The COVID plandemic psychologically conditioned people to uncritically accept an “us versus them” attitude, and that played into this new world war perfectly. After brainwashing someone to hate his neighbors for not double-masking and taking all 16 booster shots like he’s supposed to, then it’s very easy to convince him to hate the Russians, now isn’t it? I’ve had coworkers and even lifelong friends disown me for not “standing with Ukraine.” It’s amazing to see people so utterly tribalistic about a country they knew nothing about until February.
Our concept of “reliable sources” became laughable too. The same story happened over and over again exactly the same way. A random blogger or Twitter handle makes an absurd claim, “mainstream” outlets like BBC and CNN uncritically report it as fact, then quote each other for eternity. Even when a story that was obviously bullshit to begin with, like the ghost of Kiev or the Spartans of Snake Island, is proven fake, it doesn’t matter. And there’s just so many fake stories piled up now there’s not even a point in taking anything pro-NATO media says seriously. Our analysts have been so shitty in the last few months, we have to question everything they said about every war. They so quickly manufactured a “weaponized rape” hoax about the Russian army now, we can and should dismiss it as fake all the previous times they said it too. Oh, and Ukrainian farmers allegedly destroying their own farm equipment Kulak-style. Hmm, raises questions about the Holodomor, doesn’t it?
Oh, conspiracies. Yes, mainstream journalists in the USA, Canada, UK, and EU are expected to repeat the narrative, and there are serious consequences for journalists who stray, but don’t assume or exaggerate centralized control. People are inherently tribalistic, so are quick to accept victories by “us” and atrocities by “them” and there’s no need for a master puppeteer to force those narratives. Journalists and bloggers looking for the next sensational, viral headline will peddle bullshit on their own and don’t need a gun to their head.
The narrative, for now, is that the Ukrainians are a plucky resistance movement that have a realistic chance of winning. I think that’s the chief reason why pro-Ukraine outlets have conspicuously stopped even discussing their casualties – that’s a sign they’re high. Very high. The secondary narrative is butter for guns. American and especially European citizens are expected to make huge, devastating sacrifices – they’re expected to literally go hungry – but it’s all worth it to stop the bad, bad Russians.
About COVID again. Besides “us versus them,” the plandemic was extremely useful to foster a specific attitude. “If these measures save even one life, it’s worth it.” That made COVID lockdowns emotionally immune to criticism, and demonized naysayers. “Oh, you don’t think we should cripple the entire world economy? You must want grandma to die!” The best part of this line of reasoning is that it pushes the idea that we should “do something” and there’s never any negative consequences to it. Let’s say forcing everyone to wear masks and stay in their homes did in fact save one life. Well, how about people who fell into suicidal depressions? Do their lives not count? How about the tens of millions of people in developing nations who suffered from the entire world supply chain being artificially crippled? It’s quite amazing that European liberals could literally argue “It’s better for a thousand black people to starve to death than for one white person to get COVID” and be so god damn smug about it.
So here we are now. We must stand with Ukraine! And there are no possible negative consequences to this. Stopping the bad Ruskis is religious dogma and no one is permitted to even suggest that there might be negative consequences to this idea.
I’ve been writing about the Ukraine crisis for a little over a year now. In December I visited Moscow, so was armed with the knowledge that Russia is not a wasteland populated by bear-riding savages. Within the first several days of Russia’s special operation, I began to weigh in on the information war specifically. As a former army PR guy and marketing specialist, that’s something I’m qualified to do. A few of my rants “went viral,” so apparently some people liked what I had to say and found it useful. But eventually, I ran into a problem, and my struggle is a microcosm for the whole war.
Simply, I’m running out of things to write about, and I’m not the only one. This turned out to not be a one-stroke war but rather a slow grind. That’s left writers and “analysts” on both sides scrambling to come up with more copy to churn out, but there’s just not much new to say.
See, this is the first modern war of the 21st century, everything else was just a warmup. Social media has matured and saturated every single population with internet access. It is possible to over-analyze a war and that’s exactly what we’re doing. Furthermore, our access to a constant stream of information has given us the illusion that we know more. This is further compounded by how easy information is to fake, even photographs and video. This is a war with psyops outfits on both sides, in addition to bloggers and viral marketers who have the skill to produce fake news to harvest clicks. So don’t try counting destroyed tanks on the internet, that’s just silly. And try not to read too much into every random street and village that’s taken by one side or the other.
Also, and I have said this repeatedly before, try to have an understanding of scale. For example, even massive artillery barrages over hours tend to inflict very few casualties, like Ukraine’s repeated barrages of cities in the DPR. Both armies are relatively small and strung out across a wide front, population density is fairly low (Mariupol’s 400,000 inhabitants barely qualify as a suburb), and people generally have the good judgement to avoid congregating in places where they know there’s a risk of being killed. So if you see a story claiming that a single HIMAR launcher killed and wounded 500 people, or that an entire Russian battalion was destroyed at a single bridge crossing, have the common sense to know it’s bullshit.
Moving forward, unless there’s a major game-changing development in Ukraine, I am not planning on writing more posts dedicated to it. I’m pinning this post for smaller updates as I think of them, and if you see news that is relevant and I should comment on, please drop them in the comments. As I mentioned in my previous post, I’ve been banned from Facebook yet again, and I’m still off Twitter, so please, I do appreciate everyone who shares my content to their own pages and blogs. Thank you!
Featured Image Source: Donetsk News Agency
Ian Kummer
Support my work by making a contribution through Boosty
All text in Reading Junkie posts are free to share or republish without permission, and I highly encourage my fellow bloggers to do so. Please be courteous and link back to the original.
I now have a new YouTube channel that I will use to upload videos from my travels around Russia. Expect new content there soon. Please give me a follow here.
Also feel free to connect with me on Quora (I sometimes share unique articles there).
About the ability of Russia to rotate units in and out of combat, check out this post from Moon of Alabama:
“The frontline has been shortened to 25 kilometer (15 miles). On Sunday the Russia Defense Ministry announced that it troops had ‘liberated’ 184 square kilometer over the last 24 hours.
When I was in the military my tank battalion was expected to operate on a generally five kilometer (3 miles) wide frontline. That was of course just a rule of thumb depending on the terrain and other circumstances. But we can expect that a Russian Battalion Tactical Group (BTC) has similar abilities of frontline coverage.
Russia needed some 25 BTCs to cover the frontline on June 21. It now needs only 5 BTC to cover the current line. There were and now are of course additional reserve troops and some BTC are rotated out as rested ones come in just as Russia’s president has ordered them to do:”
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/07/western-media-spread-copium-to-prolong-the-war-in-ukraine.html#comments
This makes sense.
Feels very clear that Russia is winning the war on the ground, and always was. They have the strategic initiative and will grind away until they choose to stop. Zero evidence that Ukraine can do anything other than defend, retreat and score the occasional tactical “triumph” such as knocking out a Russian tank with viral images on Twitter.
There is little more to say other than to refute the opposite rhetoric that ignores reality or to speculate on geo political outcomes. But the course of the war itself is clear.
In my opinion the biggest obstacle to ending the war peacefully is the continuous stream of long-range weapons to a military that is, by all accounts, completely decentralized. As long as Ukrainian artillery keeps hitting cities, Russians will be obliged to continue advancing and demilitarizing more territory.
What makes you think Russia wants “ending the war peacefully”? Remember the “NATO weapons to 1997” non-ultimatum?
I may believe Russia did not want to start an open war in Ukraine, but since it started anyway it is now “never let a crisis be wasted”.
What would be there good in Ze’s capitulation now (assuming Ukrainian paramilitary would obey the capitulation and the war could and would be stopped in tracks indead) for Russia?
Don’t you agree it is not war with Ukraine but with West ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PKqNSRa1_0
“Don’t you know the law of the quarrel? You never pull a knife out. But if you did you must hit to kill.”
Russia pulled the knife, for good or for bad.
Russia MUST “kill” the West.
Russia MUST crush EU so thoroughly EU would shake in boots and pee themselves on a fleeting eida of making another EuroUkraine ever again.
If Russia would let this war end fast then Ukraine remains doomed to be remain EU’s zombie and doomed be turned into cannon fodder again.
For the sake of Russia and EVEN for the sakew of Ukraine the war must be stretched as long as it takes to make West’s lust to fight turned into its opposite.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rU2Wpx3Chrk
I don’t know how exactly can Russia incur this on West, but she MUST find a way.
Otherwise it is bound to be repeated again and again.
Ukraine must be turned into a corpse *forever* hanging like that albatross from West’s neck. For the sake of Russia and EVEN for the sake of Ukraine.
Arioch,
I think all the evidence points to Russia wanting a peaceful and as amicable an outcome as possible, and the reason why they want one should be fairly obvious. Russia benefits from economic reintegration with Ukraine and Europe, and economic integration is the only way to assure peace. If the EU is dissolved and turned into a collection of desperate, impoverished third world countries occupied by American nukes, that makes them more dangerous to Russia than ever.
The problem is the EU fails to understand it and see its benefits/risks
it’s like stretching a coil spring. Do it too much and it snaps and then, after the breaking, it can no more be stretched.
> Russia wanting a peaceful and as amicable an outcome as possible
but what if Russia decides “as possible” is “impossible at all” despite all the ‘potential energy debt’ (spring stretching) and flips the page? then she pulls out the knife and does all she can to kill
Russia is associated with bears and bears are feared due to theiur “unpredictable temperament” or, in another interpretation, “pocker face” making an attack sudden without visible forewarnings.
Yep, that seems to be a key dynamic.
Strictly speaking, IMO an equally big obstacle is that the main Western sponsors and instigators (US/UK) don’t seem to feel much (if any) pain for the suffering of their proxy allies. The cynical Kissinger logic is still in effect.
I’ve been reading you for a while but I think this is the first comment I’m making on your site. I’ve been saying some approximately late March that Russia has adopted the original Verdun strategy of Falkenhayn, the so called mincing machine: let the enemy bleed himself to death trying to keep territory he should logically abandon. It’s working beautifully so far; but it’s also a sign that modern war between equals will from now on be far more like WWI than any of the turkey shoots from Iraq to Georgia. In fact this is very much like WWI with only modern equipment, and not always (the Ukrainian military is still using M 1910 Maxim machine guns!)
Since scope for commentary ran out, I’m creating fiction, as in my comic strip, which is currently dedicated to this conflict and nothing else.
Hi, I agree with your assessment that this is a mincing machine, and wrote that (referencing Verdun specifically) a while back:
https://readingjunkie.com/2022/05/29/the-blood-pump-of-donbass/
Can you share your comic strip?
I guess somewhere in that long list at https://ragheadthefiendlyterrorist.wordpress.com 🙂
> that modern war between equals will from now on be far more like WWI than any of the turkey shoots from Iraq to Georgia
Hello Bill. You are contradicting yourself here.
1. “war between equals” never was “turkey shoot” and can not be ever. By definition the “turkey shoot” means inequality so huge, that weak side has no any defense nor even escape.
2. War between equals (“near peer wars” in that catchy advert-english) can, hypothetically, be some mix or choice between blitzkireg or attrition, but none of those is “turkey shoot”.
3. the choice between slow and fast pace more depends on the internal ratio of defence/offense abilities, than on ration between enemies. And it is nothing new, “glass jaw” in USA boxing, or this newer lingo – https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GlassCannon
4. War between Ukraine and Russia is NOT war between equals. Well, maybe it was for few opening days but no more. Russia performed a great all-out to destroy all the means that was making Ukraine more or less equal. In a fast-pace mode!
And i think your main concept is the opposite of reality.
If you model “XXI near peer wars” on Russia-Ukraine, then you should model it on “Phase 1” – an explicit blitzkrieg, aimed at destroying key capabilities of the enemy with little regard to own costs of it.
The “phase 2” really is “turkey shoot” but it is NOT war between equals.
In a sense Russia did a “hybrid” war. It dashed through inevitable “war or equals” stage with boost rockets firing, in a perfect western all-out ambush, blitzkrieg mode. Then Russia reduced Ukrainian army to that sitting turkey and took her leisure.
None of this is like “trench warfare”, none!
Phase 1 was about “who takes a knock first”: all-out, in both tempo and maneuver and ammo.
Phase 2 is about “kicking the lying defenseless body at one’s leisure”.
If anything, i’d rather compare it to your interpretation of the Sino-Vietnamese war, rather than WW1.
Or to Hitler’s war against UK+France, where Reich managed to throw allies to the floor in few weeks, and then was kicking them on the floor.
WW1 was when BOTH sides either hid in static trenches or sent human waves against fortified MGs and cannons.
I do not see Russia in Ukraine doing any of those.
Basically, it is a job of Ukraine to force Russia into those modes by denying other options, and Ukraine failed it.
WW1 meatgrinders were built upon very shallow lines of contact. No matter of what was happening in the frontline, the deeper homeland kept producing more and more ammo, cannons, and cannon fodder.
You can compare it with kids fighting in sandbox, while emotions are real no any single, specific hit is strong enough to change the status. It is only stamina running dry from all the slaps accumulated. It would take minutes if not hours.
Russia-Ukraine war is instead a war of thugs in dark alleys, having knives and knowing how to do fatal stabs. The one who opened to receive a blow is almost lost, the one who received 2-3 blows is surely lost. He might stand on his feet for a while, but internal bleeding would finish him, it is only a mater of time. Make few deep cuts, then break a distance and focus on not letting yoursel be cut while your enemy is dying trying to reach you.
In the phase 1 Russia destroyed Ukraine’s capability to supply the war “with ammo, cannons” and decenbtly trained “cannon fodder”. This totally denied any option to go “ww1-like”, instead forcing a cascading collapse of “industrial war machine” with its very efficient but very fragile long chain of mutually dependent factories.
And this is against in a contrast with those shallow war “bubbles” of WW1. Russia was fighting not at the skin depth at the lines of contacts, but was making piercing carving deep stabs at Ukraine’s critical organs, breaking her internal military-economic processes.
I may also compare Russia to a parasitoid wasp here. Russia did ultra-fast and perfectly targeted paralyzing stings. This initial ambush, it’s success or failure, would have had a crucial effect upon the rest of the fight. If the enemy was not paralized – then the “war” would be largely lost. But the paralyzing stings were success. Now the caterpillar of Kievan Army is still making slow moves in its paralized agony, but none of those moves has any effect, less so danger for the wasp, which is slowly devouring the still shaking prey.
Nothing like WW1 here, in my view.
Hi Arioch,
I think you misread his statement. Iraq (both times) was a Turkey shoot, as you said, a fight between wildly unequal opponents, in which NATO forces could inflict massive casualties while incurring almost inconsequential losses. What’s happening now IS a peer/near-peer fight. They have a huge army that’s NATO trained and equipped. They can hold their own and even win sometimes on a tactical level, that makes them worthy of respect as an opponent.
The comparison to WWI is a somewhat valid one. As Guderian said, breakthrough is the most difficult phase of operations. In WWI, neither side possessed the weapons and protection needed to break through enemy lines without suffering unacceptable losses. That’s arguably true now, with the proliferation of serious anti-tank weapons. We’re not seeing dramatic blitzkriegs, but rather slow, grinding advances behind artillery barrages. It’s also noteworthy that most of the cauldrons are three-sided, with Ukrainian forces being actively encouraged to run away, rather than attempts to surround and completely annihilate them.
> What’s happening now IS a peer/near-peer fight.
No more. It was NATO plan, indeed. It was so during phase 1, i agree. But no more.
Imaging a boxing match where one of the boxers suddenly sayts “screw the rules”, pulls some lead club and break the bones in all the opponent’s limbs. Then shifts the club, and goes back to “boxing by rules”. Would it STILL be peer fight? To me it won’t, not any more.
> They have a huge army that’s NATO trained and equipped.
China had huge army about 1850-1950. Did it make them peers to European colonial powers or to Japan ?
Africa had huge population, and thus armies, did it make them peers to European colonialists and, to extent, slavers?
“NATO … equipped” was it so? Ukrainian army, en masse, relied upon post-USSR weaponry, not NATO weaponry. Some small “elite units” could be armed to NATO standards by NATO issued equipement, at least so it was in Georgia 2008. But the backbone of army was armed with USSR tech (with some post-USSR upgrades).
However… that was all about phase 1. During that phase Russia secured the state of have free hunt and turkey shoot.
> They can hold their own and even win sometimes on a tactical level, that makes them worthy of respect as an opponent.
I do not see this consequential. We would naturally respect a person or nation giving desperate if helpless last stand. Those who practically believe in “better die standing than live kneeled” deserve respect. Still that does not make a turkey shoot less of turkey shoot, when we see it as some factual input to derive future lessons from.
> In WWI, neither side possessed the weapons and protection needed to break through enemy lines
In the start of it.
There was Brusilov, and there were German “shock troops”.
Also, while i a not very versed there, specifically Verdun battle was AFAIR that German succeeded in breaking French frontline. What they failed was to cross the “kill zone” and capture French “second echelon” lines where their cannons were.
But, you again seem to focus only on “shooting” – “We’re not seeing dramatic blitzkriegs”.
While “profesisonal talks logistsics”, and to me the key difference between today and ww1 is in fragility of industrial produciton chains, or, more correctly, in ability of armies attack production chains and dleivery lines OVER non-penetrated frontlines.
You may compare it with some imaginary fight of European rifle-armed troops vs africans armed by spears and wooden shields. Europeans (unless overrun in human wave ambush) won’t be able to break through the mob, but they won’t need to, they can just shoot deep into enemy ranks, much deeper than a spear or a bow could reach, selectively destorying warchiefs or what would be crucial to keep the opponent army structured and functional.
Today we see something similar in LOGISTICAL dimension. Russia can – OVER a non-penetrated “shields” – selectively destroy crucial components of production and logistics, reducing Ukrainian army – however trained and determined – to a “spears and wooden shields” mob.
It is new century turkey shoot. When “old” technologically advanced army would smash opponent’s prince marquee (set in a perceived safety of half-mile away out of bows range) with a cannon ball, reducing his knights into a demoralized uncontroleld mob, “new” technologically advanced army destroys production and distribution ALL THROUGH the enemy homeland.
The old fast/slow or blitzkrieg/attrition gauge is now augmented with one more dimension: attack on economy/logistics at ANY depth and at ANY range.
In the end, WHAT was the battlefront? It was a mean to prevent enemy from razing your productive environments. Medieval wars did not require it, it could be centered upon sieging castles, political centers. Because, well, you do not need to recharge a sword with knew bullets. and because peasants and grain fields are the same everywhere. If you do not have immobile but criticalyl required factories – you can not loose them.
And that is what made industrial ww1 require vast (so, very expensive!) battlelines. You just could not let ourself have an opening, because enemy raid would not be a matter of humiliation, it would be a matter of factories destruction and then army collapse due to lack of one-time use weapons (bullets, shells, etc).
This boosted importance of blitzkrieg or attrition strategies – you break enemy’s production by either piercing through into his “soft underbelly” or by “DDoS”-ing it in situ. The very different methods.
And once a frontline is broken – the cost of that is enormous, because unlike a sword, a rifle DOES require constant, 24×7 flow of newly produced cartridges. Razing enemy’s producting lands was a positive feedback loop, stripping his army of capabilities to fight for nextxt frontline, and setting it to loose yet more of “factories” and “hubs”.
OTOH to get into “soft underbelly”, to destroy production means at large was not possible without breakign through the line. Which made mantaining them – and break them – the critical aim at both armies, disregarding the costs.
As for Russia vs Ukraine grade war – this holds not more. Russia can destroy Ukraine’s produciton without breaking the frontline. It is a new dimension added. We are no more on blitzkireg vs attrition 1D gauge. The ww1-ish measure units lost huge part of their merit.
And that also why “meat grinder” is not a requirement in “new wars”. We now can go beneath the skin. Blunt weapons weree replaced by stilettos.
It happened to me with a lifelong friend since highschool on the 4th of July. He’s a retired Navy Commander currently employed by the Naval Joint Warfare Center. Sad. Later that evening I had a chance conversation with someone I met for the first time and he had the guts to come out and say he supports Russia and the whole country is propagandized. He was tight. Ready to fight. I told him he’s the first person I’ve come across with those views. He knew some history. We exchanged numbers.
On a different note, you’ve indicated disappointment in the Saker site but have a link. I’m surprised you don’t have a link to MoA. I’ve seen your comments there and also links to Caitlin Johnstone. Also I’ve thoroughly enjoyed Rosa’s Diary.
Cheers
Well it seems one of the moderators at MoA, took a disliking to me and banned readingjunkie from the site altogether, so it looks like I won’t be sharing there.
B stayed and stays away from the COVID narrative.
If you linked Ukraine with the pandemic in any way…
The Saker is on that same page too.
In the future however, they will have to connect the dots and acknowledge the pattern.
As Mattias Desmet (see my post) puts it, it is about manipulaiton and “they” won’t let go. Why let go if/when it works.
LoL! I scroll down and want do I see? You Son of a Gun!
> The COVID plandemic psychologically conditioned people to uncritically accept an “us versus them” attitude
How could it be? in videogames term it is PvE against PVP, “Player aganse environment” vs “Player vs [other] Players”
COVID and other pandemies do not have their own deliberationsm, free will, rational aims and strategies, they are “force majore” – blunt but huge.
“Russian invasion” kinds of threats are far from omnipotent, but are presumedly lead by sapient being, which select their goals and methods, explore weaknesses to exploit, adapt, etc.
COVID equally targets anyone in all nations and all stratas (albeit the defense measures available to USA multi-billioner and to starving Africans commoner are vewry different, but the COVIF itself is the same).
“Russian invasion” clearly does not target Russians, and does not directly, immediately target Europeans.
Those – pandemics and wars – are as different as can be. Then how it can be conditioning anyone like you described?
COVID is “the world agains us all”, or “god’s wrath against us” or maybe “rich 1% againt as the people” – but it definitely is not “Russian barbarians vs civilized West”. Those are orthogonal threats.
Maybe I should have elaborated on my point more. By us versus them I mean markers versus non-maskers, vaxxers versus non-vaxxers. It gets everyone agitated and in a blind rage, but it’s not grounded on facts and rationality.
i appreciate it but i do not see nothing new there. It was always divide et empera and belum omnium contra omnes.
before “vaxxers” those were whites/coloured or straights/gays or good americans vs ungodly commies, or even dems vs reps.
When US media went crazy about police killing… i guess Floyd, not sure, i then wrote to my penmate, that “it started”. American TPTB started to apply methods tested in Ukraine domestically. In particular, that event i mapped to Vradievka https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vradiivka – when police’s trespassing was blown out of proportion to condition both mobs that “negotiations are not possible” and the only ption is to eliminate “not our mob” people totally.
COVID-induced hate to me looks more like unintended coincidence. Like a gas station blowing in a middle of big city fire. It makes things much worse, indeed. But it was not the firestarter, it was one of the victims of fire.
> It gets everyone agitated and in a blind rage
“If you only have a hammer you can only see all problems as nails”
I think the rage and viciousness about vaccines and masks were not the method/tool/cause but an effect of traits trained ealier finding new targets. People were conditioned to meet any disagreement with “bite to kill” instinct. Then they had disagreement over COVID and they “only had hammer” to deal with dissident ideas. It was the effect (detrimental, sure) not a cause/tool.
Well yes I agree Arioch, human nature isn’t new and it’s the same mentality that people had when snitching on their Jewish neighbors in WWII, or killing their protestant neighbors a few centuries before that. All I’m saying is that the weaponization of tribalism and making the entire population “unhinged” to this extent is a new and consequential step, even if it’s not playing on new human characteristics.
Good day Ian,
I came back to see if you had anything fresh. Yesterday I was reading Saker and clicked a link in a comment. When I returned to the the site I get the message that I’m refused weird.
I found your conversation with Arioch enlightening.
Beste to all
Hi Ian,
Pleasure reading your articles. Keep on going.
When comes to your assertopn that
The COVID plandemic psychologically conditioned people to uncritically accept an “us versus them” attitude
You are right, of course.
Check out the work of Prof Desmet on mass formation
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=mattias+desmet&&view=detail&mid=E87AFF7FD9762A2F0FFCE87AFF7FD9762A2F0FFC&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dmattias%2Bdesmet%26FORM%3DHDRSC4
https://thehighwire.com/videos/mattias-desmet-the-psychology-of-totalitarianism/
Totalitarianism isn’t something that happens to other countries, those less fortunate or less civilized or a few times in our own shameful history. It’s a constant travel companion in a technocratic society that overvalues rationality and believes oneself capable of steering that which will not be steered. It is usually suppressed and kept well-controlled, yet always lurking beneath the surface of even the friendliest of populations.
https://brownstone.org/articles/mattias-desmet-on-totalitarianism-of-mass-panic/
There is link to his new book on that page> The Psychology of Totalitarianism
A must summer read… leasurly.
COVID, Ukraine, climate change… the pattern is and will be the same.
Greetings from Cambridge (UK),
Ian, really have appreciated your writing on this topic over the last few months and comprehend the desire to set it aside as much commentary has become “churn”.
I wanted to bring up a topic you mentioned some weeks back, that Russia was not here to “save” anyone (except of course those Russians in the Donbass, Ukraine and itself). I think you were quite right in pointing out that the Russian state and its people weren’t concerned with the schisms within Western societies and their domestic politics. That the perceived Russian posture of “conservative” shouldn’t be viewed as sympathetic or antagonistic to one or another spectrum of Western politics; that their morality was their own, a reflection of their long history and deep culture. Perhaps some people listen to Putin and think he’s fighting the “great reset” or some other “globalist” initiative. But Putin is simply the executive in charge of maintaining and promoting the Russian national interest. That national interest would likely make competitors of Russia and the West regardless of which Western function is in power.
But as the SMO continues and the West throws all civility and rationality out the window has your opinion changed. That is, now that Western elites have declared their intention to wage something like never-ending jihad on Russia, and have forsaken the well-being of their own populations in this venture, the Russian response seems to have evolved. Certainly the SMO remains limited in scope, but economically and politically Russia seems to be off its back foot. They have expressed their desire to overthrow the “rules based international order”. The method and repercussions of this extend far beyond Russia’s borders. So are the Russians, now that they’ve declared the end of the unipolar world, actually out to “save us”?
That’s a great question, and to be honest, I’m not sure. Winning the information war in the collective west would be an uphill asymmetric fight for Russia (just like NATO fighting Russia in her own backyard is an asymmetric fight in the other direction). At this point, strengthening ties and partnerships with anyone who is willing (like LatAm and East Asia), and respond to provocations and escalations from NATO on a 1:1 basis. I think at this point this is all they can do. I also don’t think anyone could have predicted a year or even 6 months ago that the situation in Ukraine would deteriorate as severely as it has.
And yet the 15 million corpses remain, the number will continue to increase, and then, belatedly, the general population will wake up to the widespread realities of long covid.