The fish is rotting from the head for the second time in Russian history, Eidman says

[blue-wave]

“A fish begins to rot from the head,” Russians say, “and society descends into insanity following its dictator. His personal paranoia become that of society and propaganda infects the entire country with it,” Igor Eidman says. “Thus it was in Stalin’s USSR; such it has occurred in Putin’s Russia as well.”

There is only one principle difference, the Russian commentator for Deutsche Welle says.

“Stalin’s paranoia was directed inside the country. He was pathologically afraid of conspiracies, didn’t trust even his closest entourage, and sought to destroy all he suspected of disloyalty.”

Putin’s paranoia in contrast is “directed abroad.” He believes that the West and “above all the US” wants to overthrow and destroy him.” Indeed, he appears to view himself as a Russian bear “which the West and the US ‘never will leave in piece” but will always try to seek out and destroy.

Full Article: http://euromaidanpress.com/2017/07/07/the-fish-is-rotting-from-the-head-for-the-second-time-in-russian-history-eidman-says-euromaidan-press/


Interesting perspective on Russian and Putin's psychological outlook.

[FakeNoose]

1. Russian people are too smart to let this happen again

In 1917 during the Communist revolution Russians were mostly uneducated and didn't care about world politics. They were just tired of fighting and dying in wars for the Tsar.

It's a totally different situation in Russian now, they've seen that Communism has failed, and they've seen the dangers of dictatorship and totalitarianism. I think they're sure they have to get rid of Putin somehow, they're just trying to figure out how to do it.

If Hillary were President, she'd be trying to help the Russian people (who hate Putin) behind the scenes. We can't expect Cheeto to do any such thing, unfortunately. Maybe it's best for us to worry about our own problems right now.

[Igel]

3. No.

That needs a few words.

First, poll after poll says that Russian prefer stability to Western freedoms. They're like Turkish. Both missed the Enlightenment; both missed the Reformation. Both had the Horde or it's twin. Both are diverse societies that would fly apart except for a strong central government.

Polls also show they think they mostly have Western freedoms. The young? They're fine where they are. Those that don't tend to like things like gay rights or drugs, or are in it for the economics: Like a lot of the idiot protesters in the Arab Spring and Trump voters, they assume that "freedom" entails increased prosperity. Within a month or two, but certainly by New Year's. (Good luck with that delusion.) They also resent being talked down to and told that their values are certainly antediluvian and need an upgrade to Western Values 2.0. They don't push the "continue" button; they click "cancel" and seek to block automatic updates to their wetware.

International politics in Russia are binary: "Hurray for our side!" or "Who's kept us from greatness?" Even during "hurray for our side!" periods there's still the "who's still keeping us from even greater greatness" mantra in the background, as needed. Everything else is "blah-blah-blah-blah." They're very much like that by social network in the US, but Americans aren't in as much lockstep as Russians so it's less obvious. We also live in a much smaller country so we have to know more about what's beyond our borders. (Never thought you'd hear somebody say that, didja?)

Communism didn't just fail. For some, the USSR was subverted from the outside. Viz., the West. Or economic sanctions slowed them down. This is Maduro's playbook in Venezuela, if you haven't noticed. Also Saddam Hussein's. For other Russians, the problem was a few bad personalities. Stalin was pretty good with a few unpleasant quirks. For Communism to fail meant that Russians failed. Nationalism and partisanship preclude that (Stalin wasn't Russian!). (D) point to internal enemies; Russians are still ethnic-tribal and point to external foes. Then again, (D) are very much like that these days--the internal foe is working with the external foe (who passed itself off as a friend and tricked our guy for years! the vermin!) It sounds tak uzh kak 1993 g, po kraine mere ko mne. Or "it sounds so 1993, at least to me." Just swap out TsRU (CIA) for their FSB.


There's a reason that Putin hated HRC. Seriously, it's hard to miss if you seek to understand the enemy. A bit of empathy helps here--empathy's more important with foes and opponents than it is with friends if you want to actually have a clue instead of a stereotype.

Russia saw a bunch of color revolutions at its borders, and from their perspective it always had Western NGOs behind them, Western ideas, Western influences. (Again, see Chavez and Maduro, Collected Revelatory Rants from Utopia, Venezuelan "Official Truth" Publishing House, Havana, 2016.) Russia was brought down by the West. Albright said that it had "too many natural resources for one country." It's allies and friends like Serbia were under attack. Surely the imperialist US had Moscow next for economic and political satrapy? We may argue that those revolutions happened because the people *chose* to be more Western, that they resented Russia and the USSR, but from their perspective that's not true. They were subverted. And what, you're questioning the authenticity of their perspectives and opinions?

The West, the story goes, was responsible for the oligarchs--who, conveniently, had put much of their money in the West and got money from the West. Native cultural values were at risk: the West sought domination, genocide. And then in 2011 there was the "white revolution" that failed--and behind it, from their POV, America. Clinton, in particular. Who then denounced Putin and made horrible accusations that I doubt Putin thinks are true. All those people upset because of the Ukrainian "cookies" phone call here? Imagine if there was actual money documented to have been transferred, logistic support provided, training that took place. Americans on the ground advising those who protested and called for removal of Putin.

Don't get it? Imagine your response if it was clearly documented last November that a Russian staffer getting money from the Kremlin as part of "Russ-Aid" for development of a better balanced American society was in the Trump campaign office and provided the money and equipment for the Trump campaign. And had been in Romney's office in 2012 and McCain's in 2008. At the same time, Putin took every chance to say bad things about Obama. What would Obama have done? And how many DUers would be saying, "You know, Obama's wrong in being tough in dealing with this interference?" Or how would we respond to, "Many Americans are opposed to Obama, and we just need to help them effect regime change behind the scenes." Now you're getting warmer. The mirror ain't pretty.

From their perspective the US has been at war with Russia since 1946. In the '90s there were American carpetbaggers.

So, yeah, have somebody "help the Russian people behind the scenes." Play into the paranoia. Give them evidence to use against their political opposition that they're right and the opposition are traitors working for the US. You see the xenophobia and paranoia here? It would be nothing compared to what you'd see in Russia--to what you have seen in Russia, to be honest. For the same kinds of (suspected) things.

It's like the anti-imperialist anti-American attitude among some sections of the Latin American population. It's justified in part. Much of the "evidence" is suspicion and mostly fiction, but there's enough real intervention by the US south of the border to justify suspicion and paranoid. Take Maduro, again, as an example. We "get it" for them. We don't "get it" in the case of Russia because, frankly, we support overthrowing that regime. (How Putin's better than Saddam, I don't know. But look at Assad--he wasn't a bad guy under Bush II, but he was under Obama. It wasn't Assad that changed, it was domestic US politics. In 2008, even 2012, Russia still wasn't a foe because Obama wanted a reset and that switch didn't reset anything but did turn off critical thinking skills across the US. Gradually, though, they rebooted, but what really switched things was when we could blame Trump on Putin. And we both loathe Trump and need to blame somebody besides just an inchoate mass of stupid white men for Trump.)

No, I don't have a solution. It's like in 2008--people were like, "Duh, there's a problem, but I'd really like the financial mess cleared up by the end of next week." But for sure, we're not going to stop poking Russia with a sharp stick until we feel safe. And Russia's not going to stop poking us with a sharp stick until *they* feel safe. And they don't. (Beyond that I have this little problem in that sometimes humans seem like a different species to me. I've observed them for over 45 years and think I get it most days, but this is sort of an extreme circumstance. No intuition. Just logic, and people aren't logical, even in their beliefs that they are.)

I'm not sure there is a solution. Attitudes are set and it's not like Russians are going to change. We had Bill Clinton failed (new Russia); Bush II failed (maybe Putin's okay); Obama failed (he has no excuse, nor did HRC). Now Trump (he really sounds like Obama--"they're not bad people, it was my predecessor they didn't like&quot .

In '89 my Russian teacher, not a stupid fellow (but a bit of a perv) harshed our enthusiasm. "Glasnost'! Perestroika! Russia'll be just like us in 5 years," we said. Many sounded like the blockheads who said the same thing about the Arab Spring protesters. He said it would take at least 3, probably 4 generations. The "mentalitet", the mentality, needed to change. He said the first generation was the adults at the time: they knew how bad it had been and most would suffer for change, but others would mourn the stuff they'd lost. That generation's kids would hear firsthand how bad it had been but wouldn't believe them--they'd remember happy childhoods followed by economic collapse that screwed with their lives. They'd push back for the "good old days" when they came to have political clout. "Back to the USSR!", Nazad v CCCP--yes, you could see those signs recently. There was a nice multipart series with that name in 2010 in which the hero goes back to the USSR, falls in love, and loves it so much he decides to stay there.

*Their* children, Gen III, would be content with what was there, it's what they knew and grew up with, and it wasn't so bad. After all, these things take time. Gen IV would look and say, "Time's up, where's the beef?"

He was talking about the '20s and '30s and '40s. First generation suffered the Civil War and privation with some push back. Second generation resented it and ran into Stalin's buzzsaw. It was interrupted by the Great Patriotic War, WWII. But in the '60s and '70s it was "it's what they knew and grew up with". The '80s saw the collapse, "Time's up, where's the beef?"

Putin's the push back, the kids who saw a happy childhood go to crap and suffered privation and problems. The cycle's a bit shorter these days, so maybe there's hope for Gen IV by the time I'm 80. Until then you deal, but you have to figure out what rewards are from the other guy's perspective. Russians decide what a reward is, that's not up to us. So far our rewards are like giving Russian kid a Ukrainian flag when he gets an A on a test. Not cool.

Now, since this post is downright gloomy--the best we can do is stop screwing up like we have for the last 20 years and maybe wait it out--here are some anti-Russian jokes:

An American tells a Russian that the United States is so free he can stand in front of the White House and yell, "To hell with Ronald Reagan!" The Russian replies: "That's nothing. I can stand in front of the Kremlin and yell, 'To hell with Ronald Reagan,' too." (Oddly, it works all over again with "Donald Trump" under Putin.)

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP89G00720R000800040003-6.pdf

[FakeNoose]

4. Well I must have misunderstood something

I guess I'll go back and re-read these articles to see if I missed something.

https://worldview.stratfor.com/analysis/russia-readies-itself-unrest

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/21/protest-moscow-russia-ukraine

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/elections-and-political-unrest-russia-causes-and-prospects

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/12/world/europe/russia-aleksei-navalny-kremlin-protests.html

Thanks for the tip.

[Igel]

11. You missed the wishful thinking.

To keep it short(ish).

1. I've followed such pronouncements since about 1975. The generalization is this: Most of the time you know the conclusion before you know the topic. Look at the official view from DC, consider what you think about the president, and add in a pinch of what the public thinks. If there's a Big Event, skew towards public thinking. There, you're able to predict Soviet and Russian-related punitry for the last 40 years with probably 95% accuracy. Russia good, Russia bad, Putin good, Soviet Union evil. Whatever. Write the conclusion and then fill in the justification.

Since 2012 nobody's liked Putin. They wanted him gone, so people bent over backwards to predict his early exit. A big march in 2012 proves people didn't like him--approval ratings be damned. And he was undertaking steps to avoid mass unrest. Leave out the background, and it sounds bad. The Stratfor guy probably knows background and got stuff right. The NYT Moscow coverage these days is parasitic on group think.

Look at something like events from 1991 and you have to yawn. The media was breathless, worried. It was high stakes so intelligence services were on high alert and could afford no mistakes. But seriously, there were only a few pivot points worth fretting over. When tanks rolled into Ljubljana, when the pulled out, when the Duma was shelled, and how would Russia hold together. That's it. When the tanks pulled out of Ljubljana everybody was pretty sure that Estonia and Latvia would say ciao and nothing would happen. The generals in Moscow considered all the events in Slovenija, and that was that. They probably told Jugoslavija to get the tanks out. And whether Russia would hold together was unpredictable--it really was that close. And it's left wounds on the Russian psyche.

2.
So "mass unrest preparations." Others have said that any march can turn violent. We see that in the US, can't get worked up over it. 50k, like the White Revolution, would be a real mess (official estimate too low, advocates are insanely high in so many ways, I go with about 50k because I like the number and if it's 75k, it doesn't matter). But it wasn't going to go that way: the FSB knew about the march, quantity of people, route, and Putin could have pretty much stopped it that morning with a phone call. Just keep the out-of-town trains from running and have the metro trains avoid the station that was the march's starting point. 400 out of 50k or more, not so bad. But Putin had no qualms about letting the violence happen. We read one message, locals read another.

It was an excuse. Others have pointed out that Russians prefer stability to freedom. One survey even had young adults overwhelmingly saying that they had enough freedom, some said society offered too much. Not fertile ground for revolution, that.

Meanwhile, Putin's approval dipped into the low 60s for a couple of months once. Obama's reached the low 60s for a couple of months, once. By that measure, Obama should have feared overthrow any minute, heaven knows enough people hated him viscerally. (I trust the poll numbers. Backchannel Slavist wisdom is that the Levada Center is pretty good with their data. They're pretty much it for reliable Russian polling. They've been forced to doctor a very, very few numbers, and word's leaked behind the scenes, sometimes prior to release, that they're doctored and why just because it's such a big deal.)

The mass unrest at issue has been described as maidan-like events. If stability >> freedom, the maidan is a center of chaos. It sucks strength from every government that has to confront it. Use force, bad government; let it go, government's weak, impotent. Government falls, snap elections, previous rulers are too mean or to wussy to re-elect. Lose-lose, political kryptonite.

Second option has Putin up at night. You know how the Donbas fell, that slow-mo rolling coup? Again, lose-lose, no way to confront it without a shoot out, and the social media feed shows dead unarmed civilians. Government falls, snap elections, yada-yada. That was almost certainly FSB or GRU, it was brilliant, and it was oh-so-Soviet mentality. If it wasn't FSB or GRU, they studied it and it's now in their toolkit. How to take over without firing a shot, in a way that even if you lose you win. And then when the soldiers occupied the towns, the city governments were prostrate and had piss-poor communication with the central government. Genius. Evil genius, but genius. Hybrid war.

Remember the recent non-protest protest? Protest called, it was banned, police showed up and made sure the march didn't happen. No march, no rally in the park and adjacent square that weekend afternoon? Just a whole bunch of families and others sitting, eating, walking, talking, playing. So the police were there, and confidently reported the protest did not happen, all's well in Mudville. Then all these phones buzz with a social media message and scores of protesters pulled their rolled up posters out, unfurled them and stood up. Insta-rally. The FSB didn't see it coming. A conspiracy like that. Putin peed his pants. Yes, this and the slo-mo coup tie together.

Now imagine teams of 20 people in 10 cities from Novgorod to Nakhodka, Murmansk to Rostov na Dony, in the parks around municipal buildings (as there usually are) one afternoon. Then from each park 20 people, 10 unarmed, 1 armed with a camera broadcasting to live social media, and 9 armed men who had their assault rifles in gym bags, go into the municipal buildings. Islamic terrorists would be better politically, killing everybody they met. But these occupiers would be bearers of chaos and instability that would castrate government--and to deal with them would be to kill unarmed men and women on camera. Unless you prevent it by controlling social media. If you can't prevent it, you need to have instant SWAT teams ready to respond before they set up shop and it becomes a standoff, or you control social media and news media so the word doesn't get out when you kill all the bastards. These are like red and green putinite, able to strip Superpoot of his super powers.

These are two examples of serious "mass unrest" that's utterly not "mass" but which Russia's prepared for. It's dangerous, and something that "foreign agents" could help organize. USAID, for example. Both involve small groups of possible conspirators and could be done with meddling from the US in internal Russian matters. If you're sufficiently cynical and a believer, something you're unlikely to read in the NYT or Stratfor, last fall was revenge.


Even the shut-down of religious groups fits this. It's billed as religious extremism and cultural oppression. You have to know your bolshevik history--old believers and baptists helped smuggle in bolshevik tracts, distribute them, guide revolutionaries to towns in safety, in return for promises of freedom of worship under the bolsheviks. (Just read Lunacharsky.) Under the Soviets, JWs and pentecostals and baptists with ties to the west were a conduit for smuggling dissident info out from the USSR, information and money into the USSR. The KGB didn't give these groups any rest. Even the Central Committee shows that official invitations of religious figures and their trips abroad allowed them to function as an informal backchannel for messages during times of war or international tension when even president's or prime minister's cabinet couldn't be trusted because the very fact of the communication was a secret. That last bit's from a recent article in a journal whose advisory board's a who's who of Putin cronies--it should be published in English next winter. All the religions with links to the US, that USAID or the CIA (etc.) could use ... Are being shut down. And the NYT just sees "religious discrimination."

Yeah, yeah, Putin bad. A bit paranoid. He's not going anywhere. And he's not stupid. Remember, aspens turn colors in clusters because their roots connect them.

[Xolodno]

7. This should be required reading on DU.

Often see knee jerk reactions here in regards to Russia and when I challenge them....oh boy, I don't get flamed, I get burned at the stake.

Russia is a country with a lot of history and a lot of pride. Russian troops marched in Paris when it helped take down Emperor Napoleon. And Russia helped considerably in breaking the back of the Nazi forces. Before the bomb, FDR wanted and was promised by Stalin to take down Japan. We were going to come up the south while they came down north during the proposed invasion.

And the country and people also perceive themselves as getting screwed over by the west on multiple occasions. Most people don't know after World War I, Russia was to gain control over Istanbul...which it would then rename Constantinople and become the capital of Orthodoxy once again. Instead, because of the revolution, not only did they not get that, but lost all the land that the Germans occupied, which were then turned into their own nations, such as Ukraine....a place that never really was a nation.

After the Soviet collapse, they got Yeltsin and when the Duma opposed him, he illegally liquidated it....and we backed his autocratic power grab...so you could say, we helped create this mess. Who knew a former mid level, lackluster and nondescript former KGB agent would become what he is today? Oh and and insult to injury, again, they lost territory, again. Many of the republics in the USSR included Russian territory to prevent them from doing what they eventually did, secede. For example, Ukraine is much larger as a nation than it was after WWI, because it actually includes former Russian territory.

Russia is complicated. Due to its long history and complicated role with Europe and the USA is a country that's barely 250 years old and dictating to them one dimensional solutions. To them, that's an insult.

[lanlady]

9. Russia is a failing state. Ukraine, at least, has a chance at a future

Russian villages are emptying out; men are poisoning themselves with vodka; the country reached negative population growth this year; it produces nothing - ничего - that the world wants to buy (except some weapons); its oligarchs have literally stripped the country of its natural wealth and robbed citizens of their future.

But lets give credit where credit is due. Russia is very good at: spying, subterfuge, chicanery, agitprop, political repression, blackmail, international money-laundering, and stealing other countries' territory (you have it all backwards - Russia steals from Ukraine, not the other way around).

Russians perceive themselves as being screwed by the West? That is because Russian leaders have been feeding them that bullshit for centuries. Because the despots in the Kremlin, whether they're tsars, Bolsheviks, or post-Soviet kleptocrats, don't want the Russian people looking to the West for help to reform the rotten and corrupt cesspool that is the Russian political system.

Ukraine is trying to pull itself out from under decades of Moscow's malevolent rule. It's rough going and it might not succeed, but it has no other choice than to try to join the European family of nations. Ukrainians do not want to be part of Russia or under its thumb. Gee, I wonder why?

By the way, who made you the arbiter of nationhood, Холодно? You are flat wrong on Ukraine. It is a nation. I know that's hard for Russians to accept, but too damn bad. Ukraine has its own national identity, history, pride, and its own (quite beautiful) language. Here's a novel idea for Moscow - leave Ukraine alone, and concentrate your attention on solving Russia's vast demographic, economic, and societal problems.

[Xolodno]

10. Demonstrated my point...perfectly.

Oh and FYI, I never advocated Ukraine to be ruled by Russia. But just pointed out a bit here and in several other places, Ukraine has been a much smaller nation than the artificial lines suggest, if it wasn't, then why would it be so easy for Russia to create and aid a rebellion? And why would people of the Ukrainian proper have so much...shall I say, adverse relations, towards eastern Ukraine? If we want to get technical, Crimea and a portion of southern current Ukraine belongs to the Tatars, something Russians, Ukrainians and the rest of Europe refuse to recognize.

If the borders were aligned to account for the Soviet manipulations....this problem wouldn't exist. The very territory Ukraine is trying to claim, has never been historically part of it. Don't get mad at me, get mad at the Soviet system, Khrushchev for transferring administrative jurisdiction, but not territory and leaving in international forums many would consider "limbo".

Oh and I need to correct you, Ukraine hasn't been under Moscow's rule for decades....but over a century and then some. And by the way, I believe Ukraine should be a nation, I haven't done the 23 and me DNA test, but, I suspect, given some of my family tree last names, I'm not as Russian as I think. My wife is Russian, but she knows that is probably a small part of her and Persian is the ethnicity she has most of. Just the way it is under an empire than expands over three centuries.

Nor am I an arbiter, just pointing out historical facts...that I often get flamed for. For example, I point out, outside this forum, that most US Bible maps show Israel under King David at its peak...when an actuality, its history shows it was about two thirds that...and if you want to get technical, Israel never had jurisdiction over Jerusalem, when the Kingdoms separated, Jerusalem was under Judah's control...and that nation has not been restored. And after its restoration from Babylon, Israel was much smaller than we think, boy oh boy, do I get heat for that.

Russia not being screwed by the west? Oh come on, did you write that with a straight face? I won't go into detail, but you know, even if you outwardly refuse to believe it, deep down know its true. I could make a long bullet point with examples in Powerpoint showing this.

As for joining the European family, good luck with that. Russia has been trying that for centuries. Lets look at the recent examples... Yeltsin stated he wanted Russia to join NATO.... crickets. Early in Putin's term, a reporter asked him if Russia would be willing to join NATO, he stated "I don't see why not". The response, more crickets. If you read Sebag Montefiore Romanovs, you will see an often effort to be considered "European"...even being hailed as heroes...but still kept out of the club.

The only reason Ukraine..or for that matter, Georgia was considered for NATO was the strategic positions. Want proof, Turkey is a long time NATO member...what's their chances of joining the EU?

Again, I'm just stating facts, you may not like them, I know how Slavic pride tends to over-ride that, but, it is what it is.

[lunasun]

2. Putin has a whole young generation brought up on anti western propaganda

Violent and super conservative religious too
The west is not spiritual enough and they are superior , they have been conditioned to believe.

Putin’s puritanism has grown hand-in-hand with the personal influence of two key conservative ideologues: his personal confessor Bishop Tikhon Shevkunov and the mystical geopolitical thinker Alexander Dugin. Bishop Tikhon is one of Russia’s highest-profile critics of the decadence of the modern western world — and his Every-day Saints and the Other Stories was the best–selling Russian book of 2012
The influence of the Russian Orthodox church on public life is growing fast, thanks to Kremlin patronage. The church’s preferred instrument of control is a draconian law criminalising ‘offending the feeling of religious believers’ that was passed in the wake of a protest by the feminist punk group Pussy Riot in Moscow’s Christ the Saviour Cathedral in 2012. Prosecutions under the law have kicked into high gear this year. In March in Stavropol, south Russia, criminal charges were brought against Viktor Krasnov after he wrote ‘God does not exist’ on the VKontakte social network, Russia’s version of Facebook. Krasnov was ordered to spend over a month undergoing examinations in a psychiatric ward before he was finally deemed sane enough to stand trial, and the case continues.
A month ago, 20-year-old blogger Ruslan Sokolovsky was arrested and sentenced to two months in jail after he posted an online video of himself playing Pokémon Go in a church. He could eventually spend five years behind bars if his action is classed as a ‘hate crime motivated by religion’. ‘I decided to catch some Pokémon in church because why not? I believe it’s both safe and not against the law,’ said Sokolovsky in his online video as he walked into Ekaterinburg’s Church of All Saints.

‘Who could be offended if you walk in a church with a smartphone in your hand?’

Apparently, the answer is: most Putin-era Russians.

Polls show that most ordinary Russians hold deeply illiberal views on social issues (for example, 21 per cent want to see homosexuals ‘liquidated’, and another 37 per cent advocate ‘separating them"

Dugin, once a marginal figure, has come closer to the political mainstream as Russia has veered deeper into isolation and nationalism in the wake of the annexation of Crimea in March 2014. The Tsargrad team played an important role in encouraging and fomenting the pro-Russian rebellion in eastern Ukraine. Dugin and Malofeyev have both been named in the US sanctions list for their role in the conflict — a rebellion that was spearheaded by two of Malofeyev’s former employees, Igor Strelkov and Alexander Borodai, who became defence minister and prime minster respectively of the break-away (and Russian-backed) Donetsk People’s Republic.
‘This is a state that cynically uses Orthodox Christianity as a surrogate ideology to prop up its authority,’ argues Brian Whitmore, author of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s influential blog The Power Vertical. ‘It’s a state where fealty to the Orthodox church, or at least publicly proclaiming fealty, becomes a surrogate for patriotism… and it’s a state where challenging the authority of the church is akin to an act of treason

[UTUSN]

6. "Putins paranoia ...that the West and above all the US wants to overthrow and destroy him.

Even if true, same impetus as N. Korea or any other autocrat




.

[Demonaut]

8. "leave in piece"?...who proof-reads anymore?