Russia has listed transsexual and transgender people among those who will no longer qualify for driving licences.
Fetishism, exhibitionism and voyeurism are also included as "mental disorders" now barring people from driving.
The government says it is tightening medical controls for drivers because Russia has too many road accidents.
"Pathological" gambling and compulsive stealing are also on the list. Russian psychiatrists and human rights lawyers have condemned the move.
The announcement follows international complaints about Russian harassment of gay-rights activists.
In 2013 Russia made "promoting non-traditional lifestyles" illegal.
Valery Evtushenko at the Russian Psychiatric Association voiced concern about the driving restrictions, speaking to the BBC Russian Service. He said some people would avoid seeking psychiatric help, fearing a driving ban.
The Association of Russian Lawyers for Human Rights called the new law "discriminatory". It said it would demand clarifications from the Russian Constitutional Court and seek support from international human rights organisations.
But the Professional Drivers Union supported the move. "We have too many deaths on the road, and I believe toughening medical requirements for applicants is fully justified," said the union's head Alexander Kotov.
However, he said the requirements should not be so strict for non-professional drivers.
Mikhail Strakhov, a Russian psychiatric expert, told BBC Russian that the definition of "personality disorders" was too vague and some disorders would not affect a person's ability to drive a car safely.
So Russia continues its march to be the number one anti-LGBT regime in Europe.
So Russia continues its march to be the number one anti-LGBT regime in Europe.
I would think you (a European) would want to distance yourself from that, and call Russia "the number one anti-LGBT regime in Asia"
To the heart of the matter... all I can really do is shake my head. Hopefully someone somewhere will have the ability to fight this thing off, but given Russia's stellar human rights performances, I am doubtful.
It is very sad but not surprising, Russia has been descending into that kind of retrograde, backward conservative bigot laws a lot recently.
That and putting the Pussy Riots in prison.
So Russia continues its march to be the number one anti-LGBT regime in Europe.
I would think you (a European) would want to distance yourself from that, and call Russia "the number one anti-LGBT regime in Asia"
Well I was going to put some little quip about the Vatican being more accepting of LGBT but then I thought that putting them both in a sentence together was unfair....
Putin is growing some dictator chic, with apparent whackjob laws. It seems all he now needs are some sunglasses, a gilted cap, a shiny suit, and a gold plated AK.....
However; this new law and similar preceding ones are not as stupid as they sound though. Facepalms are not in order, alarm bells are in order. Putin is not a joke president, and he is not an out of touch madman making bizarre random laws. Putin is nobodies fool, he is creating internal enemies to focus his people and stabilise his regime, everything he does he does with cold reasoning..
i have an enormous amount of respect for Vladimir Putin, the way he stole a march on just about everyone regarding the Crimea and got away with it, and how he has advanced the cause of Russian realpolitik enormously and turned around a bankrupt wreck of a country after Yeltsin into a nation on the verge of regaining its super-power status. He is a smooth operator and in my opinion the most impressive statesman on the world stage today.
However that admiration doesn't mean he is not a threat to the global balance of power, and someone to be exceptionally wary of and carefully opposed.
Orlanth wrote: Putin is growing some dictator chic, with apparent whackjob laws. It seems all he now needs are some sunglasses, a gilted cap, a shiny suit, and a gold plated AK.....
Orlanth wrote: Putin is growing some dictator chic, with apparent whackjob laws. It seems all he now needs are some sunglasses, a gilted cap, a shiny suit, and a gold plated AK.....
However; this new law and similar preceding ones are not as stupid as they sound though. Facepalms are not in order, alarm bells are in order. Putin is not a joke president, and he is not an out of touch madman making bizarre random laws. Putin is nobodies fool, he is creating internal enemies to focus his people and stabilise his regime, everything he does he does with cold reasoning.. i have an enormous amount of respect for Vladimir Putin, the way he stole a march on just about everyone regarding the Crimea and got away with it, and how he has advanced the cause of Russian realpolitik enormously and turned around a bankrupt wreck of a country after Yeltsin into a nation on the verge of regaining its super-power status. He is a smooth operator and in my opinion the most impressive statesman on the world stage today.
However that admiration doesn't mean he is not a threat to the global balance of power, and someone to be exceptionally wary of and carefully opposed.
It can hardly be considered on the verge of regaining superpower status. His annexing of Crimea and interference in eastern ukraine has contributed to obliterating the russian economy thanks to economic sanctions coupled with the low price of oil.
Putin's lust for power and regaining superpower status and fear is destroying Russia. He's a brilliant politician if your definition is "man who bankrupts country in order to wave his dick in peoples faces".
Having seen a lot of dash cam vids on youtube their priority needs to be with all the vodka soaked drivers hammered out of their minds. Russia is the only place I've ever seen somebody literally drive half a car down the road with a dead friend in the back.
How about a little common sense in what you post here, please? --Janthkin
Having seen a lot of dash cam vids on youtube their priority needs to be with all the vodka soaked drivers hammered out of their minds. Russia is the only place I've ever seen somebody literally drive half a car down the road with a dead friend hanging out the back.
I don't normally get uptight about things on the internet, but can we spare dakka links to videos with dead people hanging out the back of cars?
It can hardly be considered on the verge of regaining superpower status. His annexing of Crimea and interference in eastern ukraine has contributed to obliterating the russian economy thanks to economic sanctions coupled with the low price of oil.
Putin's lust for power and regaining superpower status and fear is destroying Russia. He's a brilliant politician if your definition is "man who bankrupts country in order to wave his dick in peoples faces".
The old Soviet Union didn't need an economy. It had a horde, a space program and lots of nukes.
Russia still ticks all three of those boxes, and Putin is in effect turning back the clock to the Cold War era little by little.
I have some sympathy for that. westernised bankrupt Russia resorting to selling cheap oil and porn is not what they want. Most Russians look back to the days not too long ago when the world trembled whenever the Soviet Union moved its hand.
And yes America trembled too, don't believe the hype.
Putin wants a return to those glory days, and he has a good chance of getting what he wants.
If that deosnt convince you try this:
The Us jmnational debt makes almost other nation look competent and solvent, with possible exception of Zimbabwe. However the Us national debt is an irrelevance, as noone can pull the -plug on the US. People can pull the plug on russia, they couldnt pull the plug on the Soviet Union, a return to the old standards will make the fiscal situation a paper exercise of little real relevance.
This is a simplifiction, but Russia has a growing relationship with China and India, and has enormous natural resources to internalise. The only thing making Russia vulnerable is western trade itself, cutting it off makes the import of luxury good more difficult and therefore available to fewer people,. but that wont effect those in power and their cronies. however sanctions have a retrograde effect, like a bee srting that can be drawn out, it only really bites once if Russia draws the sting. I suspect Putin is aiming to do exactly that, and with China's help can do so relatively painlessly.
Most russians didn't have TVs, fridges, freezers or a car (let alone a decent car).
They had food rationing whilst the west was guzzling down coca-cola and steak.
The only reason russia wasn't selling cheap oil and porn then was because the eastern bloc had to buy their crap cars and other tech as they weren't allowed western stuff
Well, until perestroika came in. Then what happened?
Most russians didn't have TVs, fridges, freezers or a car (let alone a decent car).
They had food rationing whilst the west was guzzling down coca-cola and steak.
And that bothered the Politburo exactly how?
It helps Putins case that a lot of ordinary Russians are now looking back at the Soviet Union with nostalgia, and most of all the worst mistakes of Communism are behind them. Soviets didnt have nice things because the Kommissars had an up their own arse dogma on everything. Modern Communism as pioneered by China is not anything so backward, if you are loyal to the state you can expect a reasonable standard of living, with plenty of amenities and plenty of opportunities for capitalism and profit to keep the ambitious moving forward.
The only reason russia wasn't selling cheap oil and porn then was because the eastern bloc had to buy their crap cars and other tech as they weren't allowed western stuff
Well, until perestroika came in. Then what happened?
The old school communism was unsustainable. China realised this in the 70's and reformed,. russia stuck with the old dogmas and didnt reform until too late. Russia was also pushed from internal pressure set up by western agencies. Modern Russia is not old Communism, it might not be communist at all, just totalitartian. If it is is sufficiently nationalistic, and Russians are long on nationalism then the populace could well rally behind a neqw master and a new power future.
Also Russi doesn't need western gear anymore, the West doesn't make most of it for a start, China does and China will sell no matter what embargos the US or Europe wants to impose.
I wouldn't put too high a store on western sanctions on Russia. The only reason its being done is because we are now the ones with a doctrinal mission. LGBT doesn't matter on the global scale, it didnt matter even in the west until a few years ago, and neither China nor Russia not India care. If they don't care, we don't really matter.
It gets quite hot in Russia in summertime. Also if Russian freezers (actually unpowered by lined cold rooms) are like Canadian ones they in a way keep the meat comparatively warm. You don't want to store frozen food at -60C.
Putin is restoring the church in Russia. He doesn't want Russia to be anything like it was under communism. Pre Bolshevik Russia is what he's aiming for.
He's a man that does questionable things but the Russians love him. He's getting their pride back that was ground down by Marxist scum. Russians lived in terrible poverty and fear during the times of the Soviet Union.
I'm sure this policy has more depth than the way it is represented.
Transgender people are far more likely to suffer depression/be suicidal so it's not really up for debate that they have a more fragile mental state.
Whether that should lead to a driving ban is perhaps a bit of a mental leap. I think the idea is to make it very difficult to be anything but a straight married couple.
Even Stalin also restored the church briefly in 1940, as it suited him.
This can work, Russian Orthodox is not heavily linked to any other deonomination, there is no external influence from the glovbal Christian identity, it has always been isolated and linked only really to Greeck church and then only be tenuous routes centuries out of touch. So if Putin places his own men in all the important bishoprics and chooses church doctrine he has a fair chance of getting what he wants even if he sets the cvhuch 'free' to continue on its course afterwards.
Best means for totalitarianism to proliferate is to offer the people some freedoms that the state can afford to give. With Chinese imports a new Russia can have an import economy, with a tied church a new Russia can have relgious 'freedom'. China itself is still communist and has both those things.
There is a lot of religious persecution in China, but there is also an official Christian church and their own form of Buddhism, both tame and state controlled.
It is a workable system from the point of view of a centralised state.
The illegal free church in China is however very strong, in fact it has a larger membership than the Communist party, much to the states chagrin, but then conscience based Christianity has always been very strong in times of persecution, to kill a church movement you need western decadence, not totalitarian repression.
Putin is appearing to learn not only the lessons from the Sioviet era errors, but also those moves China itself has made that were not for the best. By controlling the church now, ahead of time, before there is visible religious persecution to set splinter denominations moving Putin will have firmer control later once the regime locks down.
Orlanth wrote: Putin is growing some dictator chic, with apparent whackjob laws. It seems all he now needs are some sunglasses, a gilted cap, a shiny suit, and a gold plated AK.....
However; this new law and similar preceding ones are not as stupid as they sound though. Facepalms are not in order, alarm bells are in order. Putin is not a joke president, and he is not an out of touch madman making bizarre random laws. Putin is nobodies fool, he is creating internal enemies to focus his people and stabilise his regime, everything he does he does with cold reasoning..
i have an enormous amount of respect for Vladimir Putin, the way he stole a march on just about everyone regarding the Crimea and got away with it, and how he has advanced the cause of Russian realpolitik enormously and turned around a bankrupt wreck of a country after Yeltsin into a nation on the verge of regaining its super-power status. He is a smooth operator and in my opinion the most impressive statesman on the world stage today.
However that admiration doesn't mean he is not a threat to the global balance of power, and someone to be exceptionally wary of and carefully opposed.
It can hardly be considered on the verge of regaining superpower status. His annexing of Crimea and interference in eastern ukraine has contributed to obliterating the russian economy thanks to economic sanctions coupled with the low price of oil.
Putin's lust for power and regaining superpower status and fear is destroying Russia. He's a brilliant politician if your definition is "man who bankrupts country in order to wave his dick in peoples faces".
Yeah, I was gonna say, Putin's latest and greatest achievement is alienating every single other country able to help Russia out at the exact time when their economy gets its legs taken out from under it. In classic dictator style, he's very good at securing his personal rule, but that doesn't mean good things for Russia.
I really don't understand Europe's hell bent attitude on making an enemy out of Russia. Encroaching on it's borders when the Soviet Union collapse over the past 2 and a half decades with both the EU and NATO sphere of influence.
It's stupid to initiate cold war 2: putin boogaloo because they'll simply continue to ignore us.
Specifically given that Russia is trading with Argentina suggests that Britain needs to start getting comfortable with Russia again. It might not be a problem now but give it a few more decades and then it will.
We can hardly claim all of our international allies are saints.
Medium of Death wrote: I really don't understand Europe's hell bent attitude on making an enemy out of Russia. Encroaching on it's borders when the Soviet Union collapse over the past 2 and a half decades with both the EU and NATO sphere of influence.
It's stupid to initiate cold war 2: putin boogaloo because they'll simply continue to ignore us.
It wsont get that far. We cant start a cold war, we dont have the resources and rthe East knows it. The b lance between sanctions damage and the ilrrelevance of further trade withthe west will switchover soon, then it simply wont matter/
Medium of Death wrote: I
Specifically given that Russia is trading with Argentina suggests that Britain needs to start getting comfortable with Russia again. It might not be a problem now but give it a few more decades and then it will.
argentina is not a problem as the Falklands can be secured indefinately by a few relatively inexpensive and careful precautions. It will take a surprisingly little action to achieve. However that requires having the Foreign Office, the Treasury and Westiminster politicians collective pull thumbs out of arses and get on with some work for a change. Therefore Argentina is a problem.
We can hardly claim all of our international allies are saints.]
What allies? Obama will stab the UK in the back given half a chance, the French will stab us in the front and Cameron is pissing on the relationship with Merkel and Labour are all round useless.
The UK has remarkably few friends, again because of short sightedness in Westminster and Whitehall. We have opportunities to make good lasting allies but are not taking them because of pety expediency.
That being said the Uk is not entirely friendless, there are some nations that always quietly vote for our interests due to long standing favours, and their votes can count. Especially as we have enough friends amongst minor countires that some cycle through to the security council with reasonable frequency.
Sill the asshats in Whitehall take their favour foregranted, being the short sighted numbskulls most of them are.
Still its not too late.
Transgender people are far more likely to suffer depression/be suicidal so it's not really up for debate that they have a more fragile mental state.
I wonder why that is? Could it be because of inadequate support and prejudice against them?
I think a lot of it comes from post-transition to be honest with you. While it might not be nice to admit a lot of transgender people are shunned by society or treated like freaks. I don't think that is taken into consideration enough. I know it shouldn't have to be, but ideals and reality never match up sadly.
Transgender people are far more likely to suffer depression/be suicidal so it's not really up for debate that they have a more fragile mental state.
I wonder why that is? Could it be because of inadequate support and prejudice against them?
It happens anyway. I know a transgender and learned a lot about the condition.
Post op a number cases actually change sexual preference.
Also adjusting to a new biology is not easy, as is coming to the conclusion you feel a man/woman inside. The person I knew felt this way decades before they came to the conclusion they should be transgender, and in the meantime got married and had that whole relationship play its course.
It doesn't require any discrimination to be a fethed up state. Handling being gay can also be traumatic.
The old Soviet Union didn't need an economy. It had a horde, a space program and lots of nukes.
Russia still ticks all three of those boxes, and Putin is in effect turning back the clock to the Cold War era little by little.
I have some sympathy for that. westernised bankrupt Russia resorting to selling cheap oil and porn is not what they want. Most Russians look back to the days not too long ago when the world trembled whenever the Soviet Union moved its hand.
And yes America trembled too, don't believe the hype.
Putin wants a return to those glory days, and he has a good chance of getting what he wants.
If that deosnt convince you try this:
The Us jmnational debt makes almost other nation look competent and solvent, with possible exception of Zimbabwe. However the Us national debt is an irrelevance, as noone can pull the -plug on the US. People can pull the plug on russia, they couldnt pull the plug on the Soviet Union, a return to the old standards will make the fiscal situation a paper exercise of little real relevance.
This is a simplifiction, but Russia has a growing relationship with China and India, and has enormous natural resources to internalise. The only thing making Russia vulnerable is western trade itself, cutting it off makes the import of luxury good more difficult and therefore available to fewer people,. but that wont effect those in power and their cronies. however sanctions have a retrograde effect, like a bee srting that can be drawn out, it only really bites once if Russia draws the sting. I suspect Putin is aiming to do exactly that, and with China's help can do so relatively painlessly.
I would also add that this ban would be looked favourably upon by 'radical' islam. Which means less chance of terrorist attacks / disruption to their country, and the potential for better trade ties with islamic countries. Putin is a strong and effective leader, i agree that the sanction isn't as damaging as it might seem to be.
So are we going to war with these guys next Tuesday or the week after that? Unlikely, but hell what a negative turn politics has been taking itself in. Pander to the nutjobs as much as you like, but when this crap's happening all over the place to different degrees how long until they start throwing rocks at each other? Hopefully Russia can pull itself out of this hole its digging, how much the country damages itself before hand is yet to be seen. Creating a strong image (insomuch Fascism can be looked on as strong) trumps civil liberties any day it would seem.
Thats the thing, the 'western' nations really can't afford to do much of anything at this point. The wars cost money, and the more that gets borrowed off china the more problematic the u.s. situation becomes. Russia just needs to keep itself stable and it could start growing more powerful in comparison simply by the 'competition' weakening itself.
Wyrmalla wrote: So are we going to war with these guys next Tuesday or the week after that? Unlikely, but hell what a negative turn politics has been taking itself in. Pander to the nutjobs as much as you like, but when this crap's happening all over the place to different degrees how long until they start throwing rocks at each other? Hopefully Russia can pull itself out of this hole its digging, how much the country damages itself before hand is yet to be seen. Creating a strong image (insomuch Fascism can be looked on as strong) trumps civil liberties any day it would seem.
IF the oil price stays this low for at least 6 months... Russia will be in a world of hurt economically.
My guess is that he's trying to drum up some strong "nationalistic" feelings to help "winter" the coming bad times.
[LACKEY]Mr President Sir, the Economy is still in free fall and no stimulus can stop it! What shall we do, the public grows restless.
[PUTIN]Best do something crazy that doesn't affect most Russians to distract them from their woes........Oh and Sergey, don't forget to blame the Gays!
Come on, we love you guys, you brought us GW and the Mython Python and certainly tons of other stuff I just currently do not have in mind!
Not sure what you mean by allies, but currently I cannot imagine either France or the UK getting attacked, and the other country not joining the war to defend them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Orlanth wrote: but then conscience based Christianity has always been very strong in times of persecution, to kill a church movement you need western decadence, not totalitarian repression.
Well, tell that to the Christians of Albania, because sure persecution did not make them more religious, and they were under one of the stricter Communist regime for the longest time in Europe.
notprop wrote: [LACKEY]Mr President Sir, the Economy is still in free fall and no stimulus can stop it! What shall we do, the public grows restless.
[PUTIN]Best do something crazy that doesn't affect most Russians to distract them from their woes........Oh and Sergey, don't forget to blame the Gays!
[LACKEY]Mr President Sir, the Economy is still in free fall and no stimulus can stop it! What shall we do, the public grows restless.
[PUTIN] Relax Gergey, the free fall you are seeing is related only to European and american mbusines links. We are free falling towards China, amnd they are ther ones making the TV's and refridgerators.
[SERGEY] But Mr Presidentski, thr West are verty angry with you, and are saying you are naughty over Crimea.
[PUTIN] are they massing tanks on the border?
[SERGEY] No.
[PUTIN] No problem, simples.
[SERGEY} But Mr Presidentski, the stock holders are getting anxious, they cant buy dollar with rubles. They cant buy share in Euro company.
[PUTIN] are they still buying our Gasprom?
[SERGEY] Yes
[PUTIN] No problem, simples.
[SERGEY] But Mr Presidentki, the west are getting angry because we dont like the Gays.
[PUTIN] And our people?
[SERGEY] Most dont care, except those Pussy Riot and the left wing press.
[PUTIN] And China
[SERGEY] They dont care
[PUTIN] And India
[SERGEY] They dont care either.
[PUTIN] No problem, simples.
[SERGEY] But Mr Presidentski, the West are getting angrier and angrier, we are losing friends and influence.
[PUTIN} No Sergey, They are losing influence, it is drainining out of Mother Russia and we are replacing with other partners at every tantrum. yes the Gays are not happy, but we had to pick someone, and someone who the west have no choice but to like. Now with every anti Gay law I pass the West has no choice but go condemn us, and kill off their own influence further, if they do not their politicians, wo must climb over each other to show the people they are the ones who support this LGBT thing the most, or lose their own support from their own people, who have been conditioned in a few short years to change from people who don't think about LGBT to people who will rise to defend it at any cost, at any price and for any reason. So al we need to do is move our hands and they start yapping like dogs. Dogs with less and less teeth as they have less and less effect from the sanctions.
Soon we can put the price of oil up, they will still need our oil, but we wont need any real trade with them, we make them bark on queue we make them beg on queue, who is master now, and who is doggie.
Simples.
Sigvatr wrote: Hah, if it ever comes to this, we'll move to the US ASAP
Well, I know I would go to Switzerland. The country that was not attacked neither in WW1 nor in WW2, because it was not important enough and way to well defended.
...if they do not their politicians, wo must climb over each other to show the people they are the ones who support this LGBT thing the most, or lose their own support from their own people, who have been conditioned in a few short years to change from people who don't think about LGBT to people who will rise to defend it at any cost, at any price and for any reason.
I'm getting the impression that you don't like LGBT people, or their supporters.
Soon we can put the price of oil up, they will still need our oil, but we wont need any real trade with them, we make them bark on queue we make them beg on queue, who is master now, and who is doggie.
I don't see the problem. Issue a public statement, and continue the trade negotiations.
...if they do not their politicians, wo must climb over each other to show the people they are the ones who support this LGBT thing the most, or lose their own support from their own people, who have been conditioned in a few short years to change from people who don't think about LGBT to people who will rise to defend it at any cost, at any price and for any reason.
I'm getting the impression that you don't like LGBT people, or their supporters.
Soon we can put the price of oil up, they will still need our oil, but we wont need any real trade with them, we make them bark on queue we make them beg on queue, who is master now, and who is doggie.
I don't see the problem. Issue a public statement, and continue the trade negotiations.
Orlanth doesn't live in the same real world as the rest of us, you probably shouldn't really pay much attention to his conspiracy theories.
I would also add that this ban would be looked favourably upon by 'radical' islam. Which means less chance of terrorist attacks / disruption to their country, and the potential for better trade ties with islamic countries. Putin is a strong and effective leader, i agree that the sanction isn't as damaging as it might seem to be.
Yeeeeah... no.
Russia has a bit of a current history with Radical Islam, and they're not friends. See Chechnya, Russian backing of Syria/Assad, etc.
Both issues could on one level be considered not a concern of a wastern nation, but enough lobbyists, many of them with a lot of influence made it politically relevant.
I'm getting the impression that you don't like LGBT people, or their supporters.
Please keep your half formed ideas to yourself, you don't know me, and the implications are unwarranted. May I suggest you don't fall back into your old tricks of ad hominem attacks. That you had moved on from that made our many discussions far more bearable and it greatly improved the content of your replies.
Anyway your post has a backhanded merit, it proves evidence of the twisted point of view in society. If you are not proactively in favour of LGBT and vocal about it, you must be a bigot.
Again reference to the previous link. Putin turn up the heat on gays, activists in the UK call for our Olympic team to be recalled and our participation in the games canceled.
And yes just about anyone to be survivable in politics has to be seen to be proactivein support of LGBT rights, the counter point is not necessarily room to hate, but the lack of room for it to be none of our business, or in that topical case to leave politics out of sport..
There is a world of difference between non-participation in activism and opposition. It was quite difficult to have a viewpoint of leaving the Olympics alone, for example. When ideology sets in a neutral standpoint is seen to evaporate into an us and them mentality, and a belief that either you are for us, or you are against us. There is a middle ground, and people have the right to remain on it without label.
It is an effective strategy, we see politicians, even church leaders falling over themselves to prove they are LGBT friendly, when a few years or even months ago LGBT wasnt an issue to them. Even the Pope is on this one. That of course doesnt mean they have actually changed their agendas, and the issues remained for far longer than the current politcal fad, and people in authority are not unaware of them, but the political dynamic has shifted in favour of activism.
Putin can see this. He knows its an easy button to press, ideology always is. It wont be the first time in recent history an ideological opposition to what another nation state is doing causes another nation state to self harm.
Yes persecuting gays is bad, but what can we do about it. Send tanks into Moscow? Tell Putin he is naughty.? Get the UN to write a strongly worded letter; and while we are forcibly distracted by gay rights issues we aren't paying attention to Ukraine, which we can do something about.
Orlanth doesn't live in the same real world as the rest of us, you probably shouldn't really pay much attention to his conspiracy theories.
You should take a leaf from dogma. He posts something challenging, and a response is usually in order.
However please don't as you say 'pay much attention' to my posts, go ahead do me that favour. You dont ever contribute anything of intelligible value. So I would be pleased as punch if you followed your own advice and went away.
I would also add that this ban would be looked favourably upon by 'radical' islam. Which means less chance of terrorist attacks / disruption to their country, and the potential for better trade ties with islamic countries. Putin is a strong and effective leader, i agree that the sanction isn't as damaging as it might seem to be.
Yeeeeah... no.
Russia has a bit of a current history with Radical Islam, and they're not friends. See Chechnya, Russian backing of Syria/Assad, etc.
Have to agree with Azazel on this one. Russia will be on the target list for a long time.
Come to think of it I don't know of any nation that when on the hate list ever comes off, to my knowledge it hasn't happened yet and appears to be a one way process.
It's pretty obvious the biggest cause of accidents in Russia is drinking. Either that or they're driving around blindfolded, having seen some videos on YouTube.
Howard A Treesong wrote: It's pretty obvious the biggest cause of accidents in Russia is drinking. Either that or they're driving around blindfolded, having seen some videos on YouTube.
One does not exclude the other... I'd say it's more likely for the latter to occur when the former is also active...
notprop wrote: Vodka. Gas. Oil. Nuclear Power Generation. Military Tech, specifically Aero and Nautical to rattle at those pesky Japanese. Tall leggy chicas.
I think that covers it.
China doesn't particularly use gas or oil (it already has access to cheaper coal), it has its own Nuclear scientists and has its own military development.
China isn't really as much into the whole "piss off everyone around you" strategy like Russia is. It prefers to trade with them and make money.
China doesn't particularly use gas or oil (it already has access to cheaper coal), it has its own Nuclear scientists and has its own military development.
China isn't really as much into the whole "piss off everyone around you" strategy like Russia is. It prefers to trade with them and make money.
China is completely different from Russia. China has an active industry going, producing staff for the entire world. Russia has nothing but oil.
Howard A Treesong wrote: It's pretty obvious the biggest cause of accidents in Russia is drinking. Either that or they're driving around blindfolded, having seen some videos on YouTube.
Vodka.
Gas.
Oil.
Nuclear Power Generation.
Military Tech, specifically Aero and Nautical to rattle at those pesky Japanese.
Tall leggy chicas.
I think that covers it.
The shopping list is more of revelance to a go it alone Russia, not what China wants. Though on your list is oil, and oil of course is always good.
If fact you can stop at oil, it works as a an export on its own, or so the Saudi's say.
China doesn't particularly use gas or oil (it already has access to cheaper coal), it has its own Nuclear scientists and has its own military development.
China isn't really as much into the whole "piss off everyone around you" strategy like Russia is. It prefers to trade with them and make money.
China is completely different from Russia. China has an active industry going, producing staff for the entire world. Russia has nothing but oil.
All Russia needs to bring is its valued customer status, which it has because its a large market for China's stuff (250m people) and it has oil to sell.
Also why would Russia want to compete with China on manufacturing? The west does not.
Russia can stick with its core competencies. Data services, space tech, military hardware and nukes.
Its has enough to trade with the world for itself, in fact from that list it appears not too dissimilar from an oversized UK or France.
As for sanctions, sure we might close the door but Russia can still trade its wears to the Middle East, Africa, South America etc. This isn't Iran. The US and western Europe has the power to stop trading with Russia if it likes, but has zero power to stop a nation that size making deals in third party countries. We can lean on those countries, but again western geopolitical bloc is not what it was. Again if China and Russia are willing to trade they arent concerned if it make washington or eeurope cry because trade is being done with naughty Putin.
Most of all, once all this is done the fiscal paper trail that shows the Russian economy to be on the ropes (apparently) becomes of little use as anything but toilet paper. How can western banks and nation states declare a neo-Soviet Union mk2 bankrupt and foreclose on it?
Dmitriy, bad Dmitriy!
He should not have signed that decree last month. In principle, it is a good decree because it aims at reducing traffic accidents in Russia (and it does not only target transgender people and sexual deviants, but also alcoholics and many others), but being transgender or sexually deviant does not really affect a person's ability to drive. They should have left that out. I hope the decree is going to be amended.
Most russians didn't have TVs, fridges, freezers or a car (let alone a decent car).
They had food rationing whilst the west was guzzling down coca-cola and steak.
The only reason russia wasn't selling cheap oil and porn then was because the eastern bloc had to buy their crap cars and other tech as they weren't allowed western stuff
Well, until perestroika came in. Then what happened?
What you write is ignorant. How much do you actually know about Soviet Union?
Back in the USSR, from the 1970's onwards, the vast majority of Russians had television, fridges etc.
Cars have never been as popular in Russia as in the West because of the train network.
Food rationing only started to become a thing in the late 80's and '90s.
In the Soviet Union, there was no poverty, everyone had a decent standard of living, even if that standard was somewhat lower than in the West. The Soviet planned economy was uneffective, but compared to what came before and after it, it was great.
China doesn't particularly use gas or oil (it already has access to cheaper coal), it has its own Nuclear scientists and has its own military development.
China isn't really as much into the whole "piss off everyone around you" strategy like Russia is. It prefers to trade with them and make money.
China uses huge amounts of gas and oil, and has to import most of it because it has little natural resources of its own. China is the second biggest importer of oil in the world (after the US)
Chinese military development is based almost entirely on Russian technology, and since the '90s, the Russian and Chinese defense industries have also worked together a lot. Before the '90s, the Chinese defense industry was primitive, only producing cheap copies of old Soviet tech. Since then, China's defense industry has advanced a lot, partially thanks to Russian help.
Ouze wrote: I came to this thread solely to see Iron_Captain defend or at least rationalize this... leaving sad and disappointed.
Sorry to dissapoint, but I am just too Westernised to agree with this bullgak. I can still see some value in that other law that outlawed promotion of non-traditional lifestyles, but this is just ridiculous.
I can still rationalise it though, it is not hard at all. Russians are just a very traditional, conservative people, and adding transgenderism (is that a word?) to the list of disorders that prohibit someone from driving is just Medvedev caving in to the powerful Orthodox-conservative lobby. United Russia is probably hoping that cracking down on transgenders and gays (who are loathed by a large part of Russian people) will make them even more popular. It also can be a scapegoat to distract people from the bad economy. And it also makes some people feel they are getting back at the West (homosexuality and such are often seen as being "Western", and some nationalists like Zhirinovsky believe the West uses gay people to undermine and destroy Russia.).
Orlanth wrote: All Russia needs to bring is its valued customer status, which it has because its a large market for China's stuff (250m people) and it has oil to sell.
Russia has a population of 143 million, not 250 million.
Orlanth wrote: All Russia needs to bring is its valued customer status, which it has because its a large market for China's stuff (250m people) and it has oil to sell.
Russia has a population of 143 million, not 250 million.
Thank you for the correction, was thinking of the old Soviet population figures as my ballpark.
Its still a large market.
What you write is ignorant. How much do you actually know about Soviet Union?
Back in the USSR, from the 1970's onwards, the vast majority of Russians had television, fridges etc.
Cars have never been as popular in Russia as in the West because of the train network.
Food rationing only started to become a thing in the late 80's and '90s.
In the Soviet Union, there was no poverty, everyone had a decent standard of living, even if that standard was somewhat lower than in the West. The Soviet planned economy was uneffective, but compared to what came before and after it, it was great.
Not going to entirelty retort your rose tinted view of the Soviet era. After all a lot of western ideas of what it was like in the Soviet Union are laced with heavy propaganda. That being said Soviet citizens did have to wait in a long queue fro a crappy car, and while the Soviets inherited and improved on the Tsars rail network, trains cant run everywhere and Russia is a big place. Russia is now stocked with cars, decent ones; and many other things you did not have before.
A lot has improved yes. The main difference is that Russia no longer causes the world to fear its name, and didn't matter much at all under Yeltsin's mismanagement. I can imagine that any self respecting Russian is not happy with that and wants their nation strong again. I think you will get what you want, the real problem is what will you do when you have got it.
Food rationing only started to become a thing in the late 80's and '90s.
In the Soviet Union, there was no poverty, everyone had a decent standard of living, even if that standard was somewhat lower than in the West. The Soviet planned economy was uneffective, but compared to what came before and after it, it was great.
So great that an estimated 5 million people starved to death in 1932-1933 and another estimated million in 1947.
It was so great that in the 70's, Russians lived on average 2 less years than their Western Europe contemporaries (and this distance only increased up until the 90's).
It was so great that the Infant Mortality Rate in the USSR was more than 10 points higher than in Western Europe...
Food rationing only started to become a thing in the late 80's and '90s.
In the Soviet Union, there was no poverty, everyone had a decent standard of living, even if that standard was somewhat lower than in the West. The Soviet planned economy was uneffective, but compared to what came before and after it, it was great.
So great that an estimated 5 million people starved to death in 1932-1933 and another estimated million in 1947.
It was so great that in the 70's, Russians lived on average 2 less years than their Western Europe contemporaries (and this distance only increased up until the 90's).
It was so great that the Infant Mortality Rate in the USSR was more than 10 points higher than in Western Europe...
Clearly it was really a workers paradise.
If we're going by infant mortality rate the US is currently hell on earth compared to Europe, so yeah...
Food rationing only started to become a thing in the late 80's and '90s.
In the Soviet Union, there was no poverty, everyone had a decent standard of living, even if that standard was somewhat lower than in the West. The Soviet planned economy was uneffective, but compared to what came before and after it, it was great.
So great that an estimated 5 million people starved to death in 1932-1933 and another estimated million in 1947.
It was so great that in the 70's, Russians lived on average 2 less years than their Western Europe contemporaries (and this distance only increased up until the 90's).
It was so great that the Infant Mortality Rate in the USSR was more than 10 points higher than in Western Europe...
Clearly it was really a workers paradise.
If we're going by infant mortality rate the US is currently hell on earth compared to Europe, so yeah...
Which that rate has been debunked.
Countries don't tabulate this data the same way, thus skewing the results.
Countries don't tabulate this data the same way, thus skewing the results.
Infant mortality is pretty well defined, live births that die before reaching 1 year old.
And unless European countries like the UK, France, Germany, Sweden etc. are skewing their numbers by not following the WHO guidelines of what is a live birth (any birth that shows signs of life), then the USA is behind. Not drastically so (except from the Scandinavian countries but pretty much everyone is behind them, UK included), but behind.
Countries don't tabulate this data the same way, thus skewing the results.
Infant mortality is pretty well defined, live births that die before reaching 1 year old.
And unless European countries like the UK, France, Germany, Sweden etc. are skewing their numbers by not following the WHO guidelines of what is a live birth (any birth that shows signs of life), then the USA is behind. Not drastically so (except from the Scandinavian countries but pretty much everyone is behind them, UK included), but behind.
That's my point... which countries are likely to adhere the WHO guidelines? (ie, did you know many countries don't count death from pre-mature births? Yet, the US count 'em.)
The more freer countries? Or the more strict totalitarian/communist/dictatorial countries?
Anyways, we're going waaaay too off topic here, but the point was that it's dangerous to attempt to compare statistics between countries. It's like trying to compare US crimes vs UK crimes... we just had a massive thread about that one.
Anyways, we're going waaaay too off topic here, but the point was that it's dangerous to attempt to compare statistics between countries. It's like trying to compare US crimes vs UK crimes... we just had a massive thread about that one.
Sorry, but all I got from that was "I was wrong, better call the discussion off topic and run!". If it's dangerous to compare between countries, why is it that you did not object when people did the same with the US and the USSR higher up on this very page?
Remember Pussy Riot and the indignation in the western media.
Yes, but I'm probably one of the few people that do, and even then I don't really care. Its also worth noting that the actions of Western media are not tacit to those of Western nations, unless you're using "nation" to refer to a group of people distinct from its government. If so, that was not the sense in which I was using that word.
Both issues could on one level be considered not a concern of a wastern nation, but enough lobbyists, many of them with a lot of influence made it politically relevant.
Anyway your post has a backhanded merit, it proves evidence of the twisted point of view in society. If you are not proactively in favour of LGBT and vocal about it, you must be a bigot.
I never called you a bigot, appearing to not like a thing does make one a bigot.
Yes persecuting gays is bad, but what can we do about it. Send tanks into Moscow? Tell Putin he is naughty.? Get the UN to write a strongly worded letter; and while we are forcibly distracted by gay rights issues we aren't paying attention to Ukraine, which we can do something about.
Exactly what I said the West (to the extent that "the West" is a thing) should do: issue a public statement and move on. Absent the commitment of physical resources, states are capable of dealing with multiple geopolitical issues simultaneously.
Exactly what I said the West (to the extent that "the West" is a thing) should do: issue a public statement and move on. Absent the commitment of physical resources, states are capable of dealing with multiple geopolitical issues simultaneously.
Agreed.... If we're still living in a Westphalian system, then there's very little (actually, nothing) that we can/should do to stop Russia, beyond sending them hate mail and saying theyre bad.
The West really shouldn't do anything but to keep quiet and mind it's own business. The West interfering in Russia's internal affairs will only make things worse because to the people it will confirm what the radical nationalists say and empower them.
We don't want the Liberal Democrats getting any more votes.
Iron_Captain wrote: The West really shouldn't do anything but to keep quiet and mind it's own business. The West interfering in Russia's internal affairs will only make things worse because to the people it will confirm what the radical nationalists say and empower them.
We don't want the Liberal Democrats getting any more votes.
The west has no business standing up against violations of human rights!
Could you be any bigger of an apologist? Seriously?
Iron_Captain wrote: The West really shouldn't do anything but to keep quiet and mind it's own business. The West interfering in Russia's internal affairs will only make things worse because to the people it will confirm what the radical nationalists say and empower them.
We don't want the Liberal Democrats getting any more votes.
The west has no business standing up against violations of human rights!
Could you be any bigger of an apologist? Seriously?
Apologist of what?
As I said, the West 'standing up' for human rights in the case of Russia doesn't do anything except making things even worse.
Anyway your post has a backhanded merit, it proves evidence of the twisted point of view in society. If you are not proactively in favour of LGBT and vocal about it, you must be a bigot.
I never called you a bigot, appearing to not like a thing does make one a bigot.
You don't have to like something to tolerate it. Not liking something doesn't make you a bigot.
It might be an indication that you are inclined to be bigoted towards those views, but it doesn't mean that you'd actively seek to suppress them.
Agreed.... If we're still living in a Westphalian system, then there's very little (actually, nothing) that we can/should do to stop Russia, beyond sending them hate mail and saying theyre bad.
My last name is Westphal. I like that I have a system named after me.
Also, take it from me. Americans are just donkeycaves with 1st world problems, instead of third world ones. Holiday season+snowstorms+pregnant wife that is imminently due? I wish I could distribute some corporal punishment to half my fellow Americans on the roads.
Russian dash cam videos seem to show that they have no business judging who can and cannot drive in their own screwed up country.
Iron_Captain wrote: The West really shouldn't do anything but to keep quiet and mind it's own business. The West interfering in Russia's internal affairs will only make things worse because to the people it will confirm what the radical nationalists say and empower them.
We don't want the Liberal Democrats getting any more votes.
The west has no business standing up against violations of human rights!
Could you be any bigger of an apologist? Seriously?
Even if somehow transgenders and others of similar lifestyle choice were even different than normal people (they are not), then they are one of the furthest things from the top of what should be Russia's "to improve" list. That whole country is going insane, when looked at from a westerner's eyes.
Iron_Captain wrote: The West really shouldn't do anything but to keep quiet and mind it's own business. The West interfering in Russia's internal affairs will only make things worse because to the people it will confirm what the radical nationalists say and empower them.
We don't want the Liberal Democrats getting any more votes.
The west has no business standing up against violations of human rights!
Could you be any bigger of an apologist? Seriously?
Iron_Captain wrote: The West really shouldn't do anything but to keep quiet and mind it's own business. The West interfering in Russia's internal affairs will only make things worse because to the people it will confirm what the radical nationalists say and empower them.
We don't want the Liberal Democrats getting any more votes.
The west has no business standing up against violations of human rights!
Could you be any bigger of an apologist? Seriously?
Guantanamo.
British Colonial Days...
Wanna play this game?
Sure, I'll play. That was then this is now.
Human rights were calculated differently in the 19th century and the 21st, and things were different then, besides the colonial era was a strange time. The British Empire took more land from more people than any empire in human history. It also blocked slavery, much to the chagrin of the "freedom loving" USA.
Lets not have a pissing contest, you go back far enough and everyone hands are dirty.
Americans didnt ask nicely for Indian land, and the Americans that came from Europe came from land their ancestors stole.
I find it best summed up in a rehash of a racist slogan of the far right in the UK: "Britain for the British..." with the suffix of "...Saxons and Normans go home".
We are all the decendents of invaders, with exception of selected native peoples, with tracable geneology, most in Australasia.
Ashiraya wrote: Ah jes, we must stop those terrible transgenders from making the streets unsafe.
Just to weigh in on that, keep in mind that since 2013, Russian are allowed to be intoxicated while driving up to 0.035%. Because clearly, that's on par with other stuff like having a sex fetish.
...how on earth are you even going to prove someone having a fetish?!
Medium of Death wrote: Here are a couple of times where intervening in a country's affairs on these types of grounds went horribly wrong, Rhodesia and South Africa.
Wait, who intervened in Rhodesia? I thought they were pretty much on their own after UDI?
Medium of Death wrote: Here are a couple of times where intervening in a country's affairs on these types of grounds went horribly wrong, Rhodesia and South Africa.
We aren't intervening in Russia, all that's being applied are certain sanctions that take effect outside of Russia. Foreigners don't have a complete right to travel and do business in our countries unless we wish them to. If we wish to restrict the freedoms of certain russian citizens and businesses in response to their supporting invasions of other counties, that happens to be "our business" as Iron Curtain puts it, we can chose who to do business with for our own reasons. We can pass comment on Russian legislation being prejudiced and discriminatory if we like, we do have a greater freedom of speech and in the press than Russian after all. None of this adds up to intervening with Russia. If any of this results in hurting the Russia's interests or it's economy, then really it's for them to reflect upon their own actions. There may be consequences for them throwing their weight around internationally and oppressing certain demographics in their own country, that's their choice, and we aren't obliged to do trade with them or give them free passage around the world.
Iron Captain's response is basically telling us to mind our own business and not pay attention to things Russia does, and carry on dealing with them as though business is normal. Well sorry, sometimes you don't always like the look of people you're doing business with.
Agreed.... If we're still living in a Westphalian system, then there's very little (actually, nothing) that we can/should do to stop Russia, beyond sending them hate mail and saying theyre bad.
My last name is Westphal. I like that I have a system named after me.
Hate to burst your bubble... but you don't really... the system is named after the Treaties of Westphalia, or Peace of Westphalia, as that is the location in Germany where they were made, thus ending the 30 years war, and setting up the "system" we've all been somewhat using for the last 4-5 hundred years.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Medium of Death wrote: Here are a couple of times where intervening in a country's affairs on these types of grounds went horribly wrong, Rhodesia and South Africa.
Also, what intervention are you talking about for South Africa??
Medium of Death wrote: Here are a couple of times where intervening in a country's affairs on these types of grounds went horribly wrong, Rhodesia and South Africa.
Wait, who intervened in Rhodesia? I thought they were pretty much on their own after UDI?
Pushing for Black Majority rule sooner than would have worked? Leading them to declare UDI? The Sanctions that followed that?
Howard A Treesong wrote:
Medium of Death wrote: Here are a couple of times where intervening in a country's affairs on these types of grounds went horribly wrong, Rhodesia and South Africa.
We aren't intervening in Russia, all that's being applied are certain sanctions that take effect outside of Russia. Foreigners don't have a complete right to travel and do business in our countries unless we wish them to. If we wish to restrict the freedoms of certain russian citizens and businesses in response to their supporting invasions of other counties, that happens to be "our business" as Iron Curtain puts it, we can chose who to do business with for our own reasons. We can pass comment on Russian legislation being prejudiced and discriminatory if we like, we do have a greater freedom of speech and in the press than Russian after all. None of this adds up to intervening with Russia. If any of this results in hurting the Russia's interests or it's economy, then really it's for them to reflect upon their own actions. There may be consequences for them throwing their weight around internationally and oppressing certain demographics in their own country, that's their choice, and we aren't obliged to do trade with them or give them free passage around the world.
Iron Captain's response is basically telling us to mind our own business and not pay attention to things Russia does, and carry on dealing with them as though business is normal. Well sorry, sometimes you don't always like the look of people you're doing business with.
I'm focusing more on their internal policy and the thread topic. How they run their country. Obviously we can criticise it but it's not really sanction worthy is it? It'd be very hypocritical
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Automatically Appended Next Post:
Medium of Death wrote: Here are a couple of times where intervening in a country's affairs on these types of grounds went horribly wrong, Rhodesia and South Africa.
Also, what intervention are you talking about for South Africa??
Medium of Death wrote: Here are a couple of times where intervening in a country's affairs on these types of grounds went horribly wrong, Rhodesia and South Africa.
Wait, who intervened in Rhodesia? I thought they were pretty much on their own after UDI?
Pushing for Black Majority rule sooner than would have worked? Leading them to declare UDI? The Sanctions that followed that?
Oh, alright. I thought you were referring to more direct intervention.
Hate to burst your bubble... but you don't really... the system is named after the Treaties of Westphalia, or Peace of Westphalia, as that is the location in Germany where they were made, thus ending the 30 years war, and setting up the "system" we've all been somewhat using for the last 4-5 hundred years.
Oh, I knew that, I'm just being goofy. I always thought it was "funny" as my father's German side of the family is named Westphal, and are originally from the Westphalia region, too.
Ashiraya wrote: Ah jes, we must stop those terrible transgenders from making the streets unsafe.
Just to weigh in on that, keep in mind that since 2013, Russian are allowed to be intoxicated while driving up to 0.035%. Because clearly, that's on par with other stuff like having a sex fetish.
...how on earth are you even going to prove someone having a fetish?!
Sorry Sigvatr, I think you are misunderstanding the nature of the decree and law change. Its not about justice, its about labeling.
The people who decided if a driver has a fetish and should lose his or her license are those in power.
Also it helps the mob get riled about perverts in the society, perverts who cross dress, or are gay, or hate Putin's government, who are likely the worst perverts of them all.
Don't try to reconcile what is going on with any form of procedural justice. It's not supposed to add up.
Iron_Captain wrote: The West really shouldn't do anything but to keep quiet and mind it's own business. The West interfering in Russia's internal affairs will only make things worse because to the people it will confirm what the radical nationalists say and empower them. We don't want the Liberal Democrats getting any more votes.
The west has no business standing up against violations of human rights!
Could you be any bigger of an apologist? Seriously?
Guantanamo.
British Colonial Days...
Wanna play this game?
Sure, I'll play. That was then this is now.
Human rights were calculated differently in the 19th century and the 21st, and things were different then, besides the colonial era was a strange time. The British Empire took more land from more people than any empire in human history. It also blocked slavery, much to the chagrin of the "freedom loving" USA.
Great argument. Human rights are calculated differently in Russia, and things are different there, besides the post-soviet era is a strange time. The Russian Federation limits the rights of some minorities such as homosexuals. It also ended the cultural supression of many minority peoples and restored the historic rights of some previously persecuted ethnicties such as the Cossacks and Volga Tatars.
Howard A Treesong wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote: I can still see some value in that other law that outlawed promotion of non-traditional lifestyles...
Which law would that be? Pretty much anything passed on the basis of preventing "non-traditional" things reeks of being backward and prejudiced.
That law Western media made such a fuss about last year. It was aimed at preventing the promotion of non-traditional lifestyles, not on non-traditional lifestyles an sich. You can still be completely gay in Russia without any trouble. The only difference is that now your gay club can not have a large flashy neon sign anymore.
Howard A Treesong wrote: Iron Captain's response is basically telling us to mind our own business and not pay attention to things Russia does, and carry on dealing with them as though business is normal. Well sorry, sometimes you don't always like the look of people you're doing business with.
And sometimes, well sorry, you have to let go of your principles in favour of a realistic approach. Sometimes you just need to stop waving around your own cultural values as morally superior and force them upon other peoples with different values.
Iron_Captain wrote: Sometimes you just need to stop waving around your own cultural values as morally superior and force them upon other peoples with different values.
In the case of Russias politics of discriminating against homosexuals and trans, their cultural values are obviously morally inferiour to those of most western countries. It is no problem comparing different values and point out which are better or not, objectively.
It is not easy being homosexual in Russia today. Look at the sheer madness Stephen Fry faces:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AegisGrimm wrote: Every major society is either currently a bunch of psychos, or has been in their history.
.
The difference today is that those psychos have modern weapons, can start war and launch nuclear weapons. Which gives greater need for action against psychos today than previously.
Orlanth wrote: Don't try to reconcile what is going on with any form of procedural justice. It's not supposed to add up.
Its a form of justice known as social justice. Right and wrong are determined by popularity and propaganda. It does add up, just not the way regular 'justice' does.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Baxx wrote: The difference today is that those psychos have modern weapons, can start war and launch nuclear weapons. Which gives greater need for action against psychos today than previously.
They've had nukes and modern weapons for longer than i've been alive. Sometimes you do have to draw a line in the sand, but if you're going to start a potential nuke war i'd sincerely hope you had a good reason.
Orlanth wrote: Don't try to reconcile what is going on with any form of procedural justice. It's not supposed to add up.
Its a form of justice known as social justice. Right and wrong are determined by popularity and propaganda. It does add up, just not the way regular 'justice' does.
Iron_Captain wrote: Sometimes you just need to stop waving around your own cultural values as morally superior and force them upon other peoples with different values.
In the case of Russias politics of discriminating against homosexuals and trans, their cultural values are obviously morally inferiour to those of most western countries. It is no problem comparing different values and point out which are better or not, objectively.
Please explain to me how you can 'objectively' judge a culture. What you are saying sounds like some kind of cultural fascism.
Baxx wrote: It is not easy being homosexual in Russia today. Look at the sheer madness Stephen Fry faces:
Being homosexual is not easy in Russia today. That is very true. But being homosexual has long been hard in Russia, it did not just start in the Russian Federation.
Russia's cultural intolerance towards homosexuality is something that slowly has evolved over time since the Middle Ages. Medieval Russia used to be highly tolerant of homosexuality, but this official tolerance ended when Peter the Great outlawed it because ironically, he wanted to westernise Russia and thus followed the West's example in this (funny no, how cultural values change?). After this intolerance and persecution of homosexuals started to increase, but it never really picked up steam until Stalin cracked down on them. So historically, Russia has actually been rather tolerant of homosexuality, but the Soviet period, with its cultural conservatism, saw a massive rise in homophobia. This homophobia became so widespread that it became an integral part of modern Russian identity, which is extremely conservative.
You could say Russia has experienced exactly the reverse development from the West. Instead of growing from intolerance towards tolerance, Russia grew from tolerance to intolerance.
What Stephen Fry faces is not madness. He faces Vitaly Milonov, a man with a vastly different history, culture and values, known for his zealous persecution of homosexuals. Milonov is a highly conservative christian, and his religion is of paramount importance to him. Just look at all the icons, Bibles, model churches and other religious stuff in his office. The guy even has a portrait of the Patriarch hanging on the wall behind him! In Milonov's religion, homosexuality is one of the greatest sins there is. Because of this, Milonov views homosexuality as one of the greatest dangers to mankind, and he has made it his mission to safe Russia's children from eternal damnation by shielding them from this great sin. He is not mad. In fact he is very intelligent and perfectly reasonable. He just follows a completely different line of logic than you do. Not all humans think and reason in the same way, and culture and ubringing has massive influence on what a person sees as logical and on how he thinks and acts. And Milonov is far from alone in Russia. A large majority shares his point of view, albeit somewhat more moderately.
And now tell me, why is your point of view objectively superior to the point of view of all those others?
AegisGrimm wrote: Every major society is either currently a bunch of psychos, or has been in their history.
.
The difference today is that those psychos have modern weapons, can start war and launch nuclear weapons. Which gives greater need for action against psychos today than previously.
And also requires a lot more caution. It is hard to take action against someone who has so much power he could destroy the world if he would like to.
When dealing with Russia, you should leave the stick at home. Use a big juicy carrot instead. That will work. Bringing a stick will just result in Russia coming at you with a bigger stick.
Iron_Captain wrote: The West really shouldn't do anything but to keep quiet and mind it's own business. The West interfering in Russia's internal affairs will only make things worse because to the people it will confirm what the radical nationalists say and empower them.
We don't want the Liberal Democrats getting any more votes.
The west has no business standing up against violations of human rights!
Could you be any bigger of an apologist? Seriously?
Guantanamo.
British Colonial Days...
Wanna play this game?
Yes.
British Colonialism ended decades ago, long before the introduction of human rights into British Law and psyche.Guantanamo Bay still exists today, in violation of American and international law.
So it's not a valid retort. Apples and oranges mate. You could have mentioned Britain's support of American rendition and torture programs...
And you're missing the point entirely. It's hypocritical of us to bleat about human rights in Russia, when we're still drowning unconvicted terror suspects in Cuba.
And you're missing the point entirely. It's hypocritical of us to bleat about human rights in Russia, when we're still drowning unconvicted terror suspects in Cuba.
Nah... you're just trying to stay on that "high horse" mang...
We're a country that'll now drone your ass... and we'd do it to our own citizen (much to my dismay).
*fwiw: we ain't *still* drowning gitmo folks. I believe Obama put a stop to that.
Anyhoo... hypocritical or not, evil men doing evil things does so when good men stays quiet.
Iron_Captain wrote: He faces Vitaly Milonov, a man with a vastly different history, culture and values, known for his zealous persecution of homosexuals. Milonov is a highly conservative christian, and his religion is of paramount importance to him. Just look at all the icons, Bibles, model churches and other religious stuff in his office. The guy even has a portrait of the Patriarch hanging on the wall behind him!
See, I have loads of Gundam models but I don't zealously follow the principles of Char Aznable.
Iron_Captain wrote: He faces Vitaly Milonov, a man with a vastly different history, culture and values, known for his zealous persecution of homosexuals. Milonov is a highly conservative christian, and his religion is of paramount importance to him. Just look at all the icons, Bibles, model churches and other religious stuff in his office. The guy even has a portrait of the Patriarch hanging on the wall behind him!
See, I have loads of Gundam models but I don't zealously follow the principles of Char Aznable.
So, yeah, it is madness.
He's clearly a buffoon just like strongly homophobic people in our own counties, unfortunately he has influence in running it. He's not highly intelligent and reasonable, because he spouts total nonsense that isn't evidence based. It's not just a different but equally valid logic as Iron Captain argues. The guy is just wrong and saying stuff that doesn't stand up under any 'logic' other than that coming from a very conservative reading of a holy book. If you're just going to legislate based on scripture instead of looking at the facts and evidence of actual threat, then you're no better than the loonies running counties in the Middle East that imprison people for dancing in the street. Well I suppose Russia did imprison people for dancing in a church, so they aren't far off.
Why? I'm just saying that no one gets to sling mud on that particular argument. Hell, it's one of the causes many cultures aren't around anymore.
I'm not even getting there. If you're comparing NA pilgrims / founding fathers to modern ("modern") Russia, then this is gonna be a fruitless endavour.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: All this thread is confirming is that Bronze Age religions are incompatible with thinking, compassionate human beings, amongst other things.
Which religion would that be? All Abrahamic religions came to be after the Bronze age.
They've had nukes and modern weapons for longer than i've been alive. Sometimes you do have to draw a line in the sand, but if you're going to start a potential nuke war i'd sincerely hope you had a good reason.
As Sting said, "I hope the russians love their children too". I am not convinced jihadists for instance love their children when they encourage them to martyrdom and suicide bombings. That is a difference.
Iron_Captain wrote: Sometimes you just need to stop waving around your own cultural values as morally superior and force them upon other peoples with different values.
In the case of Russias politics of discriminating against homosexuals and trans, their cultural values are obviously morally inferiour to those of most western countries. It is no problem comparing different values and point out which are better or not, objectively.
Please explain to me how you can 'objectively' judge a culture. What you are saying sounds like some kind of cultural fascism.
Easily. I loan the example from Sam Harris. Imagine an isolated society with a tradition of sticking out the eyes of every third-born baby.
Can you say that this is morally inferiour to any culture without this practice? Or would it be fascism to do so?
Iron_Captain wrote: He faces Vitaly Milonov, a man with a vastly different history, culture and values, known for his zealous persecution of homosexuals. Milonov is a highly conservative christian, and his religion is of paramount importance to him. Just look at all the icons, Bibles, model churches and other religious stuff in his office. The guy even has a portrait of the Patriarch hanging on the wall behind him!
See, I have loads of Gundam models but I don't zealously follow the principles of Char Aznable.
So, yeah, it is madness.
He's clearly a buffoon just like strongly homophobic people in our own counties, unfortunately he has influence in running it. He's not highly intelligent and reasonable, because he spouts total nonsense that isn't evidence based. It's not just a different but equally valid logic as Iron Captain argues. The guy is just wrong and saying stuff that doesn't stand up under any 'logic' other than that coming from a very conservative reading of a holy book. If you're just going to legislate based on scripture instead of looking at the facts and evidence of actual threat, then you're no better than the loonies running counties in the Middle East that imprison people for dancing in the street. Well I suppose Russia did imprison people for dancing in a church, so they aren't far off.
Again, this is just your point of view. You and I think what he says is total nonsense, but to millions of others out there, it makes perfect sense. He derives his logic from a holy book he strongly believes in, you derive your logic from different sources. What he says is wrong according to your logic, but right according to his. Truth is relative.
Also, I hope you realise the difference between religion and fiction. People generally do not cover their rooms in religious symbols unless they follow that religion's principles.
Iron_Captain wrote: Sometimes you just need to stop waving around your own cultural values as morally superior and force them upon other peoples with different values.
In the case of Russias politics of discriminating against homosexuals and trans, their cultural values are obviously morally inferiour to those of most western countries. It is no problem comparing different values and point out which are better or not, objectively.
Please explain to me how you can 'objectively' judge a culture. What you are saying sounds like some kind of cultural fascism.
Easily. I loan the example from Sam Harris. Imagine an isolated society with a tradition of sticking out the eyes of every third-born baby.
Can you say that this is morally inferiour to any culture without this practice? Or would it be fascism to do so?
Reductio ad absurdum. When you find an actual society with a practice like that, come back and tell me. Before I can comment on such a thing it would be neccessary to know a whole lot more about that culture.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: All this thread is confirming is that Bronze Age religions are incompatible with thinking, compassionate human beings, amongst other things.
Which religion would that be? All Abrahamic religions came to be after the Bronze age.
Also, I hope you realise the difference between religion and fiction. People generally do not cover their rooms in religious symbols unless they follow that religion's principles.
Generally it's that people seem to believe one of them is real. Besides that, no difference.
Iron_Captain wrote: He faces Vitaly Milonov, a man with a vastly different history, culture and values, known for his zealous persecution of homosexuals. Milonov is a highly conservative christian, and his religion is of paramount importance to him. Just look at all the icons, Bibles, model churches and other religious stuff in his office. The guy even has a portrait of the Patriarch hanging on the wall behind him!
See, I have loads of Gundam models but I don't zealously follow the principles of Char Aznable.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: All this thread is confirming is that Bronze Age religions are incompatible with thinking, compassionate human beings, amongst other things.
Which religion would that be? All Abrahamic religions came to be after the Bronze age.
Judaism is definitely a bronze age religion.
Christianity and Islam are definitely not, however. It's arguable as to whether or not Judaism qualifies.
Well, at what point did Judaism become Judaism? I expect that at some point, a mish mash of wandering tribes and religious traditions and legends were amalgamated into the ethnicity and religion we now know as Judaism.
Back then in the Bronze Age, these "Jews" probably didn't call themselves that.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Well, at what point did Judaism become Judaism? I expect that at some point, a mish mash of wandering tribes and religious traditions and legends were amalgamated into the ethnicity and religion we now know as Judaism.
Back then in the Bronze Age, these "Jews" probably didn't call themselves that.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: And you're missing the point entirely. It's hypocritical of us to bleat about human rights in Russia, when we're still drowning unconvicted terror suspects in Cuba.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: All this thread is confirming is that Bronze Age religions are incompatible with thinking, compassionate human beings, amongst other things.
Which religion would that be? All Abrahamic religions came to be after the Bronze age.
Judaism is definitely a bronze age religion.
Christianity and Islam are definitely not, however. It's arguable as to whether or not Judaism qualifies.
1400 BC is about the date of the formation of the original Jewish kingdom in Israel (post Exodus). That puts it firmly in the Bronze Age.
Has the religion evolved since then? Certainly. So has every other religion on the planet. It was still Judaism though.
Discrimination is wrong, everywhere. Civil and human rights abuses are wrong, everywhere. I don't care about "oh, the west should leave Russia alone". What Russia is doing is wrong. Other people do things that are wrong but that does not excuse wrong acts.
Medium of Death wrote: What moral authority do you have to say that what another country is doing is "wrong" if you also do things that could be considered "wrong"?
What exactly do you propose to combat this "problem"?
If I also do things? Tell me, what do I do that is wrong?
Medium of Death wrote: What moral authority do you have to say that what another country is doing is "wrong" if you also do things that could be considered "wrong"?
What exactly do you propose to combat this "problem"?
If I also do things? Tell me, what do I do that is wrong?
Are you a country?
Supporting Saudi Arabia could be one. Extremely homophobic country.
Medium of Death wrote: What moral authority do you have to say that what another country is doing is "wrong" if you also do things that could be considered "wrong"?
What exactly do you propose to combat this "problem"?
If I also do things? Tell me, what do I do that is wrong?
I'm suggesting it's a bit hypocritical to suggest that Russia should somehow be punished for its views on Homosexuals while giving support to places like Saudi.
I'm suggesting it's a bit hypocritical to suggest that Russia should somehow be punished for its views on Homosexuals while giving support to places like Saudi.
Well considering the UK and Saudi Arabia have ties just about as close as ours, I'd watch how hard you cast them stones... might chip your walls.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: I'm referring to the weekly American Homophobia discussions. In case that wasn't obvious enough...
The only discussion of late has been the topic of how Russia is discriminating against them, and somehow you lovely Europeans have again turned it into a Bash America discussion. *rolls eyes*
I'm suggesting it's a bit hypocritical to suggest that Russia should somehow be punished for its views on Homosexuals while giving support to places like Saudi.
Well considering the UK and Saudi Arabia have ties just about as close as ours, I'd watch how hard you cast them stones... might chip your walls.
I despise my own government as much as I do yours.
I'm suggesting it's a bit hypocritical to suggest that Russia should somehow be punished for its views on Homosexuals while giving support to places like Saudi.
Well considering the UK and Saudi Arabia have ties just about as close as ours, I'd watch how hard you cast them stones... might chip your walls.
Do you assume everything is an attack on America? We've had lots of people from different countries, including the UK, suggest what Russia is doing is wrong. Most of those countries support Saudi.
Nice counter argument though considering I'm not even supporting doing anything about Russia treating homosexuals the way they do.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: America's just as homophobic as Russia, according to Dakka Dakka Off Topic. Something in the book you read I guess.
I have a hard time believing that. America has got plenty of homophobia, but I think it doesn't even come close to Russia.
Altough, public opinion in Russia towards gay people does seem to be improving.
In a poll in 1989, 31% of Russians were of the opinion that gay people should be executed for their sin, while in in 1994, when asked the same question, only 23% thought executing gay people was a great idea. So much progress!!!
No really, outside of Islamic countries or Belarus, you are probably not going to find a more conservative and homophobic country than Russia.
Easily. I loan the example from Sam Harris. Imagine an isolated society with a tradition of sticking out the eyes of every third-born baby.
Can you say that this is morally inferiour to any culture without this practice? Or would it be fascism to do so?
Reductio ad absurdum.
When you find an actual society with a practice like that, come back and tell me. Before I can comment on such a thing it would be neccessary to know a whole lot more about that culture.
You need to know more about a culture to condemn the practice of sticking out eyes of babies because of religious tradition?
If that's the case, nothing I can say will have any effect.
You know, here's the thing. I'm not saying this as an American, but as an individual. I believe this to be wrong. And discrimination is pretty resolutely in the wrong, only those who discriminate themselves disagree, and they will still object when then they are discriminated against themselves.
Co'tor Shas wrote: You know, here's the thing. I'm not saying this as an American, but as an individual. I believe this to be wrong. And discrimination is pretty resolutely in the wrong, only those who discriminate themselves disagree, and they will still object when then they are discriminated against themselves.
Co'tor Shas wrote: You know, here's the thing. I'm not saying this as an American, but as an individual. I believe this to be wrong. And discrimination is pretty resolutely in the wrong, only those who discriminate themselves disagree, and they will still object when then they are discriminated against themselves.
All discrimination is wrong?
Yes.
I wonder what you are trying to jump on me, I hope if I guess right!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Although I should explain that I am talking about discrimination of people belong to groups and what have you, not keeping known child predators away from school and stuff like that.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Although I should explain that I am talking about discrimination of people belong to groups and what have you, not keeping known child predators away from school and stuff like that.
But if you don't play the semantic game how will you win? HOW WILL YOU WIN?
Co'tor Shas wrote: Although I should explain that I am talking about discrimination of people belong to groups and what have you, not keeping known child predators away from school and stuff like that.
But if you don't play the semantic game how will you win? HOW WILL YOU WIN?
No it isn't. Judaism was founded around 600 BCE, and the Bronze Age in Middle East ended around 1200 BCE. Jews can trace their history back farther than that, but Judaism as we know it today came into being around that time.
No it isn't. Judaism was founded around 600 BCE, and the Bronze Age in Middle East ended around 1200 BCE. Jews can trace their history back farther than that, but Judaism as we know it today came into being around that time.
In a poll in 1989, 31% of Russians were of the opinion that gay people should be executed for their sin, while in in 1994, when asked the same question, only 23% thought executing gay people was a great idea. So much progress!!!
Perhaps President Putin intends to conform to the progressive concensus by reducing the firing squads by 8%.
It is very much just propaganda, yes.
There is no way they are really going to check your sexuality when you want to get a driver's license. That would be comical.
It is very much just propaganda, yes.
There is no way they are really going to check your sexuality when you want to get a driver's license. That would be comical.
No but you could have police stops with the equivalent of the breathalyzer test with porn images.
My eyes bleed just by reading this. While the underlying idea is correct, this study is just so bad >.<
- assigning homophobia based on the subject's answer - n = 70 - homophobia score from 1980. NINETEENEIGHTY. That's 35 YEARS from now and was 16 years back then. - heterosexual, male homosexual and...lesbian? Terminology? - if you let another man put something on your penis to..measure...science...then chances are...
It is very much just propaganda, yes.
There is no way they are really going to check your sexuality when you want to get a driver's license. That would be comical.
Bit more difficult to hide being transgender though.
Sigvatr wrote: My eyes bleed just by reading this. While the underlying idea is correct, this study is just so bad >.<
- assigning homophobia based on the subject's answer
- n = 70
- homophobia score from 1980. NINETEENEIGHTY. That's 35 YEARS from now and was 16 years back then.
- heterosexual, male homosexual and...lesbian? Terminology?
- if you let another man put something on your penis to..measure...science...then chances are...
Penis is fine, everyone knows it's only gay if the balls touch. Maybe they need to reinforce the study with hard facts from, say, phrenology? At least that's something they can check if they pull you over: sorry sir, you have a bump on the 'gay' part of your skull. We're impounding your vehicle, you're going to have to come with us to have your penis tested.
It'll end up being a popularity contest, just like everything else. People will make false accusations to 'get' people they don't like for whatever reason. But if everyone is focusing on who is driving while under the influence of gay, they may not focus on things like food supply shortages, crumbling infrastructure, etc.
No it isn't. Judaism was founded around 600 BCE, and the Bronze Age in Middle East ended around 1200 BCE. Jews can trace their history back farther than that, but Judaism as we know it today came into being around that time.
1400 BC is about the date of the formation of the original Jewish kingdom in Israel (post Exodus). That puts it firmly in the Bronze Age.
Has the religion evolved since then? Certainly. So has every other religion on the planet. It was still Judaism though.
Judaism didn't exist when the first Kingdom of Israel was founded. There were no Jews then, just Israelites.
According to the history I have read King david was about 900 BC . there were two or 3 kings before him? I'm doubting the 600 BC . I got the 900 bc from records about a king from around the same time.(from tyre)
Medium of Death wrote: I'm suggesting it's a bit hypocritical to suggest that Russia should somehow be punished for its views on Homosexuals while giving support to places like Saudi.
You can be friends (or in the case of countries, allies) with someone and not agree with everything they do, or think certain things they do are wrong. It's not hypocritical to point out something wrong when someone else does it either. Just because you point out that you think something is wrong when Russia does it doesn't mean you don't think it's wrong when Saudi Arabia does it, unless you really believe you have to have a laundry list of caveats every time you post an opinion on something.
Medium of Death wrote: I'm suggesting it's a bit hypocritical to suggest that Russia should somehow be punished for its views on Homosexuals while giving support to places like Saudi.
You can be friends (or in the case of countries, allies) with someone and not agree with everything they do, or think certain things they do are wrong. It's not hypocritical to point out something wrong when someone else does it either. Just because you point out that you think something is wrong when Russia does it doesn't mean you don't think it's wrong when Saudi Arabia does it, unless you really believe you have to have a laundry list of caveats every time you post an opinion on something.
Pointing it out is fine, still undeniably hypocritical though. I'm talking about actual punishment. Like if additional sanctions were added because of this.
Medium of Death wrote: I'm suggesting it's a bit hypocritical to suggest that Russia should somehow be punished for its views on Homosexuals while giving support to places like Saudi.
You can be friends (or in the case of countries, allies) with someone and not agree with everything they do, or think certain things they do are wrong. It's not hypocritical to point out something wrong when someone else does it either. Just because you point out that you think something is wrong when Russia does it doesn't mean you don't think it's wrong when Saudi Arabia does it, unless you really believe you have to have a laundry list of caveats every time you post an opinion on something.
Pointing it out is fine, still undeniably hypocritical though. I'm talking about actual punishment. Like if additional sanctions were added because of this.
It's not really hypocritical if you acknowledge it. If you denied it, it would be.
Not sure confirming or denying makes a big difference. Look at ISIS: some of them claim they're being discriminated against on religious grounds while simultaneously trying to kill everyone who isn't of their faith. Its harder to claim the morale high ground if you're doing the exact same thing as the person/group/nation you're denouncing.
Condemning an injustice in Russia whilst turning a blind eye to the same injustice in Saudi Arabia (because it happens to your ally) indicates a selective moral outrage.
And I'm talking about Governments here, not members of Dakka Dakka.
We see the same hypocrisy with China. Our British Government claims to be committed to Human Rights, yet quietly casts that commitment aside whenever we need to sign some new trade deal. It also colluded with America in kidnapping, extraditing and torturing terror suspects.
I'm not saying I want Russia to be "left alone", that we shouldn't condemn its disgusting treatment of gays and others. But I do wish our Governments would be more consistent. Selective moral outage proves you don't really care about the issue, you're just doing what's politically expedient.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Condemning an injustice in Russia whilst turning a blind eye to the same injustice in Saudi Arabia (because it happens to your ally) indicates a selective moral outrage.
And I'm talking about Governments here, not members of Dakka Dakka.
We see the same hypocrisy with China. Our British Government claims to be committed to Human Rights, yet quietly casts that commitment aside whenever we need to sign some new trade deal. It also colluded with America in kidnapping, extraditing and torturing terror suspects.
I'm not saying I want Russia to be "left alone", that we shouldn't condemn its disgusting treatment of gays and others. But I do wish our Governments would be more consistent. Selective moral outage proves you don't really care about the issue, you're just doing what's politically expedient.
To be fair the government is consistent, unless you consider Stephen Fry to be the government.
Russian homophobia attracts media attention because it is a topical developing story the UK press has done numerous exposes over the years on Saudi Arabia, including the BBC documentary Death of a Princess in 1979-80 which still has diplomatic ramifications today.
Diplomatic protests were made over Hong Kong recently, but that was due to an obligation to speak out due to treaty history. Russia isn't formally our business, unlike Hong Kong we have signed no treaty which promises the welfare of the Russian people to which we must make protest when their welfare is threatened.
Even much larger nations like the US is saying very little about Putin on this issue, because there isnt anything to say that will actually help. However there is defiance over the Ukraine because we can do something about it, and the damage is far more globally significant.
Hordini wrote: Yes, actually doing something while denouncing someone else for doing the same thing would be hypocritical in most cases.
It doesn't have to be though. If I drink too much alcohol while extoling the virtues of being sober, it doesn't have to be hypocricy, I could very well mean what I say but be too weak of spirit (or having drunk too strong spirit ) to achieve what I want.
Hordini wrote: Yes, actually doing something while denouncing someone else for doing the same thing would be hypocritical in most cases.
It doesn't have to be though. If I drink too much alcohol while extoling the virtues of being sober, it doesn't have to be hypocricy, I could very well mean what I say but be too weak of spirit (or having drunk too strong spirit ) to achieve what I want.
In such a case, you may not be a hypocrite, but you will sound like a hypocrite, and that is all what matters. I mean, if it quacks like a duck, swims like a duck but looks like dog, than it probably is a dog, right?
Hordini wrote: Yes, actually doing something while denouncing someone else for doing the same thing would be hypocritical in most cases.
It doesn't have to be though. If I drink too much alcohol while extoling the virtues of being sober, it doesn't have to be hypocricy, I could very well mean what I say but be too weak of spirit (or having drunk too strong spirit ) to achieve what I want.
In such a case, you may not be a hypocrite, but you will sound like a hypocrite, and that is all what matters. I mean, if it quacks like a duck, swims like a duck but looks like dog, than it probably is a dog, right?
Hordini wrote: Yes, actually doing something while denouncing someone else for doing the same thing would be hypocritical in most cases.
It doesn't have to be though. If I drink too much alcohol while extoling the virtues of being sober, it doesn't have to be hypocricy, I could very well mean what I say but be too weak of spirit (or having drunk too strong spirit ) to achieve what I want.
In such a case, you may not be a hypocrite, but you will sound like a hypocrite, and that is all what matters. I mean, if it quacks like a duck, swims like a duck but looks like dog, than it probably is a dog, right?
Iron_Captain wrote: I mean, if it quacks like a duck, swims like a duck but looks like dog, than it probably is a dog, right?
Not if empirical studies and logic show that the animal is, in fact, a dog. Petty populist arguments shouldn't carry much weight anywhere, and it's not something I would expect of Dakka to be honest. Despite our differences in opinion, we're generally at least trying to come at issues from a logical point of view.
Iron_Captain wrote: I mean, if it quacks like a duck, swims like a duck but looks like dog, than it probably is a dog, right?
Not if empirical studies and logic show that the animal is, in fact, a dog. Petty populist arguments shouldn't carry much weight anywhere, and it's not something I would expect of Dakka to be honest. Despite our differences in opinion, we're generally at least trying to come at issues from a logical point of view.
True.
But when have empirical studies and logic ever convinced someone? Populist rhetoric just works so much better.
Hordini wrote: Yes, actually doing something while denouncing someone else for doing the same thing would be hypocritical in most cases.
It doesn't have to be though. If I drink too much alcohol while extoling the virtues of being sober, it doesn't have to be hypocricy, I could very well mean what I say but be too weak of spirit (or having drunk too strong spirit ) to achieve what I want.
Most of the Russian dash cam stuff you can find anywhere.
The tank crossing was a bit of a shock though.
As for Russians suddenly dropping down in front of you. The dashcam shows only half the story.
I knew some missionaries out in Russia and they told me about this. Its a car jacking/heavy begging/lawsuit fraud attempt (individual cases vary). Excluding natural cases when people slip on ice.
In Russia someone will just flop down in front of the car, with no ice about or obvious fall. They might be very drunk, might not. NEVER GET OUT OF THE CAR, in fact drive around them and carry on.
If you do you might get car jacked, or you might get people in your car who wont leave until you give them a handout, or the guy on the ground may phone the police and you might need a bribe to contin ue your way plus compensation to the guy you 'ran over'.
Well, the tank crossing the road was not weird at all. At least not there. In any other place in Russia it would be weird, but that video was shot in Nizhny Tagil, near, Uralvagonzavod, the largest tank factory in the world. The tank was just driving over a normal crossroad that was snowed in. In the longer version of the video you can see the car actually stops for a red traffic light. The other cars ahead ignored the red light. So really nothing out of the ordinary.
I've always liked this one with the cannon better:
I knew some missionaries out in Russia and they told me about this. Its a car jacking/heavy begging/lawsuit fraud attempt (individual cases vary). Excluding natural cases when people slip on ice. In Russia someone will just flop down in front of the car, with no ice about or obvious fall. They might be very drunk, might not. NEVER GET OUT OF THE CAR, in fact drive around them and carry on. If you do you might get car jacked, or you might get people in your car who wont leave until you give them a handout, or the guy on the ground may phone the police and you might need a bribe to contin ue your way plus compensation to the guy you 'ran over'.
Very good tip. Most of the time those people are just drunk, but some of them are sneaky.
Maybe they need to reinforce the study with hard facts from, say, phrenology? At least that's something they can check if they pull you over: sorry sir, you have a bump on the 'gay' part of your skull. We're impounding your vehicle, you're going to have to come with us to have your penis tested.
) to achieve what I want.
