The Power of Putin

[rainerann]

I watched this documentary the other day and I thought it was fascinating. I think it does a good job of presenting a summary of who Putin is and what he has experienced including the beginnings where he was torching KGB documents when communism ended. I think it also does a pretty good job of briefly showing how the Russian people wanted democracy to replace communism, but how replacing an entire government structure created chaos for in the interim. I believe this provides a good lesson about how important it is to consider that a complete overall to a government process can create consequence, good and bad.

It was also interesting to see how in the modern times, there are glimpses of the history and culture of Russia emerging. It is very beautiful in some ways, but difficult for me to understand completely since I am not from Russia. Inevitably, I still feel like I don't understand Putin enough to form an opinion about him. So this thread is to discuss all things Putin, good or bad.

 

[Karlysymon]

Well, he enjoys going shirtless while on holiday so that when the images come out, he is viewed as strong and fit to rule and thus deserving of another term.

 

[rainerann]

Well, he enjoys going shirtless while on holiday so that when the images come out, he is viewed as strong and fit to rule and thus deserving of another term.

lol someone wrote a song for him too.

 

[Thunderian]

Putin is the greatest boss thug in history.

 

[polymoog]

pros: the guy is anti-pedo and anti-human trafficking. hes also a bit of a thorn in the side for the NWO. he doesnt like hillary

cons: im not sure what his ultimate agenda is.

 

[rainerann]

cons: im not sure what his ultimate agenda is.

That is exactly how I feel. I can't quite put my finger on what his ultimate agenda is, and it is makes it difficult to form an opinion on him.

 

[Thunderian]

He is totally in it for himself. He may be the richest man in the world.

 

[Dan Northman]

I watched this documentary the other day and I thought it was fascinating.

FakeNews CNN and FakeNews BBC are the producers of this ham-fisted Globalist propaganda piece.

Notice which shills are promoting it on Twitter: https://twitter.com/search?q=#powerofputin

Globalists HATE Christians with a passion, and President Putin is returning Russia to Christianity.

Never forget that Globalist Marxists murdered 60 million Christians in Russia during the 20th century.

 

[rainerann]

FakeNews CNN and FakeNews BBC are the producers of this ham-fisted Globalist propaganda piece.

Notice which shills are promoting it on Twitter: https://twitter.com/search?q=#powerofputin

Globalists HATE Christians with a passion, and President Putin is returning Russia to Christianity.

Never forget that Globalist Marxists murdered 60 million Christians in Russia during the 20th century.

I agree with what you are saying about BBC. I consider their work to be somewhat generic, which is why I won't form a concrete opinion based on their documentary alone. Would you have another reference to support what you are saying about Putin returning Russia to Christianity?

 

[Dan Northman]

Would you have another reference to support what you are saying about Putin returning Russia to Christianity?

I contend it is difficult to find a national leader who is more Christian than President Putin.

Read these articles about how President Putin is revitalizing Christianity in Russia after 70 years of Atheism...

https://russian-faith.com/search?s=putin

In numerous speeches over the years he has begged the world to return to Christian Values:

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=putin+christian+message

Compare President Putin's words and state support of Christianity to those by the leaders of France, Germany, Spain, Canada, Mexico, Britain, Italy, Australia, Brazil et al.

 

[Helioform]

Putin restoring Christianity? What a fecking joke. Tell that to the Ukrainians he invaded, who are in the vast majority Christians. They hate him with a passion. They view Russia as some kind of Beast that is trying to take over.

 

[Dan Northman]

They view Russia as some kind of Beast that is trying to take over.

If George Soros and the Clinton Foundation began a civil war in Mexico to strip-mine that country of natural resources and install a government hostile to the United States they way they did in Ukraine, I certainly hope you would support President Trump's efforts to stop them.

 

[Corvus Metus]

Putin’s agenda is the same agenda of every other authoritarian; personal power. And while he might be an enemy to the Western elite, it's a touch foolish to think that he's one of the good guys. Good guys don't imprison people who disagree with him.

If George Soros and the Clinton Foundation began a civil war in Mexico to strip-mine that country of natural resources and install a government hostile to the United States they way they did in Ukraine, I certainly hope you would support President Trump's efforts to stop them.

George Soros is the the right, what the Koch Brothers were to the "left'. That is to say someone could be considered dangerous, since he uses his money to manipulate grass-roots organizations they they end up working with the establishment, but is ultimately a small player in the grand scheme of things and used as a boogeyman to reinforce the imaginary right-left divide in America that really only exists to keep people thinking that wedge issues define what is a divide between economic ideals rather than the actual economic ideals.

 

[Dan Northman]

...the imaginary right-left divide in America

LOL

 

[Futility]

Putin’s agenda is the same agenda of every other authoritarian; personal power. And while he might be an enemy to the Western elite, it's a touch foolish to think that he's one of the good guys. Good guys don't imprison people who disagree with him.



George Soros is the the right, what the Koch Brothers were to the "left'. That is to say someone could be considered dangerous, since he uses his money to manipulate grass-roots organizations they they end up working with the establishment, but is ultimately a small player in the grand scheme of things and used as a boogeyman to reinforce the imaginary right-left divide in America that really only exists to keep people thinking that wedge issues define what is a divide between economic ideals rather than the actual economic ideals.

It's because he is an authoritarian that the elements of the American right are so fond of him. US white supremacists are big fans, they love the traditionalism. Like in America, he doesnt give two shits about religion, but its useful to him.

Look I prefer diplomacy with a nuclear power as opposed to the other option, but the man is a pseudo-dictator who dissapears his opponents.

Good post.

 

[Corvus Metus]

LOL

What's so funny about that? The American "left" is still 100% pro-capitalist, imperialistic, war-mongers that seek to spread "democracy". Calling for higher taxes on the rich, so the working class and poor don't come for your head, and pretending you think minorities and LGBT people doesn't make you left-wing.

 

[Dan Northman]

...doesn't make you left-wing.

What does make one Left Wing?

 

[Corvus Metus]

What does make one Left Wing?

Economic policies?

If you believe wealth for a few creates wealth for the masses, or that the market will solve all our problems, you're right-wing even if you think gays are just swell and women should have bodily anatomy. Likewise, if you believe wealth needs to be redistributed (beyond marginally higher taxes on the rich) or that capitalism in inherent exploitative you're left-wing, even if you believe that your religion should dominate the world.

In America, there isn't a genuinely left-wing political party. Even our "democratic socialists" aren't genuinely socialist since they aren't calling for the abolition of capital and securing the means of production. They do see to redistribute wealthy on a higher level, which does make them left-leaning, but they seek to do it within the confines of capitalism, which still puts them in the right.

Most modern, left-wingers do champion the rights of minorities, the LGBT community, and women since many tend to be in the libertarian spectrum of things. But so do American-style Libertarians (as the party, at least before they got sucked into the vacuum of the culture war but that's another issue entirely) and they are clearly right-wing... Since you know, they support the capitalism and the market.

Never forget the libertarian-authoritarian axis, that goes right along with the left-right axis.

 

[Dan Northman]

Most modern, left-wingers...

Earlier you said the Left/Right divide was imaginary.

Now you say Left Wingers and Right Wingers do actually exist.

There is a field of study called Logic. It's pretty cool. You should check it out.

http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic

 

[Corvus Metus]

Earlier you said the Left/Right divide was imaginary.

Now you say Left Wingers and Right Wingers do actually exist.

There is a field of study called Logic. It's pretty cool. You should check it out.

http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic

Alright, then.

Let me clarify me clarify so you can understand, even though I believe you do understand what I meant.

This is what I said.

George Soros is the the right, what the Koch Brothers were to the "left'. That is to say someone could be considered dangerous, since he uses his money to manipulate grass-roots organizations they they end up working with the establishment, but is ultimately a small player in the grand scheme of things and used as a boogeyman to reinforce the imaginary right-left divide in America that really only exists to keep people thinking that wedge issues define what is a divide between economic ideals rather than the actual economic ideals.

The bold, italicized parts are worth noting.

Notice the quotation marks around m first use of the word "left"? There was a reason for that. The American "left" is still normally considered right-wing on a global level. After all, while the might call for higher taxes they aren't exactly in a hurry to abolish capitalism or seize the means of production from the elite that pay for their campaign. Even our "democratic socialists", who discuss breaking up the banks don't dare speak of abolishing the banking institutions.

The second part, if you'll notice, I mention America specifically and in reference to the establishment. Since you know, it's sort of a well-known fact that the same multinational corporations and financial contribute to both of the major political parties. They don't really care who wins the popularity contests we hold, or what those people claim to support. They just care that the politicians continue to make laws that favor their profits over the people.

Meanwhile, both political parties put on a hell of a show. Republicans talk about how they care about personal responsibility and family values, while the Democrats talk about tolerance and social justice, while both care little for their so-called platforms, offer token gestures to their supporters so that can pretend they care, and ultimately blame the "other side" when there's no real change because real change would actually damage the establishment and threaten the power they worked so hard to cultivate. In America, the right and "left" are elements of what amounts to a large scale version of three card monte...

Does that clarify? Or are you still going to pretend you don't understand what I'm talking about?