');
The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewThe Saker Archive
The New Russian Government
A much needed evolution but not a revolution
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
    List of Bookmarks

      The suspense is over and we now know the names of all the members of the new Russian government. You can, for example, take this good summary published by RT.

      What is important right now is not only what did happen, but also what did NOT happen. I will begin with two extremely important things which did NOT happen:

      First, the Russian government has NOT remained unchanged. The naysayers had predicted that nothing at all would change, that the same folks who be sitting in maybe different seats, but that the changes would be primarily cosmetic. That did not happen. In reality 12 people kept their seats and another 9 were replaced.

      Second, this was NOT a total gutting of the Atlantic Integrationist block. Most visibly, Anton Siluanov remained as head of the Finance Ministry. However, Siluanov was demoted from his position as First Deputy Prime Minister of Russia which has now been taken by Andrei Belousov, a huge change indeed. As for Medvedev, he was given a “golden promotion” to the largely technical position as Vice Chairman of the Security Council of Russia.

      So what has taken place?

      Most Russian observers notice two key things:

      First, this is a highly competent, technically skilled, government. Truly, and arguably for the first time, each position in the new cabinet is now occupied by a professional whose expertise is recognized by all.

      Second, this is very much a non-ideological government. This is not to say that the social and economic policies of Russia will not change, they will and the new government clearly indicates that, especially with the nominations of Prime Minister Mishustin and his First Deputy Prime Minister Andrey Belousov: these are both on record as very much proponents of what is called “state capitalism” in Russia: meaning an economic philosophy in which the states does not stifle private entrepreneurship, but one in which the state is directly and heavily involved in creating the correct economic conditions for the government and private sector to grow. Most crucially, “state capitalism” also subordinates the sole goal of the corporate world (making profits) to the interests of the state and, therefore, to the interests of the people.

      In other words, goodbye turbocapitalism à la Atlantic Integrationists!

      Russia has now made the fight against poverty a national strategic priority, something which the Russian people had wanted for years and which the previous “economic block” never considered a priority.

      Furthermore, the entire Eurasian Sovereignists block of the government has remained unchanged. This indicates two things:

      First, the Russian national security and foreign policy will remain unchanged.

      Second, the Eurasian Sovereignists have finally weakened the Atlantic Integrationists to such a degree that a Medvedev nicely “boxed in” in the Russian Security Council or a Siluanov “boxed in” in the new Russian government have ceased to represent a serious threat to the future of Russia.

      In other words – we can expect the new government to put even much more efforts into the ultimate goal of the full sovereignization of Russia (this goal is also reflected in the new Constitutional changes which will now place Russian national laws above any international treaty or agreements, another longtime goal of the Eurasian Sovereignists).

      All I can say here is “finally!!”.

      Another important thing which we can note is that Putin decided to work through evolution, not revolution. In fact, he has described this new government as a “balanced” one. There are many, including myself, who would have preferred not to see the names Medvedev and Siluanov again, but there are also many (possibly many more) who seeing these names still present might be reassured that Russia is not about to embark on a radically different political course. Frankly, I think that over the past century Russia has had enough revolutions, wars, big upheavals and terrible tragedies. There IS something to be said for stability and a gradual correction of course.

      Furthermore, a new government which appears to have been formed purely on the merit of its individual members can probably generate much more support than a radically ideological one.

      Where does all this leave Russia?

      I would say that the Eurasian Sovereignists have finally secured their full control over the Russian state and that the demise of the Atlantic Integrationists is now a new fact of life. Since in this new government the only clearly identifiable group besides the Eurasian Sovereignists are the technocrats, this give Russia a much better chance to stand strong and united in the face of an AngloZionist Empire which has now clearly become unpredictable and therefore very dangerous (the murder of Soleimani is the best example of the actions of an Empire which has totally lost any sense of reality).

      It is also interesting to note the reaction of the propaganda outlets for the Empire. Here are two of my favorite ones:

      * * *

      While the western “Russia experts” are usually folks who know close to nothing about Russia and the little they do not, they don’t understand, it is reassuring (and, let’s be honest here, heart warming) to see the impotent rage felt by the defenders of the AngloZionist Empire who clearly have lost control of Russia (in spite of being in TOTAL control of the Russia of the 1990s!).

      Finally, the appointment of this new government leaves the Russian opposition – both the “official” parliamentary opposition and the so-called “non-system” opposition – in total disarray: the former only pretends to oppose the policies of the Kremlin while the latter is so terminally discredited that it can’t even make it into the Duma. This lack of any credible opposition might appear desirable, especially for those who, like myself, support the Kremlin, but in reality it is just another facet of a much deeper problem: Russia remains a country defined by one person, Putin, and not by a healthy and stable political system. The latest reforms did take a few very good steps in the right direction (the Duma’s powers and responsibilities have been increased), but Russia will remain “Putin’s country” for the foreseeable future.

       
      • Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Media, Russia, Vladimir Putin 
      Hide 47 CommentsLeave a Comment
      Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
      Trim Comments?
        []
      1. A123 says:

        Second, the Eurasian Sovereignists have finally weakened the Atlantic Integrationists to such a degree that a Medvedev nicely “boxed in” in the Russian Security Council or a Siluanov “boxed in” in the new Russian government have ceased to represent a serious threat to the future of Russia.

        It is too early to tell if this is true or not.

        The #1 Atlantic Integrationist, Angel Merkel, is still after her integration gift package — Nordstream 2 landing in Germany. If completed with its current routing, Putin will be handing anti-Sovereignist Germany a club with which to beat European pro-Sovereignity nations, such as Poland and Hungary.

        Hopefully, Russia will take this opportunity to re-route Nordstream 2 to align with current political realities. The most obvious option would be a minor change that brings the pipeline ashore in Poland. That would bring energy security to the Visegrad 4 countries + Austria as they resist Atlantic Integrationist Merkel.

        PEACE 😇

      2. Anonymous[100] • Disclaimer says:

        The Guardian is the ultimate left wing/liberal, anti-British and anti-white outlet. Perhaps you’re unaware of what the Guardian is all about, but your characterisation of them as some aggressive mouthpiece of Anglo imperialism makes this article laughable.

        The Guardian as a newspaper is decidedly anti-imperialist, and never misses an opportunity to write about the “crimes” of the British Empire. If they dislike Putin then it will be because they perceive him as an anti-LGBT right wing bigot, not because of any support for Anglo imperialism.

        • Agree: Tusk
        • Replies: @Jatt Sengh
        , @John Chuckman
      3. Nats (& Medvedev) out. Technocrats in. Looks like a shift to globalist integration to me despite Putin publishing a list of self sufficiency requirements for food.

        • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
        , @Gerard2
      4. God bless mother Russia and her holy Church:
        Proud double-eagle safe on her lofty perch.

        • Agree: the grand wazoo
      5. @A123

        Hopefully, Russia will take this opportunity to re-route Nordstream 2 to align with current political realities. The most obvious option would be a minor change that brings the pipeline ashore in Poland.

        I have been wondering if A123 was for real or a sophisticated troll, the geopolitical equivalent of Tiny Duck on Steve’s blog.

        Guess we have the answer now. Well played, sir!

        • LOL: A123
        • Replies: @A123
      6. @Philip Owen

        Neither Medinsky nor Vasilieva were/are nats (by which I assume you mean nationalists). They don’t call themselves nationalists, neither do actual Russian nationalists. They are conservatives.

        The new Culture Minister is a protege of Medinsky.

        I think both you and Saker are projecting your political preferences onto the recent changes.

        • Agree: Marshall Lentini
      7. A123 says:
        @Anatoly Karlin

        Yes. I am quite real. I want what is best for Sovereign Russia, Sovereign Poland, and the Sovereign U.S.

        What could possibly be wrong with that?

        Or, do you believe there is something wrong with nations being sovereign?

        PEACE 😇

        • LOL: bluedog
        • Replies: @Philip Owen
      8. Passer by says:

        Russia is currently preparing to implement the Istanbul Convention by stealth in favour of removing personal EU sanctions to the elite (as per senator Mizulina). Something that many western and LGBT/feminist organisations, Navalni, Medusa, EU & foreign NGOs have been demanding

        There is agreement behind close doors and a large part of United Russia elite (Volodin, Matvienko) is behind that, causing a serious division in the country, since many are against that, such as the Orthodox Church, muslim areas of the country, Kadirov, Tolstoy, some UR Mps, many regions, KPRF, Just Russia, LDPR, etc.

        The new laws are being prepared by foreign assets such as United Russia’s Oksana Pushkina and Irina Rodnina.

        Something few of the UNZ “experts” are aware of.

        “Family will die in Russia”: debate on central russian television

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTVyDMssVhk

        Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Tolstoy: The Istanbul Convention to be implemented in Russia

      9. @Anatoly Karlin

        Fair comment. The ends of the ring meet.

      10. @Anatoly Karlin

        I think Saker is spectacularly deluded, almost as deluded as Philip Owen: his Eurasian Sovereignists, Atlantic Integrationists and the supposed conflict between them is not an actual thing.

        This isn’t a Western-style coalition government, where people arrive with competing political agendas. In Russia members of nomenklatura are jockeying for a better place at the trough.

        Traditionally in Russia members of nomenklatura have no real convictions and no agendas beyond personal enrichment. Rather, they adopt convictions based on which way the wind is blowing: communist party officials evolving en masse into “democrats” during early 1990s, and then evolving again under Putin regime.

      11. I sure do hope that the Saker’s positive expectations for the new government pan out. And that the new Russian system manages to last beyond Putin’s presidency.

        As an American born and raised in the States with no connections to Russia, a lot of people are baffled when I defend Putin and his government and say that the country has a good human rights record compared to the United States. But nobody ever has any good refutations for my actual reasons for believing this:

        http://www.twilightpatriot.com/2019/10/stop-projecting-things-onto-russia.html

        It’s just assumed that America is a land of liberty and Russia is not. The caricature of “Putin the Czar” is all that most Americans ever see in the media. And the NGOs tasked with ranking countries by how “democratic” they are keep putting the United States near the top of the list, even though nearly all its laws (i.e. the legalization of same sex marriage and abortion, the immigration policy, the decisions about with whom to go to war) are made by entities other than the elected legislature. Go figure.

        • Agree: bluedog
      12. @Felix Keverich

        The Cabinet are sufficiently high up enough to get extra-legal bonuses that are a few orders of magnitude higher than their official salaries, but I don’t think they’re powerful enough to engage in the sort of jockeying you describe. They are people who do the technical job of governance, they don’t have access to Putin’s innermost circles (not Lavrov; even Shoigu is only half-in), don’t have a common history with him in the KGB/SPB/Ozero, none of them have the influence of Sechin, Patrushev, Volodin etc. who really can and do “jockey.”

        Frankly the key influence on who was let go/who stayed seems to have been how good they were perceived to have been at their jobs.

        • Replies: @Felix Keverich
        , @Gerard2
      13. Tom Verso says:

        So blatant a contraction in just two paragraphs.

        You mock ‘Politics and Policy’ and ‘The Guardian’ writers for their characterization of Putin being ‘all powerful’ and then in the next paragraph you write:

        “…in reality it is just another facet of a much deeper problem: Russia remains a country defined by one person, Putin, ….

        Russia will remain “Putin’s country” for the foreseeable future.”

      14. Gerard2 says:
        @Philip Owen

        “technocrats in”….what exactly do you think Skvortsova, Vasiliyeva. numerous zam-ministers were Philip?

        As it is, it;. Basically any country in the world would be desperate to have had the same successes as Minister of Health and Minister of Enlightenment as Skvortsova and Vasilieva had.

        Fortunately Skvortsova is basically only moving sideways ( swapping jobs with the now head of Minzdrav)…no information yet on Vasilieva( a great woman) although the equivalent replacement as for her as with Skvortsova

        • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
      15. @Anatoly Karlin

        Bureaucrats always scheme and maneuver, even when they’re in lowly positions. This is how they get to move into higher positions. But the point is that there are no ideological arguments involved here, just competition for resources. Integrationists vs Sovereignists – that’s a bunch of hogwash.

        • Replies: @animalogic
      16. Gerard2 says:
        @Anatoly Karlin

        Frankly the key influence on who was let go/who stayed seems to have been how good they were perceived to have been at their jobs.

        15 have stayed, 16 ,didn’t you idiot. Of those who stayed, only 3 ( the ones you mentioned – Shoigu, Lavrov and Kolokoltsev ) had noticeably higher ratings than all the rest who stayed or left. After those 3, current ratings of those who stayed or left were pretty much interchangeable and not even close to the pattern you are trying to sell

        Topolin as head of Labour and Social Affairs was “very unpopular” in polls because of the pension reform, has lost his job as Minister of Labour and Social affairs…to become head of the Russian Pension Fund. Not exactly “baying to the demands of the pollster mob” you cretinous Californian prick.

        Health and Education Ministers all through the world have antiratings. Russia’s ( I won’t say “ours” because I don’t classify liberast scum as you as Russian) were nowhere near the worst – and both woman have had huge successes during their terms.

        Chaika (Prosecutor) was less popular now then when the storm about him and his sons alleged business dealings first erupted 0ver 4 years ago ?? Of course not

        BTW – what is Alec Luhn’s d*ck tasting like tonight? I can’t be bothered now but do you want me to repost that bizzare twitter exchange of you offering to support this freak against his deportation?…. plus general other instances of blowing him

        Also my name for a coward like you is now Nylon – ( a reference to the only time zones you seem to post in). Can anybody actually corroborate that a liberast tramp like you has actually left USA? No

        • Troll: bluedog
      17. @Anonymous

        lgbtq IS anglo imperialism

        • Agree: Kali, Bill
      18. Seraphim says:
        @A123

        Can Poland have the cake and eat it? Hungary will get her gas through South Stream. But Hungary is less stridently anti-Russian than Poland.

        • Replies: @Commentator Mike
        , @A123
      19. Anon[384] • Disclaimer says:

        I don’t know about any of these people listed or their story. Just tell me, how many Jews are on the list of being a high ranking government member?

      20. @Felix Keverich

        The point the Saker tries to make is that there are Russians (in & outside of government)who would happily open up Russia to the full “globalization” infection, regardless of the affects this had on Russia the nation — perhaps even a back to the future a la the 1990’s.
        The West would LOVE to get its fangs into Russia, as it has with Sth America, as it would love to do to Venezuela. To deny this reality is hogwash.

        • Replies: @Observator
      21. Gerard2 says:
        @A123

        which to beat European pro-Sovereignty nations, such as Poland and Hungary

        LOL….Poland is “sovereign”?

        1.Was it their own population, or more likely their American controlled Prostitute elite who were desperate to have US Missile defence positioned there?

        2. Poland have way too many of their own people in Germany and the UK , which, combined with the common history in Poland of anybody remotely talented leaving it as soon as possible ( Chopin, Curie etcet) doesn’t suggest to me a truly sovereign nation. Hungary, despite also having a border with Germany …..has kept it’s population the same and doesn’t have millions either committing terrible crimes or parasiting off the welfare system in Germany and UK, as many of the Poles do

        3. No supposedly sovereign and “devout Catholic” country would elect as President an obvious homosexual as either of the Kaczinsky twins

        4. Infamous picture of Duda looking like he is massively enjoying taking it up the a** from Trump. in the Oval Office

        5. Officially , via the Defence Minister and others, Poland have said that Russia deliberately killed their President at the time ,and much of their elite in the Smolensk Plane crash in 2010.
        A country that has fallen in line with the US/UK policy towards Russia on every issue from Litvinenko to gas to Ukraine, (MH17 also) and taken part in sanctions has actually not placed a single sanction on Russia for the “assassinations” even though the brother of the then President is still a big player, and many in the government have said that there is “proof” Russia did it!
        Obviously Russia didn’t do this – but having proven themselves lunatics, to prove themselves spineless linpwristed coward lunatics by not following through on any of these accusations…is quite strange, and not what you would expect of a “soveriegn nation”. P.S Remember “Highly Likely” over Skripal – the Poles could easily have invoked that BS

        6. Mass exploitation of Ukrainians, using them as slaves and as cheap labour – this is unlike, say, a country as Belarus which gets by without any cheap Central Asian labour and relies on its own people. Poland just proved it is like most other globalist countries when given the chance

        • Replies: @Parfois1
      22. @animalogic

        Zbignew Brzezinski outlined Washington’s ultimate plan for Russia more than twenty years ago. Couched in the usual politicized neoliberal jargon, it reads, “Given (Russia’s) size and diversity, a decentralized political system and free-market economics would be most likely to unleash the creative potential of the Russian people and Russia’s vast natural resources. A loosely confederated Russia — composed of a European Russia, a Siberian Republic, and a Far Eastern Republic — would also find it easier to cultivate closer economic relations with its neighbors. Each of the confederated entitles would be able to tap its local creative potential, stifled for centuries by Moscow’s heavy bureaucratic hand. In turn, a decentralized Russia would be less susceptible to imperial mobilization.” (Zbigniew Brzezinski, A Geostrategy for Eurasia, Foreign Affairs, 76:5, September/October 1997)

        This is the American game plan for Russia. In order to eliminate an economic rival, Russia must cease to exist as a national entity, instead becoming three weaker “loosely confederated … decentralized political system[s]” more susceptible to external predatory exploitation. This is regime change to create a pretend-democracy faux free market entity not unlike the one that exists at home, where the American republic once was.

      23. @Gerard2

        Vasilieva( a great woman)

        Indeed, so. Also agree per Golikova–granted, not a pleasant woman–did her job. Just in December the list of new medical facilities all with up-to-date equipment is impressive.

      24. Anonymous[385] • Disclaimer says:
        @Felix Keverich

        This isn’t a Western-style coalition government, where people arrive with competing political agendas. In Russia members of nomenklatura are jockeying for a better place at the trough.

        Some of them, sure, but your simplistic, depressed, and depressing, view of the political landscape in Russia doesn’t fit observed reality. The country is clearly in a much better shape than it was in the 90s. If what you’re saying were true, Russia would have continued deteriorating from that hellish period and almost certainly wouldn’t have existed as a nation today. It’s glaringly obvious to anyone with a brain (not you) that the country does have a significant patriotic core within its power structure.

        This is why I’m very interested in the subject. Both Putin and Xi must make sure to reinforce their nations’ command structures (even to the point of creating a shared, defensive Deep State of their own) way beyond a lifespan of any single leader. Otherwise, the (((Globalist Deep State Cabal))) – which is multi-generational and independent of any single leader – will simply wait them out and make sure to leave nothing to be reconstructed next time they get the upper hand.

      25. @Observator

        Zbignew Brzezinski outlined Washington’s ultimate plan for Russia

        Zbig could have been many things: some low level Polish aristocrat, fanatical Russophobe, Ph.D in some shitty pseudo-science. Competent geopolitical thinker of scale he was not. Not only did he fvck up a lot of thing for the US, including in Afghanistan, his ideas about Ukraine and Russia have been proven so ignorant that created a WOW-effect similar to that of Fukuyama’s delirium of the End of History. If last 20+ years of “Washington Plans” any indication–they simply do not work, because are written by people who wouldn’t be allowed to tender garden beds with carrots in normal country. Brzezinski’s hand and mind feature prominently in those. In the end, being a Pole he couldn’t study Russia properly–I guess genetic and cultural thing.

      26. @Seraphim

        A123 wants the North Stream to go through Poland so Poles can start earning some fees to pay the you know who for the you know what.

        • LOL: A123
      27. A123 says:
        @Seraphim

        Commentator Mike wants Nordstream2 to go Germany so that Mullah Merkel has more money to further her UN/NWO Globalist agenda. Importing more non-Christians to keep their Christian Citizens down is a very Establishment Elite goal.

        Orthodox Christian Putin should not cooperate with the Muslim mass migration schemes from Commentator Mike and Mullah Merkel.

        PEACE 😇

        • LOL: Commentator Mike
      28. @Anonymous

        The Guardian is a terrible newspaper anymore.

        And I don’t think that it is accurate to describe it as “left wing” at all.

        Using that description is playing the Guardian’s own game.

        It features a great deal of window dressing stuff that makes it look “leftish” Stuff about minorities and women and the unfortunate.

        But the Guardian’s heart and soul are virtually Tory.

        It joined all the attacks on Corbyn, magnifying the voice of the mob greatly at times.

        It is very pro-Israel and American empire.

        It hates Putin and Russia.

        It has supported all of America’s bloody Neocon wars and coups.

        It played a role in building up the blood-drenched Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, a good buddy of Netanyahu, as a progressive new force in the region. Utter nonsense.

        I could cite many examples of how dreadful the Guardian has become, but here is my favorite:

        https://chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com/2018/05/21/john-chuckman-comment-absurd-lengths-to-which-our-press-goes-to-attack-russia-britains-guardian-holds-hate-russia-day-today-some-of-its-stuff-is-so-ham-fisted-it-reads-like-1959-pravda-atta/

        • Replies: @Parfois1
        , @Parfois1
      29. Andevro says:

        I am guardedly optimistic. Just the rule that no one that holds dual citizenship and has not lived in Russia for the last 25 years cannot run for the presidency of Russia brings smiles to my face. Russia for the Russian people!
        What a great patriotic Russian Putin turned out to be. Cheers!

      30. melpol says:

        Thanks to Putin and his Hypersonic weapon development the US MIC can be on its toes. Lockheed will get lots of big contracts attempting to catch up. Could be Putin is a CIA asset.

      31. Milton says:

        Putin is just as much a puppet-President as Trump. Just look at how Putin continually grovels before the Zionists (even after they blow his servicemen out of the sky) and continues to glorify and whitewash the WWII Soviet Union. I had hopes for both Trump and Putin, but their actions betray their rhetoric.

      32. Parfois1 says:
        @Felix Keverich

        Rather, they adopt convictions based on which way the wind is blowing: communist party officials evolving en masse into “democrats” during early 1990s, and then evolving again under Putin regime.

        Fully agree. The political class is the same everywhere: they are in it for self-interest plus the dividends of corruption. To have principles, moral fibre and integrity is unsuitable baggage for a parasite.

      33. Parfois1 says:
        @Gerard2

        You are a bit harsh on Poland’s sovereignty though. They have had such a troubled history, always surrounded by bad neighbours who did not respect it and not responsive to its peculiar ways and needs, so much so that it has to look for friendly protection from far away and across the Atlantic. To make it worse, they really have had so little experience with sovereignty and independence and government, and that makes it very hard to understand and to do those things when the neighbours leave it alone to fend for itself.

        If somehow they could move it somewhere else on the planet, then Poland could show the world its true mettle – and the bad neighbours would miss their favourite punching-bag. It serves them right…

      34. @Observator

        Absolutely.
        I’m sure some variation on the above is still part of US policy…. We can see what it would be like: neo-Yeltsinism.

      35. Parfois1 says:
        @John Chuckman

        The Guardian is a terrible newspaper… And I don’t think that it is accurate to describe it as “left wing” at all.

        I was about to disabuse the commenter who misdescribed that rag as “left-wing”. On the other hand, many a commenter here (mostly USians) think that “left-wing” means someone or something with sinister intentions (such as Socialists and Bolsheviks, whose mission is to destroy civilization) because of the Latin origin of the word, sinister, left-limbed. Over time, because of its menacing connotation, it acquired the extended meaning of “anything I dislike”; hence its widespread use to characterize such things as god, the devil, the pope, jews, muslins, fascists, socialists, communists, faggots, feminists, freemasons, democrats, liberals, neocons, bankers, millionaires, destitutes, proles and so on. I have not seen it applied to angels yet, but it is getting close because climate-change worshipers, tree-huggers, social workers, firemen and other do-gooders are also left-wingers.

      36. Parfois1 says:
        @John Chuckman

        Visited your site. Very good stuff there, keep battling (and batting)!

        Cheers

      37. 9C says:

        This is not just a factional purge. You have to consider this in light of Pompeo’s threat to shore up US MAD deterrence with assassinations. The rational response to that threat is to institutionalize command and succession and to deepen the bench of civil servants at the highest level. The first and foremost purpose of this change is Russian national survival.

        CIA’s nationalized assassination industry naturally fixates on Putin because it demonizes individuals to justify budget increases. But CIA’s problem has always been СБРФ, not Putin. It’s at the institutional level that Russia outclasses the US.

      38. @9C

        But CIA’s problem has always been СБРФ, not Putin. It’s at the institutional level that Russia outclasses the US.

        The United States never experienced real pressure, which comes with continental warfare (in general, history), to be able to have proper mechanisms in place. Opinions of current intelligence professionals in Russia (made public not for once, such as by Lyubimov or Bezrukov) about CIA is not very high, to put it mildly. Especially contemporary CIA . But then again, contemporary US “elites” are a pathetic parody on real elites.

      39. 9C says:

        Гражданин Martyanov, truer words were never spoken. The Russian command structure has 30 IQ points on its US counterparts at every echelon. Smart Americans steal on a massive scale in Wall Street, leaving mediocrities to embroider gradiose puppetmaster fantasies at Langley. US COG is focused on dispersal of the CIA command structure to regional cities, such as the state fusion centers. The intent is to blur the distinction between counterforce and countervalue. Ever since Rumsfeld invoked the illegal state of emergency and COG, CIA has been using civilian populations as human shields (remember how cowardly that was when Saddam did it? CIA hides behind your mommy’s skirt and dares the Russians to nuke her.)

        However, Russian hypersonic kinetic warheads can do a nice surgical job on the fusion centers. They won’t even need to take them all out, because by and large they’re manned by Officer Krupke, whichever dumbshit gumshoe cop sucks up to his CIA handlers most abjectly. CIA calls those jobs white man’s welfare, because all they know how to do is sit on their doughy asses and read social media to stop protected political speech. Under any duress, the hierarchy will disintegrate. The IT-intensive COOP plans will fall apart with one big EMP burst and OPSEC won’t hide jack shit.

        I trust Russia has plans to lead civil society reconstruction per Pillar 3 of the Responsibility to Protect, because the US is already a weak state, unable to bear its duties and depending on repression for cohesion instead of protection. If Russia decapitates the degenerate US command structure, freedom-loving Americans will strew flowers and sweets for them.

      40. I see two women. Get rid of them.

      41. @Andrei Martyanov

        The thing is Americans are really good at getting people to believe they’re so good. They’re good with exaggeration and hype. There is much advertisement of billionaires like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and their investing on all these companies that will revolutionize technology to “change the world.” There is also this whole philanthropy and “eliminating world disease and poverty” and charity crap marketed all over the place. Not only excelling yourself but also making the world a better place, helping the disadvantaged and underprivileged. I remember an example of “in addition to winning international math olympiad prizes, he has also volunteered on a sustainable farm to give back to his community.” The story is so much sexier than the one people get from Soviet communism.

        By the way, what are your thoughts on American preeminence in DNA sequencing and biological sciences? Seattle area where you are is pretty strong in that. I know of Frederick Sanger (he’s British though), Leroy Hood, Illumina, 23AndMe. A few days ago I mentioned to this Russian in Novosibirsk that guy Lysenko who much stalled development of Soviet biology.

        I must say that as for America, once they pull out a Stanford or Princeton University with its world class faculty and many ultra-smart or ultra-rich students, people are dazzled, in awe, and yearn to send their kids there. It gives an eliteness, coolness that Russia or China cannot. Stanford professor, Nobel Prize, National Academy of Science. And all those software and chip and genomics startups. There is some obsession and insecurity in China about Nobel Prize, only one science Nobel won by a Chinese in China scientist, which was for the finding of this malaria drug (happened in the late 60s and 70s), awarded to this woman Tu Youyou. Soviets and Russians won a good number in physics and chemistry of course, but nowhere near as many as Americans. So people naturally see America as way better. (Of course, the Nobel Prize committee does have its biases.)

        I do think that in spite of all these genius scientists or rich people at the top, Americans aren’t actually all that smart, the culture’s shit, the appearances and services are lame, and the society is becoming more dysfunctional. And even the people in the top schools and institutions are sometimes kind of gross or naive or tasteless in the way they act, it lacks a certain type of purity, well maybe because America was founded artificially on white supremacy and dispossession anyway as opposed to being a more organic nation or culture.

        It’s somewhat embarrassing to say, but having been out of the place for a while, I find America and my experiences with Americans rather uncomfortable.

      42. @Andrei Martyanov

        I’m curious I know you’re in the aerospace sector in the Seattle area. There’s not that much money in that, like I know people at Boeing. There are people who joined in Microsoft in the 90s with millions, and also those execs and upper managers and investors in/of the big Seattle companies like Amazon, Expedia, Starbucks. Lots of those people think they’re hot shit. Many of them, I can expect their attitude towards you and also Russia would be one of “I’m so much richer and better than you so fuck off. I can send my kids to Lakeside where the Seattle rich kids attend, and then they’ll go to Stanford, Princeton, etc.” Have you ever had to deal with that? And what do you think in general on this matter?

        And yes, the kids who grow up in America including the “smart ones” (by American standards) they are culturally and personality wise and in their awareness of how the world actually works often complete shit. Many of them are full of themselves too. I grew up around them and found myself distancing from them as I grew older with more access to outside world.

      43. @9C

        It’s at the institutional level that Russia outclasses the US.

        Yes, institutional level is key here. I think of success as more of group success to be honest. A person is very much a product of a system, an educational system, an economic system, a national or ethnic culture, a language through which he accesses information (like English, Russian, Chinese). As talented as he may be individually, he must depend on this system and work with others to do anything serious.

        Even in a scientific or technological field, it takes many people building on each other’s work and advances over period of time. There are individual geniuses of course, but more often than you it takes many of them combined together along with many competent but not quite genius level people, not to mention a supporting structure that enables the person to develop his potential with people of diverse skills.

        It is the toxic aspects of American culture and English language culture that pulls back even the people within the system that are more or less naturally somewhat averse to its mainstream style. Because of the norms, the political correctness, the overall style of thinking, they are necessarily shaped towards a certain direction. Politically and culturally and style-wise, even the high IQ people in STEM think in a certain way that they would be way off in the other side or camp of the world. I think in this aspect Chinese culture and system is much better and almost certainly the Russian one (which I have no direct experience with, but I do know some Russian) is too. One thing is note that in America, in STEM, people love to exaggerate and hype and live in their delusions. They project an unrealistic “change the world” (overly abstract, almost meaningless) ethos to young people and the public. If you don’t do that, you don’t fit the mould in America. But like it or not, STEM is fundamentally about reality, not science fiction, and in this day and age, STEM is often of an institutional nature, requires lots of funding and resources and people of all kinds of expertise.

        The following explains well why American culture is so different.

        From https://gmachine1729.com/2019/12/17/thoughts-on-multiethnic-countries-and-liberalism/

        like the only healthy multiracial country is Russia
        most are fuckups
        latin america
        india
        america becoming that way too

        What do those countries have all in common (sans Russia)?

        what?

        They’re artificial. Created by colonialism. Master slave hierarchy. No matter how “civilized” they think they are. That’s their foundation. And the society they created. It’s engraved. It cannot be removed like you can’t remove your heart.

      44. @Andrei Martyanov

        This institutional stuff, the culture that comes with it, has to be moulded over generations, especially through big events like a collective experience of war. Funny, some Chinese mother metaphorized America as “landlord’s dumb son.” Because America has not had war at home for 150+ years, there’s always been plenty, industrialized before Russia. Much of the wealth was stolen or built on what’s essentially capitalist slave labor. So the way of thinking of that economics is monetary indices, as opposed to what you’re capable of concretely producing and doing. A guy with money and consumes a ton (buys big houses and luxury goods and such) while not actually doing real work is actually a parasite, he’s actually a drain on the economy. In wartime, he is a real liability. On the other hand, in places where extreme scarcity was experienced, where industrial capacity was limited, much bootstrapping was necessary, people could not afford to think in terms of these virtual indices. And if you think about it, planned economy is more suited for war. It’s what naturally has to do happen in times of scarcity if you want to get anywhere. In war, your soldiers have to eat and be equipped and fight, it’s all about how good you are at supplying them and fighting to the limits. Making money “trading” or bullshitting is not only not an asset but it’s a liability. Speaking of which, people in northern climates with cold winters tend to be less full of shit than those in warm climates (Indians, Jews), because bullshitting and sophistry does not help you or your babies survive in those environments. Whereas, in warm climates, where you don’t have the scarcity problem, it’s more about getting ahead with trading and verbal glib.

      45. these are both on record as very much proponents of what is called “state capitalism” in Russia

        =======
        How is this different from the last British colony in NA and it’s Racketeering Boards aka in orvelized and PC legalised name of “Supply Management Boards” which ensures that serfs pay DOUBLE price their FREED neighbours to the south pay.

      46. Johan says:

        The Guardian, oh man do I hate this snakepit and stinking mud pool, its articles pop up everywhere, its like the plague.

      Current Commenter
      says:

      Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


       Remember My InformationWhy?
       Email Replies to my Comment
      Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
      Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All The Saker Comments via RSS