It just amazes me how almost infinitely far ahead Russia is now compared to the U.S. in their political will and energy, driven in no small part by Putin, to make life in the "Motherland" good for every person, every class, every profession. I almost teared up reading some of what was said by a number of speakers, and I have absolutely no reason to believe that they were not sincere or that they were forced. I can only pray that the USofA can one day start to become more like Russia. Either "again" or for the first time.
At times, this entire process becomes emotional since I'm a student of history and am watching the birth of something new in front of my eyes, not something that happened years ago before I was born. It's a vital tonic to the cynicism that goes with being an American citizen. My hope is that Humanity can weather this historical transition to a new paradigm without massive tragedy. The asymmetric process Russia and China are pursuing to deprive the Outlaw US Empire of its greatest power is the right choice and looks like it will be put into motion soon--within a year. The maturity of Xi and Putin to see the peoples of the West as captives/victims of their governments is linked to the wisdom of their initiatives.
President Putin at one point refers to "Academician Tamm", i.e., Igor Tamm, co-recipient of the 1958 Physics Nobel Prize, repeating Tamm's famous quote that this (the 20th) is the century of physics, the next will be the century of biology. Impressive reach. A true statesman.
"My impression: Putin aims to turn Russia into one massive soviet."
I sincerely hope that's true. He certainly does seem to have a strong sense of what was lost with the collapse of the USSR. Not to mention, he's really a product of it's society. Perhaps, beyond the obvious natural advantages of the land, that's the secret sauce with Putin's Russia: its retained some memory of the collective, Soviet experience.
Nonetheless, he has trashed Lenin and the Bolshevik party on many occasions, so I don't want to get too excited.
If you recall the USSR's constitution, it was very liberal in a number of areas but those never became reality. The collective nature of the soviet is where any nation's power really lies, and that's what we're seeing being assembled with the merging of labor, capital/business and state. A massive amount of monies are being invested in the Russian work force, some by the state and some by capital/business. The educational foundation for the advanced tech of the 4th Industrial Revolution is being laid by state, regions, and capital/business. And in many respects, that capital/business combo also included that state because of the many public utilities and partially state-owned enterprises. Many of the capital sources were "invented" by Putin for the express purpose of supporting Russian development. Two meetings with the political players who will deal with the legislative end of providing for the Federal Address's development agenda were followed today with a meeting with the President of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs Alexander Shokhin to coordinate that part of the collective. IMO, in Russia the key is there's no war on labor as there is in the West. Labor Collectives have an equal say in what's happening as do industrialists and entrepreneurs. Instead of biting at each other's ankles they work together to build the nation and thus themselves. IMO, that part of Russian philosophy predates both Revolutions--1905/1917--but was never really acted upon until the 2000s.
Of course, the proof will be in how the work turns out. And some of that outcome will be affected by the SMO's progress and whatever further aggression NATO makes.
Much of what you say is true. He has been described as a "Bonapartist" leader sort of balancing all sectors, classes against each other with his clever administration at the center.
He definitely has a degree of control over the Russian oligarchs, but it would be so much more efficient to simply cut out the middle man and nationalize all industry. At this stage, it would be very difficult for the oligarchs to resist. He could leave each with substantial wealth over and above the average citizen to reduce the friction. In the end, the Russian worker built that industry, not the oligarchs.
IMO, what needed to be nationalized has been nationalized. Most new businesses are of the SME variety. As China recognized and Russia has also learned, there's a creative element provided by the entrepreneur that helps drive innovation, and as long as the sources of capital remain in the state/public's hands, then the state/people can remain in control. And politically, either you work with the state and the people to advance both or you're deemed unpatriotic and risk becoming a pariah, which is a status few want. The level of state/public involvement with the development of new tech, much of what emerges will be a hybrid product, which it seems Russia's electorate understands and favors.
It's an apt description of the West. The onset of "friendly fascism" during the Anti-Communist Crusade is where you'll find its roots. Classically, governments that are deaf to their citizenry are oligarchies, while those where political discourse is constantly ongoing are usually vibrant and prosperous nations. As you'll see when I finally post another of Maria's briefing selections Iceland has been captured by NATO's Russophobic spell. It's going to be really bad for the West when the spell wears off and reality returns to their much poorer lands. Sure, post the link for other readers besides myself. Thanks!
Those statements are from an article written during the Yellow Vest protests in France in 2019. Could the protesters with their click-bait opinions lead to constructing a new political order?
A new political order had been constructed in the past. In 1788 King Louis XVI, when the government had completely failed, engaged the public to produce a "ledger of complaints." The bottom up effort in the entire country led to the recompositing of the res publica piece by piece.
The efforts in Russia provide a means of voicing complaints connected to actions which have created a country of political agents. In the West one has to ask is politics possible? Here is an indication of what is needed.
"We always forget how new this situation of extreme depoliticization is. This
explains why we all find ourselves so helpless at both the sending and receiving
ends. Until now, despite the rhetoric on the virtues and dangers of political
autonomy—and God knows there has been no shortage of that in the two
centuries since the Revolution— we knew that the expression of interests, the
explosion of passions, the detection of injustices, were not based solely on these
fragile statements. There were a thousand solidarities of family, clan, trade,
industry, trade unions, religion, and more recently political parties, which
involved citizens and gave weight to public expression. A multiform connective
tissue, widespread throughout the social body, ensured the buoyancy, so to speak,
of these weak statements and gave them a plausibility that did not just come from
how well they were phrased. And as it was the same, on the reception side,
countless attentive ears allowed themselves, as they say, “to get along.” However,
today the connective tissue has so definitively disappeared that all that remains is
the exercise of political speech—just as its exercise has become so awkward!
This is the key to the current drama. The individuals atomized by the
expansion of neo-liberalism today are really, genuinely, atoms without any link
between them. Worse, the only links they maintain are those of social networks, a
tremendous acceleration of atomization. The founding thinkers of society for its
own sake had never imagined that there would be a day when this dream would
be reduced to the mere expression of an “That is my opinion, and I stand by it.”
And yet the French, and this is the welcome surprise, seem to be trying to talk
freely again, thanks to the “yellow vests” movement, about everything related to
daily life. So, what do we need to hang all these protests on, in a shared public life?
This is where the expression “ledgers of complains” throws a clear light on the
situation and can serve as a model, or at least an inspiration....."
From "The Search for Political Heteronomy - New Ledgers of Complaints" by Bruno Latour, March 2019
It just amazes me how almost infinitely far ahead Russia is now compared to the U.S. in their political will and energy, driven in no small part by Putin, to make life in the "Motherland" good for every person, every class, every profession. I almost teared up reading some of what was said by a number of speakers, and I have absolutely no reason to believe that they were not sincere or that they were forced. I can only pray that the USofA can one day start to become more like Russia. Either "again" or for the first time.
At times, this entire process becomes emotional since I'm a student of history and am watching the birth of something new in front of my eyes, not something that happened years ago before I was born. It's a vital tonic to the cynicism that goes with being an American citizen. My hope is that Humanity can weather this historical transition to a new paradigm without massive tragedy. The asymmetric process Russia and China are pursuing to deprive the Outlaw US Empire of its greatest power is the right choice and looks like it will be put into motion soon--within a year. The maturity of Xi and Putin to see the peoples of the West as captives/victims of their governments is linked to the wisdom of their initiatives.
President Putin at one point refers to "Academician Tamm", i.e., Igor Tamm, co-recipient of the 1958 Physics Nobel Prize, repeating Tamm's famous quote that this (the 20th) is the century of physics, the next will be the century of biology. Impressive reach. A true statesman.
Thanks for posting!
"My impression: Putin aims to turn Russia into one massive soviet."
I sincerely hope that's true. He certainly does seem to have a strong sense of what was lost with the collapse of the USSR. Not to mention, he's really a product of it's society. Perhaps, beyond the obvious natural advantages of the land, that's the secret sauce with Putin's Russia: its retained some memory of the collective, Soviet experience.
Nonetheless, he has trashed Lenin and the Bolshevik party on many occasions, so I don't want to get too excited.
If you recall the USSR's constitution, it was very liberal in a number of areas but those never became reality. The collective nature of the soviet is where any nation's power really lies, and that's what we're seeing being assembled with the merging of labor, capital/business and state. A massive amount of monies are being invested in the Russian work force, some by the state and some by capital/business. The educational foundation for the advanced tech of the 4th Industrial Revolution is being laid by state, regions, and capital/business. And in many respects, that capital/business combo also included that state because of the many public utilities and partially state-owned enterprises. Many of the capital sources were "invented" by Putin for the express purpose of supporting Russian development. Two meetings with the political players who will deal with the legislative end of providing for the Federal Address's development agenda were followed today with a meeting with the President of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs Alexander Shokhin to coordinate that part of the collective. IMO, in Russia the key is there's no war on labor as there is in the West. Labor Collectives have an equal say in what's happening as do industrialists and entrepreneurs. Instead of biting at each other's ankles they work together to build the nation and thus themselves. IMO, that part of Russian philosophy predates both Revolutions--1905/1917--but was never really acted upon until the 2000s.
Of course, the proof will be in how the work turns out. And some of that outcome will be affected by the SMO's progress and whatever further aggression NATO makes.
Much of what you say is true. He has been described as a "Bonapartist" leader sort of balancing all sectors, classes against each other with his clever administration at the center.
He definitely has a degree of control over the Russian oligarchs, but it would be so much more efficient to simply cut out the middle man and nationalize all industry. At this stage, it would be very difficult for the oligarchs to resist. He could leave each with substantial wealth over and above the average citizen to reduce the friction. In the end, the Russian worker built that industry, not the oligarchs.
IMO, what needed to be nationalized has been nationalized. Most new businesses are of the SME variety. As China recognized and Russia has also learned, there's a creative element provided by the entrepreneur that helps drive innovation, and as long as the sources of capital remain in the state/public's hands, then the state/people can remain in control. And politically, either you work with the state and the people to advance both or you're deemed unpatriotic and risk becoming a pariah, which is a status few want. The level of state/public involvement with the development of new tech, much of what emerges will be a hybrid product, which it seems Russia's electorate understands and favors.
Does this text below sound like the US and the condition of most countries?
"This would first of all require us to resolve the
crisis of extreme depoliticization we are in. (depoliticization in italics in original)
This depoliticization can be summed up in a cruel phrase: mute people trying
to speak to deaf ones.
While “the people” seem unable to articulate political
positions that can be understood by the government; “the government” also
seems incapable of listening to anyone’s claims.
Blocked at both transmission and
reception ends, a feeling of despair settles in.
It is as if the breath that energizes
the political spirit of an entire nation has completely vanished.
It is quite possible
that in France we have never before seen a situation of such profound silence in
the midst of such a flood of words.
We see crowds trying to talk to each other, we
see the State trying to fit them into a traditional mold, but, for the momentum any
case, we have the impression of a film with the sound-track turned off.
There is an old misunderstanding about what it means to express oneself
politically. It hinges on the usual distinction between the content of a political
expression from the movement or, if you will, from the spirit in which it is
expressed." (movement in italics in original)"
I see politics in Russia. Momentum. Movement. Engagement. Hope.
Would you like a link to the short article which this came from?
It's an apt description of the West. The onset of "friendly fascism" during the Anti-Communist Crusade is where you'll find its roots. Classically, governments that are deaf to their citizenry are oligarchies, while those where political discourse is constantly ongoing are usually vibrant and prosperous nations. As you'll see when I finally post another of Maria's briefing selections Iceland has been captured by NATO's Russophobic spell. It's going to be really bad for the West when the spell wears off and reality returns to their much poorer lands. Sure, post the link for other readers besides myself. Thanks!
Those statements are from an article written during the Yellow Vest protests in France in 2019. Could the protesters with their click-bait opinions lead to constructing a new political order?
A new political order had been constructed in the past. In 1788 King Louis XVI, when the government had completely failed, engaged the public to produce a "ledger of complaints." The bottom up effort in the entire country led to the recompositing of the res publica piece by piece.
The efforts in Russia provide a means of voicing complaints connected to actions which have created a country of political agents. In the West one has to ask is politics possible? Here is an indication of what is needed.
"We always forget how new this situation of extreme depoliticization is. This
explains why we all find ourselves so helpless at both the sending and receiving
ends. Until now, despite the rhetoric on the virtues and dangers of political
autonomy—and God knows there has been no shortage of that in the two
centuries since the Revolution— we knew that the expression of interests, the
explosion of passions, the detection of injustices, were not based solely on these
fragile statements. There were a thousand solidarities of family, clan, trade,
industry, trade unions, religion, and more recently political parties, which
involved citizens and gave weight to public expression. A multiform connective
tissue, widespread throughout the social body, ensured the buoyancy, so to speak,
of these weak statements and gave them a plausibility that did not just come from
how well they were phrased. And as it was the same, on the reception side,
countless attentive ears allowed themselves, as they say, “to get along.” However,
today the connective tissue has so definitively disappeared that all that remains is
the exercise of political speech—just as its exercise has become so awkward!
This is the key to the current drama. The individuals atomized by the
expansion of neo-liberalism today are really, genuinely, atoms without any link
between them. Worse, the only links they maintain are those of social networks, a
tremendous acceleration of atomization. The founding thinkers of society for its
own sake had never imagined that there would be a day when this dream would
be reduced to the mere expression of an “That is my opinion, and I stand by it.”
And yet the French, and this is the welcome surprise, seem to be trying to talk
freely again, thanks to the “yellow vests” movement, about everything related to
daily life. So, what do we need to hang all these protests on, in a shared public life?
This is where the expression “ledgers of complains” throws a clear light on the
situation and can serve as a model, or at least an inspiration....."
From "The Search for Political Heteronomy - New Ledgers of Complaints" by Bruno Latour, March 2019
http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/downloads/163-ESPRIT-HETERENOMY-GB_0.pdf