regimes.
Russia will always opt for its “special path,” even though it inevitably leads to collapse and humiliation.
That’s why they produce such great writers. Great failures make for great literature.
Or as Harry Lime would say:
“Switzerland only invented the cuckoo clock.”
What about the Mongol Conquest, surely that has left an indelible stain?
Indeed. Russia was quite democratic for its time before the mongols. The Rus in Kyiv and so on. They were conquered and ruled by the mongols who were some of the most barbaric autocrats the world has ever known. As my russian-teacher said “All non-soviet historians agree that post-mongol Russia was essentially a continuation of the Mongol way of ruling – only the Soviet ones strongly disagree”.
Why do you think Moscow conquered Great Novgorod?
Because they retained an open society not based on teh rule of a Mongol/Byzantine absolute monarchy.
I was under the impression that Moscow became regionally dominant because it was the most obsequious lapdog to the Mongols.
They were part of the Lithuanian Tartars, no? And Tartar rule included the then Ukraine. After 1945 almost half of Ukraine had been Poland and Hungary before that date. Kiev used to be a frontier town. Look where it is now.
I was under the impression that Moscow became regionally dominant because it was the most obsequious lapdog to the Mongols.
They were part of the Lithuanian Tartars, no? And Tartar rule included the then Ukraine. After 1945 almost half of Ukraine had been Poland and Hungary before that date. Kiev used to be a frontier town. Look where it is now.
Why do you think Moscow conquered Great Novgorod?
Because they retained an open society not based on teh rule of a Mongol/Byzantine absolute monarchy.
As well as more than a few genes.
Indeed. Russia was quite democratic for its time before the mongols. The Rus in Kyiv and so on. They were conquered and ruled by the mongols who were some of the most barbaric autocrats the world has ever known. As my russian-teacher said “All non-soviet historians agree that post-mongol Russia was essentially a continuation of the Mongol way of ruling – only the Soviet ones strongly disagree”.
As well as more than a few genes.
Interesting: 1917,1991 & 2023. It’s not as if the “larger West” was ever trying to help the Russians integrate. In 1917 the “larger West” immediately supported the so-called White Russians to undermine at every turn; in 1991 the “larger West” sent in carpet baggers like Bill Browder to loot and pillage the spoils of the fallen Soviet State; as for 2013, we know what’s happening now (2014 coup in Ukraine, Nordstream sabotage, obscene weapons delivery et al) I’ll add a further date: 1945, after the Soviet Union essentially won the war (at a cost of some 25-30 million dead) the “larger West” immediately began pumping money into Germany and Japan, leaving war-torn Russia (USSR) to fend for itself. It’s almost as if you are being disingenuous about the “larger West’s” desire for Russian integration.
Do you believe that Stalin would have accepted a Marshall-style plan for Russian rebuilding in 1945? The USSR was left to fend for itself in 1945 because it chose to fend for itself, leaving it to another 50 years of object poverty, isolationism and repression.
Many Americans would have liked Patton to turn east in 1945.
But sadly that would have meant NO Cold War, with 45 years of plunder and plenty for the Arms Industry, or Defence Industry as it likes to be called.
It probably also explains why the US didn’t ‘Nuke’ the place during their three year nuclear honeymoon period.
Then you have to consider how the Soviets really got the Bomb and why.
Instead the US troops themselves pulled back to give the Red Army space.
The US didn’t have an enemy post 1919, a major mistake, and NOT to be repeated post 1945.
With good reason. The Allies had fought the war as far as possible using a “steel not flesh” strategy. Insofar as was possible it was artillery, airpower and overwhelming logistic support that was used. This partly reflected a democratic political system, and partly the lack of replacement troops. The Russians did not particularly worry about casualties, though by 1945 they were getting low down the barrel. So why take Berlin a hard nut to crack. The Germans who wanted to surrender had already headed west to be taken by the Brits or the Americans. So those Germans left defending Berlin were hard core Nazis. In this environment and where the steel would need to be flesh. Just let the Russians do it. It was already clear since 1943 that Russia was the emerging enemy.
The US didn’t have an enemy post 1919, a major mistake, and NOT to be repeated post 1945.
With good reason. The Allies had fought the war as far as possible using a “steel not flesh” strategy. Insofar as was possible it was artillery, airpower and overwhelming logistic support that was used. This partly reflected a democratic political system, and partly the lack of replacement troops. The Russians did not particularly worry about casualties, though by 1945 they were getting low down the barrel. So why take Berlin a hard nut to crack. The Germans who wanted to surrender had already headed west to be taken by the Brits or the Americans. So those Germans left defending Berlin were hard core Nazis. In this environment and where the steel would need to be flesh. Just let the Russians do it. It was already clear since 1943 that Russia was the emerging enemy.
But sadly that would have meant NO Cold War, with 45 years of plunder and plenty for the Arms Industry, or Defence Industry as it likes to be called.
It probably also explains why the US didn’t ‘Nuke’ the place during their three year nuclear honeymoon period.
Then you have to consider how the Soviets really got the Bomb and why.
Instead the US troops themselves pulled back to give the Red Army space.
The Russians also prohibited Marshall Plan aid to their satellites in eastern Europe.
Many Americans would have liked Patton to turn east in 1945.
The Russians also prohibited Marshall Plan aid to their satellites in eastern Europe.
1917–the Allies had sent massive aid to Vladivostok and Murmansk. And you think the Party of Stalin was better than Denikin?
1991–No one could have prevented the collapse of an economic model that had failed for 74 years. It was Russia’s lack of Rule of Law that made them paupers. All teh other Warsaw Pact nations eventually did just fine.
As to the war. 40% of German industry was devoted to high tech weapons used exclusive against the western allies. The German air force was withdrawn in 1943 to stop allied bombing of its industry
That, along with 400,000 US trucks, 15,000 US and UK tanks and 15,000 US and UK planes gave Russia a free ride to Berlin.
You don’t seriously think RUSSIA could have won alone??
Russia will always be Upper Volta with missiles.
Because it is populated by Russians.
Hang on, Russia Tsar, Karensky and Bolsheviks we’re comprehensively defeated by the German Army ‘under’ Max Hoffmann in 1918, as demonstrated by the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.
Only the Allies generosity at the Armistice of November 1918 saved them, otherwise Hoffmann & Co could well have been in Moscow by the summer.
Hang on, Russia Tsar, Karensky and Bolsheviks we’re comprehensively defeated by the German Army ‘under’ Max Hoffmann in 1918, as demonstrated by the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.
Only the Allies generosity at the Armistice of November 1918 saved them, otherwise Hoffmann & Co could well have been in Moscow by the summer.
How kind of you to leave out the fact that Soviet Union started ww2 with Germany by invading Poland in 1939.
Then attacked Finland and invaded Baltic States.
Then supplied German war machine with raw materials when it invaded France etc.
Then in 20s and 30s SU allowed Germany to test military equipment to avoid Versaille Treaty sanctions.
Marshal Plan was offered to countries occupied by Soviets like Poland but was rejected by SU.
Idea that West should pump money into genocidal Soviet regime is just beyond joke.
They did with Lend Lease, didnt they?The SU refused to accept the conditionalities of Marshall Aid, such as access to the countries involved, and following how the money was spent.
They did with Lend Lease, didnt they?The SU refused to accept the conditionalities of Marshall Aid, such as access to the countries involved, and following how the money was spent.
Do you believe that Stalin would have accepted a Marshall-style plan for Russian rebuilding in 1945? The USSR was left to fend for itself in 1945 because it chose to fend for itself, leaving it to another 50 years of object poverty, isolationism and repression.
1917–the Allies had sent massive aid to Vladivostok and Murmansk. And you think the Party of Stalin was better than Denikin?
1991–No one could have prevented the collapse of an economic model that had failed for 74 years. It was Russia’s lack of Rule of Law that made them paupers. All teh other Warsaw Pact nations eventually did just fine.
As to the war. 40% of German industry was devoted to high tech weapons used exclusive against the western allies. The German air force was withdrawn in 1943 to stop allied bombing of its industry
That, along with 400,000 US trucks, 15,000 US and UK tanks and 15,000 US and UK planes gave Russia a free ride to Berlin.
You don’t seriously think RUSSIA could have won alone??
Russia will always be Upper Volta with missiles.
Because it is populated by Russians.
How kind of you to leave out the fact that Soviet Union started ww2 with Germany by invading Poland in 1939.
Then attacked Finland and invaded Baltic States.
Then supplied German war machine with raw materials when it invaded France etc.
Then in 20s and 30s SU allowed Germany to test military equipment to avoid Versaille Treaty sanctions.
Marshal Plan was offered to countries occupied by Soviets like Poland but was rejected by SU.
Idea that West should pump money into genocidal Soviet regime is just beyond joke.
80% of Americans supported the Iraq war.
This shows how the American press and big business control information.
At the outset of that war it was against Article 2 of the UN Charter to invade a sovereign state but this was altered( by some means or other) to say (in effect) that “If a sovereign state was not willing or in a position to protect its citizens then military action could be taken.”
It would seem, in this case, that America decided which citizens should be protected, i.e. the Shia rather than the Sunni.
.
Only 80%….amazing!
Largely based on misinformation about WMDs that the fool Sadam had been hinting about for awhile, but the misinformation was provided by the British govt. Without that almost nobody here would have supported it.
Undoubtedly the most shameful act of barbarism perpetrated by the US in my lifetime, far, far exceeding Britain’s misdemeanours including the Suez fiasco.
If the rules of Nuremberg had been applied, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blair & Co would have been quite rightly hanged long ago, and good riddance.
There’s still time – at least in Blair’s case. Plus you left out Campbell, who was the real Rasputin in all this.
There’s still time – at least in Blair’s case. Plus you left out Campbell, who was the real Rasputin in all this.
Undoubtedly the most shameful act of barbarism perpetrated by the US in my lifetime, far, far exceeding Britain’s misdemeanours including the Suez fiasco.
If the rules of Nuremberg had been applied, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blair & Co would have been quite rightly hanged long ago, and good riddance.
Burn!
This shows how the American press and big business control information.
At the outset of that war it was against Article 2 of the UN Charter to invade a sovereign state but this was altered( by some means or other) to say (in effect) that “If a sovereign state was not willing or in a position to protect its citizens then military action could be taken.”
It would seem, in this case, that America decided which citizens should be protected, i.e. the Shia rather than the Sunni.
.
Only 80%….amazing!
Largely based on misinformation about WMDs that the fool Sadam had been hinting about for awhile, but the misinformation was provided by the British govt. Without that almost nobody here would have supported it.
Burn!
Pity Lime forgot about the chocolate and cheese.
Not to mention efficient railway networks, 65 km base tunnels under the Alps, electronics, power generation/transmisson, pharma, rock stable currency. To mention cuckoo clocks is bordering on ridiculous.
Not to mention efficient railway networks, 65 km base tunnels under the Alps, electronics, power generation/transmisson, pharma, rock stable currency. To mention cuckoo clocks is bordering on ridiculous.
Didn’t Rousseau come from Switzerland? They have more to answer for than the clock.
Yes,sort of, in fact the Republic of Geneva, a Protestant Theocracy and an “everlasting ally” of the Swiss Confederacy during Rousseau’s lifetime.
However for all the tosh he spouted, I can forgive him everything thanks to his candid thoughts and astonishment on visiting the Pont du Gard. Here is what he said:-
I had been told to go and see the Pont du Gard; I did not fail to do so. It was the first work of the Romans that I had seen. I expected to see a monument worthy of the hands which had constructed it. This time the object surpassed my expectation, for the only time in my life. Only the Romans could have produced such an effect. The sight of this simple and noble work struck me all the more since it is in the middle of a wilderness where silence and solitude render the object more striking and the admiration more lively; for this so-called bridge was only an aqueduct. One asks oneself what force has transported these enormous stones so far from any quarry, and what brought together the arms of so many thousands of men in a place where none of them live. I wandered about the three storeys of this superb edifice although my respect for it almost kept me from daring to trample it underfoot. The echo of my footsteps under these immense vaults made me imagine that I heard the strong voices of those who had built them. I felt myself lost like an insect in that immensity. While making myself small, I felt an indefinable something that raised up my soul, and I said to myself with a sigh, “WHY WAS I NOT BORN A ROMAN?”
Einstein too. Btw; they didn’t invent the cuckoo clock ⏰
Yes,sort of, in fact the Republic of Geneva, a Protestant Theocracy and an “everlasting ally” of the Swiss Confederacy during Rousseau’s lifetime.
However for all the tosh he spouted, I can forgive him everything thanks to his candid thoughts and astonishment on visiting the Pont du Gard. Here is what he said:-
I had been told to go and see the Pont du Gard; I did not fail to do so. It was the first work of the Romans that I had seen. I expected to see a monument worthy of the hands which had constructed it. This time the object surpassed my expectation, for the only time in my life. Only the Romans could have produced such an effect. The sight of this simple and noble work struck me all the more since it is in the middle of a wilderness where silence and solitude render the object more striking and the admiration more lively; for this so-called bridge was only an aqueduct. One asks oneself what force has transported these enormous stones so far from any quarry, and what brought together the arms of so many thousands of men in a place where none of them live. I wandered about the three storeys of this superb edifice although my respect for it almost kept me from daring to trample it underfoot. The echo of my footsteps under these immense vaults made me imagine that I heard the strong voices of those who had built them. I felt myself lost like an insect in that immensity. While making myself small, I felt an indefinable something that raised up my soul, and I said to myself with a sigh, “WHY WAS I NOT BORN A ROMAN?”
Einstein too. Btw; they didn’t invent the cuckoo clock ⏰
1862 to 1914 was not too bad. Serfs freed, local government set up, schools established, foreign investment encouraged, and btw in the 1880s steel production in Russia was as high as in the US.
Steel Production thanks to that Welsh Iron Master Mr John Hughes from Merthyr Tydfil.
Steel Production thanks to that Welsh Iron Master Mr John Hughes from Merthyr Tydfil.
Switzerland didn’t invent the cuckoo clock
What about the Mongol Conquest, surely that has left an indelible stain?
Interesting: 1917,1991 & 2023. It’s not as if the “larger West” was ever trying to help the Russians integrate. In 1917 the “larger West” immediately supported the so-called White Russians to undermine at every turn; in 1991 the “larger West” sent in carpet baggers like Bill Browder to loot and pillage the spoils of the fallen Soviet State; as for 2013, we know what’s happening now (2014 coup in Ukraine, Nordstream sabotage, obscene weapons delivery et al) I’ll add a further date: 1945, after the Soviet Union essentially won the war (at a cost of some 25-30 million dead) the “larger West” immediately began pumping money into Germany and Japan, leaving war-torn Russia (USSR) to fend for itself. It’s almost as if you are being disingenuous about the “larger West’s” desire for Russian integration.
80% of Americans supported the Iraq war.
Pity Lime forgot about the chocolate and cheese.
Didn’t Rousseau come from Switzerland? They have more to answer for than the clock.
1862 to 1914 was not too bad. Serfs freed, local government set up, schools established, foreign investment encouraged, and btw in the 1880s steel production in Russia was as high as in the US.
Switzerland didn’t invent the cuckoo clock
Simply shows how different Russians are from the West.
Note that, from the time of Peter the Great onward, they were never able to integrate into the larger West. Every attempt at modernization/industrialization has led to complete failure, whether in 1917, 1991, or 2023.
And this is a CULTURAL phenomenon, not something tied to any political leader or ideology. It’s in the Russian people themselves, not something imposed by the various regimes.
Russia will always opt for its “special path,” even though it inevitably leads to collapse and humiliation.
That’s why they produce such great writers. Great failures make for great literature.
Or as Harry Lime would say:
“Switzerland only invented the cuckoo clock.”
I don’t know how it was for Afghanistan, but I suspect the ‘reality’ (deliberately didn’t say ‘truth’) will sink in as thousands, tens of thousands, of ex-soldiers rotate back to the ‘real’ world, starting in the regions, but gradually getting closer and closer to the places that matter. Even prisoner swaps can be primed and ‘weaponised’ to sow dissatisfaction back at home.
This is the arc of every failed Russian war: wild enthusiasm, followed by regret, and then hot anger at being misled.
This is the arc of every failed Russian war: wild enthusiasm, followed by regret, and then hot anger at being misled.
I don’t know how it was for Afghanistan, but I suspect the ‘reality’ (deliberately didn’t say ‘truth’) will sink in as thousands, tens of thousands, of ex-soldiers rotate back to the ‘real’ world, starting in the regions, but gradually getting closer and closer to the places that matter. Even prisoner swaps can be primed and ‘weaponised’ to sow dissatisfaction back at home.
And this is just one more reason why this war could spread and grow.
When people believe they are actually defending themselves against aggression they will fight to the extreme.
Putin and his government may just be creating a situation where there is literally no way for them to settle even were they to want to. How do they preserve themselves and the legitimacy of their government if they will make concessions after a long brutal fight that has been sold as an existential threat from outside?
That would seem to imply that they will need to do whatever they have to in order to win, go to any lengths. It would not be hard for them to rationalize a missile attack on striking supply depots in Poland or elsewhere. It would not be a stretch to attack convoys, ships or trains bringing in western military supplies or even shooting down western aircraft delivering ammo or other supplies. That then leads issues of a NATO country or NATO personnel being attacked and killed. How does the west respond then? Very likely by giving Ukraine the means to launch larger and longer missile attacks into Russia. How then does Putin respond to that? A straight up air, sea and land blockade of Ukraine? Invite Belarus to jump in?
Russia is now going to be committed to total victory over Ukraine and the west is never going to allow that. The only path forward would seem to be escalation, a game of chicken to see who blinks first.
In other words ‘here we go again’ and ‘third time lucky’.
In other words ‘here we go again’ and ‘third time lucky’.
And this is just one more reason why this war could spread and grow.
When people believe they are actually defending themselves against aggression they will fight to the extreme.
Putin and his government may just be creating a situation where there is literally no way for them to settle even were they to want to. How do they preserve themselves and the legitimacy of their government if they will make concessions after a long brutal fight that has been sold as an existential threat from outside?
That would seem to imply that they will need to do whatever they have to in order to win, go to any lengths. It would not be hard for them to rationalize a missile attack on striking supply depots in Poland or elsewhere. It would not be a stretch to attack convoys, ships or trains bringing in western military supplies or even shooting down western aircraft delivering ammo or other supplies. That then leads issues of a NATO country or NATO personnel being attacked and killed. How does the west respond then? Very likely by giving Ukraine the means to launch larger and longer missile attacks into Russia. How then does Putin respond to that? A straight up air, sea and land blockade of Ukraine? Invite Belarus to jump in?
Russia is now going to be committed to total victory over Ukraine and the west is never going to allow that. The only path forward would seem to be escalation, a game of chicken to see who blinks first.
The West’s security organs are inept and in concert with the media, politicians, and bureaucrats. They haven’t really understood Russia for a long, long time, certainly since the takeover of Crimea. You can never underestimate the capacity of the Russian people for taking one for their country. They are, by far, the World Champs. The Ukraine war is not over by a long shot, no matter what the talking heads spew.
It would be interesting to know hat %-age of Russians think Russia was attacked by Ukraine. This, will, I think have an important role to play in whether this turns out like Afghanistan or WWII.
Many.
The post-Maidan 2014 ATO in the Donbas bombing Russian civilians is how the majority of Russians think the war started.
Forget Feb 2022.
Many.
The post-Maidan 2014 ATO in the Donbas bombing Russian civilians is how the majority of Russians think the war started.
Forget Feb 2022.
It would be interesting to know hat %-age of Russians think Russia was attacked by Ukraine. This, will, I think have an important role to play in whether this turns out like Afghanistan or WWII.
The West’s security organs are inept and in concert with the media, politicians, and bureaucrats. They haven’t really understood Russia for a long, long time, certainly since the takeover of Crimea. You can never underestimate the capacity of the Russian people for taking one for their country. They are, by far, the World Champs. The Ukraine war is not over by a long shot, no matter what the talking heads spew.
SAFELY WESTERN
Thank you for this more insightful contribution to the Russian understanding than the perhaps most typical Western understanding of the Russian one, which you yourself refer to as the Western “zombie” understanding of the Russian understanding.
As we can see, in the name of democracy and fairness, every narrative shall have to include a section on the narrative of the opponent and why it is wrong. This enriches the task of (and enhances the demand for) journalists.
However, by using the term “barbarian” twice about the Russians, and not as a reference to Western understanding, but as your own personal view, you stay safely within the Western camp. What we need is writers who dare to challenge the Western camp.
How about reminding people of the Monroe Doctrine and the omnipresence of the US in the world? If you skip this point, it is like skipping the distinction between dying from and dying with Covid. Anything you say afterwards is an escape from the logically necessary, but politically difficult, first and most obvious question.
Actually, I find the view: first Napoleon then Hitler, and now WE – a good understanding of the West’s attitude towards Russia. All three campaigns include an ideological aspect.
We need to understand Russia, and then we must be self-critical. We must understand that Western Liberalism is not entirely good. It should not be too difficult to see that. See how the far-pushed liberalism of the West naturally turns authoritarian – say, in the form of authoritarian political correctness. It should also be possible to see that far-pushed liberalism leads to a loss of community. There are plenty of Western research pointing to the loss of community – e.g., Charles Murrey’s identification of certain values which were once seen a precondition for democracy.
Connect our loss of community to our comprehension of Russia, and perhaps discover envy.
“first Napoleon then Hitler … the West’s attitude towards Russia” – Except that in most of the Western world, Russia was seen as an ally against Hitler – although the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (which made WWII in Europe possible), Russia’s war with Finland, etc had, I’m fairly sure, not been forgotten in most thoughtful quarters.
“first Napoleon then Hitler … the West’s attitude towards Russia” – Except that in most of the Western world, Russia was seen as an ally against Hitler – although the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (which made WWII in Europe possible), Russia’s war with Finland, etc had, I’m fairly sure, not been forgotten in most thoughtful quarters.
SAFELY WESTERN
Thank you for this more insightful contribution to the Russian understanding than the perhaps most typical Western understanding of the Russian one, which you yourself refer to as the Western “zombie” understanding of the Russian understanding.
As we can see, in the name of democracy and fairness, every narrative shall have to include a section on the narrative of the opponent and why it is wrong. This enriches the task of (and enhances the demand for) journalists.
However, by using the term “barbarian” twice about the Russians, and not as a reference to Western understanding, but as your own personal view, you stay safely within the Western camp. What we need is writers who dare to challenge the Western camp.
How about reminding people of the Monroe Doctrine and the omnipresence of the US in the world? If you skip this point, it is like skipping the distinction between dying from and dying with Covid. Anything you say afterwards is an escape from the logically necessary, but politically difficult, first and most obvious question.
Actually, I find the view: first Napoleon then Hitler, and now WE – a good understanding of the West’s attitude towards Russia. All three campaigns include an ideological aspect.
We need to understand Russia, and then we must be self-critical. We must understand that Western Liberalism is not entirely good. It should not be too difficult to see that. See how the far-pushed liberalism of the West naturally turns authoritarian – say, in the form of authoritarian political correctness. It should also be possible to see that far-pushed liberalism leads to a loss of community. There are plenty of Western research pointing to the loss of community – e.g., Charles Murrey’s identification of certain values which were once seen a precondition for democracy.
Connect our loss of community to our comprehension of Russia, and perhaps discover envy.
So, if Putin is replaced, it may be by somebody with similar ideology and military objectives but better able to achieve them?
Great Post.
That is what many people in the West don’t get.
Someone like Navalny is another Russian nationalist.
His beef with Putin cleaque is about theft of national resources, which makes Russia poor and week.
Like someone said Russia was set on certain path by Mongol invasion and then Ivan the Terrible.
Whether it is Tsarism, Communism or Putinism, it is still the same genocidal imperialism.
I was quite hoping that perhaps Gavin Newsome, Pete Buttigieg or Hillary Clinton could move to Russia and lead them into a brave new world of Wokeness. I’m sure the majority of the ancient Russian people are ready to embrace transgenderism, homosexualism, secularism, and ever other “ism”. Then, perhaps, they can move onto the Middle East and “inform” those backward Islamists about progress too! Then the whole world can go the way of Sodom in a happy daisy chain of joy.
Great Post.
That is what many people in the West don’t get.
Someone like Navalny is another Russian nationalist.
His beef with Putin cleaque is about theft of national resources, which makes Russia poor and week.
Like someone said Russia was set on certain path by Mongol invasion and then Ivan the Terrible.
Whether it is Tsarism, Communism or Putinism, it is still the same genocidal imperialism.
I was quite hoping that perhaps Gavin Newsome, Pete Buttigieg or Hillary Clinton could move to Russia and lead them into a brave new world of Wokeness. I’m sure the majority of the ancient Russian people are ready to embrace transgenderism, homosexualism, secularism, and ever other “ism”. Then, perhaps, they can move onto the Middle East and “inform” those backward Islamists about progress too! Then the whole world can go the way of Sodom in a happy daisy chain of joy.
So, if Putin is replaced, it may be by somebody with similar ideology and military objectives but better able to achieve them?
The only demographic that really matters is Russian mothers. The more deaths they experience, the wider the dissent. The real question is whether the war will end before a tipping point is reached.
The only demographic that really matters is Russian mothers. The more deaths they experience, the wider the dissent. The real question is whether the war will end before a tipping point is reached.
I’m fairly certain that when polled, most Russians give the answer they think the FSB/KGB wants to hear. How are they supposed to know who’s an “independent pollster” and who’s an agent provocateur?
That’s what made her television ratings data more interesting.
That’s what made her television ratings data more interesting.
I’m fairly certain that when polled, most Russians give the answer they think the FSB/KGB wants to hear. How are they supposed to know who’s an “independent pollster” and who’s an agent provocateur?
This sounds about right.
Now, UnHerd should have someone do a similar analysis of Western attitudes towards the war and Russia, and the propaganda that is attempting to drive it.
This sounds about right.
Now, UnHerd should have someone do a similar analysis of Western attitudes towards the war and Russia, and the propaganda that is attempting to drive it.
An interesting aspect of ‘opinion polling’ is when questions are asked. I’m sure there are many Russians who initally supported Putin’s war, but changed their minds (some faster than others) whereas others may have reversed.
Putin, to this day, retains an 82% popularity rating.
Russians are united in supporting the war.
Putin, to this day, retains an 82% popularity rating.
Russians are united in supporting the war.
An interesting aspect of ‘opinion polling’ is when questions are asked. I’m sure there are many Russians who initally supported Putin’s war, but changed their minds (some faster than others) whereas others may have reversed.
I’ve travelled widely, and have positive impressions of every nationality I’ve ever met.
Apart from Russians.
My views on them: https://ayenaw.com/?s=Russians
I’ve some experience of working with Russians in business, and of course have encountered a number of them on holidays.
To a man and woman, every one of them I met has been rude, deceitful and boorish. The over-dressed moll in the silence carriage on the Shinkansen shouting at the snacks trolley person. I remember looking up the Japanese for “I’m not Russian”, to show it to the food trolley person.
The Russian businessmen in Dublin eating all their excellent food in a fancy restaurant, then calling over the Polish waiter and yelling sneering insults at him, while refusing to pay. And of course, refusing to look at him. Racial contempt palpable.
The Russian businessman who wanted me to put an “assassination clause” in his contract.
The Russian head of faculty who stole all the funding money that my better half had obtained from a pharma company when doing her PhD.
My least favourite people in the world.
And they have no experience whatsoever of democracy.
You’d have to be pretty gullible to assume that Russia is full of poor misguided people who’d be good neighbours, but for Putin.
Russians are definitely a people we can hate without repercussion. Which might explain your position. If you felt the same about Arabs, I suspect that we would be unpublishable.
I have spent over twenty years working with Russians too, but not in Dublin or Japan – in Russia, not abroad. I have not found them rude, deceitful and boorish at all. Just different.
Yes, this and your blog paint true picture of Homo Sovieticus…..
Or “Sovietskaja scat*na” for Russian trolls on here.
You are frequently rude and boorish. Do you just get up and think: which race of people shall I insult today?
Beware the ‘Plastic Paddies’ Ms Emery, they can be a real nuisance at times!
Incidentally when it comes to hypocrisy they have NO equal!
I see Mr mccusker is feeling particularly constructive today again.
Unfortunately I haven’t travelled to Ireland or I would parody his comment, but turn it around on the Irish instead. Perhaps like this to take a sample:
‘To a man and woman, every one of them I met has been incomprehensible, ginger and drunk. The under-dressed leprechaun in the potato wagon on the road to Dublin shouting insults at the British….’
Sadly there is much truth in that and, like Scotland it increases by the day.
McCusker is incorrigible, only the other day he was jibbing at Pakistanis in London, but get him onto his own benighted Northern Ireland then you really do have some ‘sport’.
Perhaps I’ll take Ireland off the holiday list then.
Yes I remember his anecdotes, didn’t that cause an exciting stir. I think he deserves a bit of stick back.
Out West, particularly Galway, Mayo and the offshore islands it’s great, but Dublin is just another English town with a monumental dose Irish ‘chippyness’. Quite attractive ( Georgian) architecture, but the River Liffey tends to stink at low tide.
ps. Just heard the splendid news Sturgeon has jumped BEFORE she was pushed! Hallelujah!
Thanks, the offshore islands sound right up our street, I heard sturgeon had gone, it was a little abrupt? About time in my opinion, I had enough of her pro mandates and lockdowns attitude during covid tbh.
I would recommend Inishbofin, Clare Island, and Inishmore (Aran Islands).
I would recommend Inishbofin, Clare Island, and Inishmore (Aran Islands).
Thanks, the offshore islands sound right up our street, I heard sturgeon had gone, it was a little abrupt? About time in my opinion, I had enough of her pro mandates and lockdowns attitude during covid tbh.
Out West, particularly Galway, Mayo and the offshore islands it’s great, but Dublin is just another English town with a monumental dose Irish ‘chippyness’. Quite attractive ( Georgian) architecture, but the River Liffey tends to stink at low tide.
ps. Just heard the splendid news Sturgeon has jumped BEFORE she was pushed! Hallelujah!
Perhaps I’ll take Ireland off the holiday list then.
Yes I remember his anecdotes, didn’t that cause an exciting stir. I think he deserves a bit of stick back.
Sadly there is much truth in that and, like Scotland it increases by the day.
McCusker is incorrigible, only the other day he was jibbing at Pakistanis in London, but get him onto his own benighted Northern Ireland then you really do have some ‘sport’.
I see Mr mccusker is feeling particularly constructive today again.
Unfortunately I haven’t travelled to Ireland or I would parody his comment, but turn it around on the Irish instead. Perhaps like this to take a sample:
‘To a man and woman, every one of them I met has been incomprehensible, ginger and drunk. The under-dressed leprechaun in the potato wagon on the road to Dublin shouting insults at the British….’
Beware the ‘Plastic Paddies’ Ms Emery, they can be a real nuisance at times!
Incidentally when it comes to hypocrisy they have NO equal!
Hedrick Smith, who I think was pretty perceptive, had a different take on them.
Russians are definitely a people we can hate without repercussion. Which might explain your position. If you felt the same about Arabs, I suspect that we would be unpublishable.
I have spent over twenty years working with Russians too, but not in Dublin or Japan – in Russia, not abroad. I have not found them rude, deceitful and boorish at all. Just different.
Yes, this and your blog paint true picture of Homo Sovieticus…..
Or “Sovietskaja scat*na” for Russian trolls on here.
You are frequently rude and boorish. Do you just get up and think: which race of people shall I insult today?
Hedrick Smith, who I think was pretty perceptive, had a different take on them.
I’ve travelled widely, and have positive impressions of every nationality I’ve ever met.
Apart from Russians.
My views on them: https://ayenaw.com/?s=Russians
I’ve some experience of working with Russians in business, and of course have encountered a number of them on holidays.
To a man and woman, every one of them I met has been rude, deceitful and boorish. The over-dressed moll in the silence carriage on the Shinkansen shouting at the snacks trolley person. I remember looking up the Japanese for “I’m not Russian”, to show it to the food trolley person.
The Russian businessmen in Dublin eating all their excellent food in a fancy restaurant, then calling over the Polish waiter and yelling sneering insults at him, while refusing to pay. And of course, refusing to look at him. Racial contempt palpable.
The Russian businessman who wanted me to put an “assassination clause” in his contract.
The Russian head of faculty who stole all the funding money that my better half had obtained from a pharma company when doing her PhD.
My least favourite people in the world.
And they have no experience whatsoever of democracy.
You’d have to be pretty gullible to assume that Russia is full of poor misguided people who’d be good neighbours, but for Putin.
“War drags in the dregs of humanity, often people from the poorest regions, with very little education, which means they are more prone to propaganda.”
I think we’re right to treat this claim with skepticism. Germans of the 1930s were arguably the most educated people in Europe. Far from giving them an immunity to propaganda, this provided skilful propagandists with novel, more creative narrative paths for exploiting their susceptibility to it.
“The Golden Billion doomsday scenario, for instance, in which powerful Western elites control world events to amass great wealth and destroy ordinary people’s lives, is endorsed by high-ranking officials, such as head of the security council, Nikolai Patrushev, a close ally of Putin.”
It doesn’t sound that far off what numerous people in the west believe, too, and on not unreasonable grounds. One might even classify these people among the more propaganda-resistant.
“War drags in the dregs of humanity, often people from the poorest regions, with very little education, which means they are more prone to propaganda.”
I think we’re right to treat this claim with skepticism. Germans of the 1930s were arguably the most educated people in Europe. Far from giving them an immunity to propaganda, this provided skilful propagandists with novel, more creative narrative paths for exploiting their susceptibility to it.
“The Golden Billion doomsday scenario, for instance, in which powerful Western elites control world events to amass great wealth and destroy ordinary people’s lives, is endorsed by high-ranking officials, such as head of the security council, Nikolai Patrushev, a close ally of Putin.”
It doesn’t sound that far off what numerous people in the west believe, too, and on not unreasonable grounds. One might even classify these people among the more propaganda-resistant.
The Golden Billion doomsday scenario, for instance, in which powerful Western elites control world events to amass great wealth and destroy ordinary people’s lives Less doomsday scenario and more reality every day…
The Golden Billion doomsday scenario, for instance, in which powerful Western elites control world events to amass great wealth and destroy ordinary people’s lives Less doomsday scenario and more reality every day…
Most Russians are passive and apolitical, like Americans. This is the future.
Ilya Matveev https://twitter.com/IlyaMatveev_ et al.
Posle https://posle.media/language/en/for-me-its-easier-that-way-why-facts-wont-beat-propaganda/
December 14 2022
The results of the survey (that took place between 29 September and 1 October, 2022) demonstrate that 60% OF RUSSIANS ARE READY TO SUPPORT THE DECISION ABOUT THE NEW OFFENSIVE, AND YET 75% WOULD ALSO SUPPORT THE DECISION TO SIGN A PEACE TREATY.
16.1% OF RUSSIANS ARE CONVINCED THAT MILITARY ACTIONS MUST BE CONTINUED and a new offensive against Kyiv pursued, While 26.8% ARE CONVINCED THAT A PEACE TREATY MUST BE SIGNED. In total THESE TWO GROUPS, the convinced supporters and the convinced opponents, ACCOUNT FOR 42.9%. At the same time, THE SHARE OF RUSSIANS WHO DO NOT HOLD STRONG OPINIONS about the future of the “special operation” AND WOULD SUPPORT ANY PUTIN’S DECISION REGARDLESS OF ITS SUBSTANCE, IS 39.2%, just slightly below the share of the convinced. Right now these people express support for the “military operation” — but this support is “passive” or “out of inertia,” because it only reflects their readiness to support any decision taken by Putin, whatever that decision is.
Most Russians are passive and apolitical, like Americans. This is the future.
Ilya Matveev https://twitter.com/IlyaMatveev_ et al.
Posle https://posle.media/language/en/for-me-its-easier-that-way-why-facts-wont-beat-propaganda/
December 14 2022
The results of the survey (that took place between 29 September and 1 October, 2022) demonstrate that 60% OF RUSSIANS ARE READY TO SUPPORT THE DECISION ABOUT THE NEW OFFENSIVE, AND YET 75% WOULD ALSO SUPPORT THE DECISION TO SIGN A PEACE TREATY.
16.1% OF RUSSIANS ARE CONVINCED THAT MILITARY ACTIONS MUST BE CONTINUED and a new offensive against Kyiv pursued, While 26.8% ARE CONVINCED THAT A PEACE TREATY MUST BE SIGNED. In total THESE TWO GROUPS, the convinced supporters and the convinced opponents, ACCOUNT FOR 42.9%. At the same time, THE SHARE OF RUSSIANS WHO DO NOT HOLD STRONG OPINIONS about the future of the “special operation” AND WOULD SUPPORT ANY PUTIN’S DECISION REGARDLESS OF ITS SUBSTANCE, IS 39.2%, just slightly below the share of the convinced. Right now these people express support for the “military operation” — but this support is “passive” or “out of inertia,” because it only reflects their readiness to support any decision taken by Putin, whatever that decision is.
We won’t know how Russians really feel about the war until Putin begins to use his “hidden reserves” in cities like St Petersburg and Moscow.
Russians are a cunning lot. Nobody cares about some yokel from Siberia or Yakutia dying in a war. But it will take at least a million more Russians to really make a numerical difference, since the quality of the equpt and training is steadily falling.
Amusing to see a massive hole in January’s budget as well.
So we’ll only know true Russian sentiments when 10s of thousands of Muscovites and Petrines start marching shoulder to shoulder to the front…
Or start fleeing in wild panic to the Georgian border.
I am not convinced.
They will somehow rationalise their loses by blaming Ukranian Na**s and NATO for it.
Usual pattern in Russian history and propaganda when poor Russia is always victim.
Never mind them invading, looting and occupying neighbouring countries for centuries…
I am not convinced.
They will somehow rationalise their loses by blaming Ukranian Na**s and NATO for it.
Usual pattern in Russian history and propaganda when poor Russia is always victim.
Never mind them invading, looting and occupying neighbouring countries for centuries…
We won’t know how Russians really feel about the war until Putin begins to use his “hidden reserves” in cities like St Petersburg and Moscow.
Russians are a cunning lot. Nobody cares about some yokel from Siberia or Yakutia dying in a war. But it will take at least a million more Russians to really make a numerical difference, since the quality of the equpt and training is steadily falling.
Amusing to see a massive hole in January’s budget as well.
So we’ll only know true Russian sentiments when 10s of thousands of Muscovites and Petrines start marching shoulder to shoulder to the front…
Or start fleeing in wild panic to the Georgian border.
Why is this author saying ‘Nato’ instead of ‘NATO’. It’s annoying me …
Why is this author saying ‘Nato’ instead of ‘NATO’. It’s annoying me …
Hitler was extremely popular in Germany, and for a long, long time.
Hitler was extremely popular in Germany, and for a long, long time.
An excellent and insight-inducing article, by an informed writer.
I wonder if her occasional references to “a country that has murdered tens of thousands of Ukrainians” are to emphasize that her comments about Russia/Russians are not the result of pro-Russian bias? (Or perhaps to let her colleagues know that she’s on the ‘right side’.)
An excellent and insight-inducing article, by an informed writer.
I wonder if her occasional references to “a country that has murdered tens of thousands of Ukrainians” are to emphasize that her comments about Russia/Russians are not the result of pro-Russian bias? (Or perhaps to let her colleagues know that she’s on the ‘right side’.)