Why I think Neoliberals and Democrats hatemonger and fearmonger Russia - The last third of Adam Curtis' The Trap, I want to ask Kiwi Farms about Russia in the 90s

[Bass]

I think they so it because there's really only 2 credible threats to the US and it's hegemony. China and Russia.

One of these threats is viewed as "exciting new markets" and is actively trying to buy or bribe it's way to the top. No points for guessing which one does this, but I'll give you a hint, the other one is Russia.

So since they are in bed with one foreign power that only leaves one credible threat to fearmonger about, because if you look too closely at the other you might actually see some stuff the powers that be don't want you to see.

 

[Łimønča]

Vladimir Putin became the new Russian President. The oligarchs were arrested or exiled. The people had grown tired of liberty, and in its place like every other occasion in the history books came Order.

Nigga, the oligarchs still exist and are loyal to Putin.

 

[Cavalier Cipolla]

Say what you want about 1990s Russia, but at least Russian TV and mainstream media didn't blame video games for everything. You could at least numb the pain somewhat with a Famiclone, be it a Dendy, Subor, Lifa or many others, playing those bootleg offically licensed by Steepler Mario sequels beyond SMB3 or a 9999-in-1 multicart without being made fun of by the mainstream media, or blamed for school shootings. In fact, on TV you had "Dendy Новая Реальность" (Dendy the New Reality) which promoted gaming as being based. Who cares if they accused Joe&Mac being the bootleg and Mario 16 the original game.

 

[3119967d0c]

Oh, right, that. Why would anyone fear (or be deeply concerned over, to be more correct) an economically unstable country able to blow up half the planet?

I mean, it's not like there's a precedent of countries starting wars to distract their populations. Next you'll be telling me Argentina tried to retake the Falklands.

this thread is about Russia, not America

 

[Lurk McDurk]

I don't have time at the moment to fully explain my love/hate of Adam Curtis but I do have time to point out that whether it's true or not, this article is fucking bonkers, and completely plausible to me so I believe it to be true anyway.

https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b150npp3q49x7w/how-harvard-lost-russia

 

[Cool Dog]

The oligarchs never left, putin simply changed them for loyal oligarchs who followed orders and paid him tribute

Everybody knows that bald manlet has billions in banks overseas

I disagree. I think it worked out exactly as the think tanks intended. None of that was ever supposed to help the russian people.

Who could have actually believe that a bunch of reagan-era neocons and neolibs who had to deal with commie bullshit for most of their lives were simply going to forget that and help their former enemies?

If anything russians fucked up by not hiring their own advisors. I think gorbachev had the right idea trying to copy sweden's economic system, except he wanted to do that while keeping the commie state apparatus that kept him and his friends as an hereditary royalty in everything but name and the police state that kept the entire population and non russian countries under his control

So you think it was planned until December 31st 1999, when Yeltsin unexpectedly resigned and, according to the Constitution of Russia, Putin became Acting President of the Russian Federation? When do you think the plan went awry or is Putin one of the elite?

It failed because they got too greedy allowing somebody like putin to get any power. Given how fucked russians were in the late 80s any improvement would've been an improvement but everybody involved in the reforms got into the feeding frenzy, nobody wanted to be left out of the new billionaires club. Is not the different than what happened in china where a bunch of CCP officials and their kids became overnight billionaires, the difference being that china kept the police state intact to keep the masses from rebelling, see tiannamen square

Oh, right, that. Why would anyone fear (or be deeply concerned over, to be more correct) an economically unstable country able to blow up half the planet?

I would be more concerned about the borderline-natsoc country literally taking over the world right now, which also has a bunch of nukes

Economic power always triumphs military power, is the same reason why the spanish empire went into a death spiral while the british surpassed them