"Russia did not really try to counter this narrative and let it play out—"
You can either devote everything to winning the information war- boosting polling approval numbers in the short term- or winning the war.
Everything that NATO does is aimed at making cheap debating points for election campaigns-headlines forpartisan newspapers- punch lines for talk shows. The war, and the poor bastards involved in it, doesn't matter. In the end it is all about the money.
"The belief that we are superior makes us vulnerable."
Did you note his inclusion of many others into the same group as Russia, particularly Hamas and Hezbollah? IMO, too many will miss that significance. What I want to read now is his conclusion.
The book's for Westerners who don't know how to think, although they think they know how to think--a head extractor if you will. I thought about contrasting it with Simplicius's analysis of a Newsweek article from last July that I see as a CIA CYA piece but merely mentioned the book since there was already 350 comments on that thread.
Is there any overlap between the way Russians think and what we call systems thinking? As soon as I read about the term 'systems thinking' I realized that that is, in fact, the way I think, and not many people in the west do, it seems. Joanna Macy has a lot to say about this, and I believe she may have come up with the term.
Yes. There's an excellent comparison between Western thought processes and those of Russia and much of the rest of the world, not just the Orient. In too many ways, the West has gone from empirical thinking and reasoning methods to wishful thinking and "narrative" reasoning methods, all of which are displayed in the book's first chapter. There's a Russian ex-pat blogger and author named Martyanov who lives in Washinton state that rails about the utter ineptitude related to Western "reasoning" who I'm sure is having a good time with this publication as it confirms what he's been on and on about for years now.
Normally I don't like over generalisations, but alas I think you may be correct in what you say. If the "west" can be thought of as a "collective", then the dominant way of thinking these days is to promote a preferred narrative as opposed to trying to understand reality and facts. The drawbacks with such an approach do not seem obvious to most...
It's again vividly present in the current issue of "Foreign Affairs" that gets a short undressing at Larry Johnson's by one of his frequent guest writers, https://sonar21.com/thinking-outside-the-box/
If you're not familiar with Andrei Martyanov's blog and his Youtube channel - if you can sit through his rants - which are correct - about how crappy western journalists and politicians are - check them out. He goes over the Russian view of military operational art and how real war fighting is heavily technical with an emphasis on planning. Of course, there are also his three books on the subject.
The main point is that Russia has been fighting for 800 years of their thousand year existence - and they're good at it. Experience matters. They are arguably the best military minds on the planet, certainly at this point. They have serious universities devoted to the subject. Martyanov talks about the educational requirements frequently. He claims most of the west's generals wouldn't be allowed to command a company size unit. :-)
I skip over the bits where he dissects the resume. It's pretty clear now that these places are for indoctrination to ensure the mental furniture is suitably arranged. In any one year most of the bureaucracies have an a near monthly mandatory test that is compulsory or else. Discovered Andrei's books back in the Saker days; very illuminating.
"Me on the other hand" would have another book added to a rather large pile of books begging to be read. I'm more interested in what Emmanual Todd has written and said in his interview with Le Point, which is behind a paywall. The gist can be gained elsewhere, but none of those reports directly state his premises.
I have now read the chapter. Fascinating. My first impression though is that it places too much emphasis on decision making within Ukraine pre the start of the war/SMO, and perhaps could explore and/or speculate further on the role of the USA/NATO in guiding those decisions. This apart, though, it should be compulsary reading for the various clowns posing as experts in the western media - who clearly get their briefings from official sources. But as you note, and as I have concluded over the last couple of years, western intelligence [agencies] are almost an oxymoron - they promote a preferred narrative. This has led to the monumental debacle for [western policy] that is unfolding in Ukraine. Rule 101 - if you are going to make war on a country you had better understand their capabilities and motivations....
Thank you for your concern, but I am now retired and of independent means. I worry about the future for the youngsters, but I am in the final quarter. I will be fine unless the whole world goes to sh*t. The young do not seem to be able to process the world, indeed most of the older neither. So I wait and watch, make my predictions and observations, and silently rage against the suicidal stupidity that now passes for civilisation in the west.
"Russia did not really try to counter this narrative and let it play out—"
You can either devote everything to winning the information war- boosting polling approval numbers in the short term- or winning the war.
Everything that NATO does is aimed at making cheap debating points for election campaigns-headlines forpartisan newspapers- punch lines for talk shows. The war, and the poor bastards involved in it, doesn't matter. In the end it is all about the money.
"The belief that we are superior makes us vulnerable."
Imperialism has its epitaph.
Did you note his inclusion of many others into the same group as Russia, particularly Hamas and Hezbollah? IMO, too many will miss that significance. What I want to read now is his conclusion.
thanks karl for drawing it to my attention.. i will have a look!
Looks like a good book, and like Russians can be very strategic systems thinkers.
The book's for Westerners who don't know how to think, although they think they know how to think--a head extractor if you will. I thought about contrasting it with Simplicius's analysis of a Newsweek article from last July that I see as a CIA CYA piece but merely mentioned the book since there was already 350 comments on that thread.
Is there any overlap between the way Russians think and what we call systems thinking? As soon as I read about the term 'systems thinking' I realized that that is, in fact, the way I think, and not many people in the west do, it seems. Joanna Macy has a lot to say about this, and I believe she may have come up with the term.
Yes. There's an excellent comparison between Western thought processes and those of Russia and much of the rest of the world, not just the Orient. In too many ways, the West has gone from empirical thinking and reasoning methods to wishful thinking and "narrative" reasoning methods, all of which are displayed in the book's first chapter. There's a Russian ex-pat blogger and author named Martyanov who lives in Washinton state that rails about the utter ineptitude related to Western "reasoning" who I'm sure is having a good time with this publication as it confirms what he's been on and on about for years now.
Normally I don't like over generalisations, but alas I think you may be correct in what you say. If the "west" can be thought of as a "collective", then the dominant way of thinking these days is to promote a preferred narrative as opposed to trying to understand reality and facts. The drawbacks with such an approach do not seem obvious to most...
It's again vividly present in the current issue of "Foreign Affairs" that gets a short undressing at Larry Johnson's by one of his frequent guest writers, https://sonar21.com/thinking-outside-the-box/
If you're not familiar with Andrei Martyanov's blog and his Youtube channel - if you can sit through his rants - which are correct - about how crappy western journalists and politicians are - check them out. He goes over the Russian view of military operational art and how real war fighting is heavily technical with an emphasis on planning. Of course, there are also his three books on the subject.
The main point is that Russia has been fighting for 800 years of their thousand year existence - and they're good at it. Experience matters. They are arguably the best military minds on the planet, certainly at this point. They have serious universities devoted to the subject. Martyanov talks about the educational requirements frequently. He claims most of the west's generals wouldn't be allowed to command a company size unit. :-)
I skip over the bits where he dissects the resume. It's pretty clear now that these places are for indoctrination to ensure the mental furniture is suitably arranged. In any one year most of the bureaucracies have an a near monthly mandatory test that is compulsory or else. Discovered Andrei's books back in the Saker days; very illuminating.
I referenced the Postil article in MoA. Great Read.
I'm curious if the entire text is worthy.
No need to check for me, I pretty much understand the theme.
More detail is of no benefit to me. You, on the other hand . . .
"Me on the other hand" would have another book added to a rather large pile of books begging to be read. I'm more interested in what Emmanual Todd has written and said in his interview with Le Point, which is behind a paywall. The gist can be gained elsewhere, but none of those reports directly state his premises.
I have now read the chapter. Fascinating. My first impression though is that it places too much emphasis on decision making within Ukraine pre the start of the war/SMO, and perhaps could explore and/or speculate further on the role of the USA/NATO in guiding those decisions. This apart, though, it should be compulsary reading for the various clowns posing as experts in the western media - who clearly get their briefings from official sources. But as you note, and as I have concluded over the last couple of years, western intelligence [agencies] are almost an oxymoron - they promote a preferred narrative. This has led to the monumental debacle for [western policy] that is unfolding in Ukraine. Rule 101 - if you are going to make war on a country you had better understand their capabilities and motivations....
Reading and then sourcing from such will get your fired; or most likely your contract won't be renewed.
Thank you for your concern, but I am now retired and of independent means. I worry about the future for the youngsters, but I am in the final quarter. I will be fine unless the whole world goes to sh*t. The young do not seem to be able to process the world, indeed most of the older neither. So I wait and watch, make my predictions and observations, and silently rage against the suicidal stupidity that now passes for civilisation in the west.