Ukraine

[seventh bullet]

Really? Maybe. I recently read something arguing that if they'd move Red Army units closer to the border in the early summer of 1941, the state wouldn't have been threatened with total collapse after Barbarossa. As it was, Jerry got as far as the outer suburbs of Moscow, which shouldn't have been allowed to happen at all. . .

Was the state threatened with 'total' collapse, though?

You can see tank trap/defence memorials on the outer parts of Moscow.

 

[seventh bullet]

Right seventh bullet. That's what happened. That's exactly what happened.

If you can make sense of what he has written in the link you posted up, then good on you. It does not seem you can, as Dugin seems to be saying different things as you describe them (that is, he does not seem to reject nation states at all). But, I suppose you can always get on your high horse, shout abuse and post up pictures of fascists to educate everyone else.

I'm not shouting abuse. I'm talking about what happened.

Like I said, you can't blag this. I admit my own inadequate understanding, maybe you should too?

Tony Blair.

 

[Idris2002]

Was the state threatened with 'total' collapse, though?

You can see tank trap/defence memorials on the outer parts of Moscow.

Well, that was what Adolf hoped for anyway - your implication that I exagerrated the threat may be right, though.

 

[dylanredefined]

Was the state threatened with 'total' collapse, though?

You can see tank trap/defence memorials on the outer parts of Moscow.

Pretty much if the Nazis had had any other plan than kill all the slavs they might have been able to win. Stalin had been warned by the British and His own agents the Germans were going to invade. His army was not on alert and so got smashed. If he had been a bit more proactive he could have prevented it.

 

[DairyQueen]

I'm not shouting abuse. I'm talking about what happened.

Like I said, you can't blag this. I admit my own inadequate understanding, maybe you should too?

Tony Blair.

You do nothing of the sort. I admit I have a hard time following the article you posted up. It appears you do as well, but have never admitted it. You posted up a link where Dugin talks about Russian relations with sovereign states, about the importance of Turkey to retain its 'culture' and politics from western influence and where he talks about strategic partnerships with nation-states as evidence he rejects nation-states. It is tangential to his attempts to find a new way between fascism, communism and capitalism.

 

[CNT36]

Pretty much if the Nazis had had any other plan than kill all the slavs they might have been able to win. Stalin had been warned by the British and His own agents the Germans were going to invade. His army was not on alert and so got smashed. If he had been a bit more proactive he could have prevented it.

I read a book once that claimed Stalin may have deliberately let his army get smashed to start with. He'd seen what blitzkrieg had done to other countries and thought it better to let the Germans advance far into soviet territory. It's a similar plan to the one Alexander used against Napoleon. Never seen it written anywhere else so almost certainly bollocks but what would of happened if everything had been thrown against the Germans on day one?

 

[seventh bullet]

You do nothing of the sort. I admit I have a hard time following the article you posted up. It appears you do as well, but have never admitted it. You posted up a link where Dugin talks about Russian relations with sovereign states, about the importance of Turkey to retain its 'culture' and politics from western influence and where he talks about strategic partnerships with nation-states as evidence he rejects nation-states. It is tangential to his attempts to find a new way between fascism, communism and capitalism.

It's integral to it. Where do you think all this talk of 'culture' comes from? And I was posting earlier about what the end result could be with regard to the division and ordering of the world.

You claimed to have read Dugin and know about his politics earlier but you know nothing about western geopolitics and Eurasianist interpretations of it, the new right in Europe (particularly France), as well as mistaking manifestations of fascism he has called the failed third way for Anthony Gidden's apologia for neoliberalism. He also mentions that by the way, within the context of a liberalism he rejects. No mention of traditionalism, either.

It's clear as day that you're being silly.

Stop it. I'm embarrassed for you.

 

[ViolentPanda]

You do nothing of the sort. I admit I have a hard time following the article you posted up. It appears you do as well, but have never admitted it. You posted up a link where Dugin talks about Russian relations with sovereign states, about the importance of Turkey to retain its 'culture' and politics from western influence and where he talks about strategic partnerships with nation-states as evidence he rejects nation-states. It is tangential to his attempts to find a new way between fascism, communism and capitalism.

It's not "tangential", it's central. I've read the same articles that seventh bullet has posted, as you have. It's apparent to me that Dugin's attempt to carve a "new" political path is based very much on his preconceptions and intellectualisations about nation and culture. He wouldn't be able to theorise his "third way" without the ideological scaffold he'd already constructed around nation and culture.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I read a book once that claimed Stalin may have deliberately let his army get smashed to start with. He'd seen what blitzkrieg had done to other countries and thought it better to let the Germans advance far into soviet territory. It's a similar plan to the one Alexander used against Napoleon. Never seen it written anywhere else so almost certainly bollocks but what would of happened if everything had been thrown against the Germans on day one?

Planning for allowing your fronts to be collapsed, and to concertina inward is a fairly old and respected strategy. I'm pretty sure it goes back to something used by Parmenion during Alexander the Great's conquests, but it could be a lot older.
With regard to Stalin's possible use of it, I think we have to match what was happening with the movement of factory plant east from central and southern Ukraine somewhat before (but mostly after) the invasion.

 

[seventh bullet]

It's not "tangential", it's central. I've read the same articles that seventh bullet has posted, as you have. It's apparent to me that Dugin's attempt to carve a "new" political path is based very much on his preconceptions and intellectualisations about nation and culture. He wouldn't be able to theorise his "third way" without the ideological scaffold he'd already constructed around nation and culture.

I think she's talking about my earlier posts on Dugin's utopian vision of a future world, where the nation-state as we know it today won't be. Although he doesn't elaborate much on these new forms of sovereignty, only that new ways will have to be found. Past and present nationalism and imperialism feeds into that, however.

What DairyQueen is referring to is Dugin's path towards that, and geopolitics is central to it.

 

[Fuchs66]

You can see tank trap/defence memorials on the outer parts of Moscow.

Right next to Mega-Mall and Ikea

 

[seventh bullet]

Indeed, lol.

At Khimki. You can see the red 'hedgehogs.'

 

[Fuchs66]

I hate that carpark and I hate Mega-mall, we always get dragged there by our minders if we have to wait for further transport.

The only good thing about it is sitting at the side of the ice rink, drinking Baltika 7 and watching people, trying to figure skate, landing on their arses regularly.

 

[Idris2002]

Baltika 7, eh? Living the dream!

 

[DairyQueen]

It's integral to it. Where do you think all this talk of 'culture' comes from? And I was posting earlier about what the end result could be with regard to the division and ordering of the world.

You claimed to have read Dugin and know about his politics earlier but you know nothing about western geopolitics and Eurasianist interpretations of it, the new right in Europe (particularly France), as well as mistaking manifestations of fascism he has called the failed third way for Anthony Gidden's apologia for neoliberalism. He also mentions that by the way, within the context of a liberalism he rejects. No mention of traditionalism, either.

It's clear as day that you're being silly.

Stop it. I'm embarrassed for you.

Oh do fuck off. As I said, your ad hominem attacks is your style now. When have you mentioned traditionalism? Its your assertion that Dugin offers a critique of nation-states. The whole basis of Dugin's grandstanding with Europe's far right is this notion that "countries of Europe shouldn't give up their national values and their history". If you're going to post up pictures of the far right and fascists linked to Dugin, you should at least acknowledge that, as I really doubt Gábor Vona's support in Hungary is concerned with Dugin's great spaces (although probably are interested in the multi-polar rhetoric) and far more interested with calling the European Union “a treacherous organisation” that “took away our markets, our factories, and filled the shelves of our shops with western garbage”.

 

[Fuchs66]

Baltika 7, eh? Living the dream!

It's about the best Baltika there is (with the exception of the occasional limited edition brews). I'd rather drink Almaza in Damascus though tbh.

 

[seventh bullet]

Oh do fuck off. As I said, your ad hominem attacks is your style now. When have you mentioned traditionalism? Its your assertion that Dugin represents some kind of genuine critique of nation-states. The whole basis of Dugin's grandstanding with Europe's far right is this notion that "countries of Europe shouldn't give up their national values and their history". If you're going to post up pictures of the far right and fascists linked to Dugin, you should at least acknowledge that, as I really doubt Gábor Vona's support in Hungary is concerned with Dugin's great spaces (although probably are interested in the multi-polar rhetoric) and far more interested with calling "the European Union “a treacherous organisation” that “took away our markets, our factories, and filled the shelves of our shops with western garbage”.

*bangs head against keyboard*

The photo of a 'fascist' is Alain Soral, who is a part of the French new right (I acknowledge that defining a thing is difficult but tell me, where did fascism disappear to all those decades?). You posted an Amazon link to an English edition of Dugin's book The Fourth Political Theory. You know, the one where Soral wrote the foreword, but that's irrelevant.

And where have I mentioned Traditionalism? I posted a link to Mark Sedgwick's book Against the Modern World (which talks about Dugin) in that post you dismissed a while back. The same post with a decent paper by Marlene Laruelle on Dugin's trajectory in Russian politics (included in her book on Russian Eurasianism). But that's shit as well, even though you haven't read it.

And has this thread turned into a posho debating club? If we're going to have rules n' shit, then maybe you should follow them yourself? The above isn't an appeal to authority either, before you try that one, seen as we're doing stuff properly now.

 

[DairyQueen]

I have no idea what that has to do with anything I wrote.

 

[seventh bullet]

<shrugs>

 

[seventh bullet]

Its your assertion that Dugin offers a critique of nation-states. The whole basis of Dugin's grandstanding with Europe's far right is this notion that "countries of Europe shouldn't give up their national values and their history".

Anton Shekhovtsov (with academic wankspeak) on what neo-Eurasianists mean by nation and their (unoriginal) view of the nation-state. The former and latter aren't necessarily the same thing.

It is seemingly difficult to apply the concept of a nation to the ENR, as the thinkers associated with this network certify (or glorify?) the irrevocable death of a nation-state. As de Benoist assumes, '[t]he idea of the nation-state, which reigned in Europe from the Peace of Westphalia until the first half of the 20th century, is today reaching its end'. However, it is possible to surmount this conceptual contradiction in this study as Griffin's approach implies an organic conception of the nation that is not necessarily equated with the nation-state or its existing boundaries, and which is indebted to modern notion of the sovereignty of the 'people' as a discrete supra-individual historical entity and actor.

By repudiating the 'modernist' idea of the nation-state, or a political union of the nation-states (i.e., the European Union), the ENR thinkers propose a seemingly 'post-modernist' concept of 'a decentralized federation of organic, ethno-cultural identities that portray the deep "historical" spirit of cultural Europe'. The concept itself is a result of the ultimately modernist, or rather alternative modernist, re-synthesis of the older notion of organic nationalism that holds that 'nations and their characters are organisms that can be easily ascertained by their cultural differentiae' and 'that the members of nations may, and frequently have, lost their national self-consciousness along with their independence', while 'the duty of nationalists is to restore that self-consciousness and independence to the "reawakened" organic nation'. The re-synthesised nature of the ENR's concept of an organic nation incorporates the New Left's ideas of political regionalism, thus shifting the emphasis from an organic nation to a federation of organic nations, or mythologized 'ethnie as homogeneous historical or ethnic communities]'.

Dugin fully agrees with the ENR concept of organic nations, and defines the 'etnos' (Russian word for the 'ethnie') as an 'immediate identity of an individual of the traditional society, from which he [sic!] draws everything - language, customs, psychological and cultural attitudes, life programme, and system of age-related and social identifications'. Thus, according to Dugin, the etnosy are 'principal values and subjects of human history', which 'live in reconciliation with natural organic cycles, wave-like mutation, etc.'

As Dugin believes the nature of an ethnic community to be superior to, and deeper than, that of a state, Neo-Eurasianism refutes the idea of a modern nation-state, even the Russian one, and promotes the concept of a 'Eurasian empire' built on the principles of 'Eurasian federalism'. According to the concept, all the political units of this 'empire' should be established in accordance with cultural, historical, and ethnic identifications rather than simple administrative division.

Elements of the racist far-right, although narrow in their particular (and in their view outmoded) nationalisms can be seen as allies. Likewise other non-far right nationalists who are actually in power (like Putin) can be allies or otherwise useful in this wider project.

 

[CNT36]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...n-outside-parliamentary-building-9736296.html

Vitaliy Zhuravskiy can be seen wearing a suit and holding his briefcase as he’s ushered to the large refuse bins by a handful of men before being thrown in head first.

According to RT.com, MPs were dumbfounded by the actions of the activists because Mr Zhuravskiy was behind the drafting of a lustration bill that the protesters had gathered to support.

The bill, which was ratified yesterday, forces any MPs who worked under former President Viktor Yanukovich to quit parliament and prevents them from occupying seats in the future.

The official had had liquid and tyres thrown on him while in the bin, in an episode which has since attracted apologies from Maidan activists.

 

[elbows]

Ah yes, the bin.

 

[SovietArmy]

I wish we could do with Cameron like that.

 

[CNT36]

Ah yes, the bin.

Do you know much about the bill?

 

[elbows]

Not much beyond what can quickly be found by googling 'ukraine lustration bill'. I'm really lacking time and quality sources these days

eg: http://en.itar-tass.com/world/749826

The act requires special scrutiny of “persons empowered to perform state or local self-government functions,” including the president, parliamentary speaker, prime minister, deputy prime ministers, chief of national security service, national bank, all people’s deputies, and also military, judges and members of the Central Election Commission.

Lustration procedures will be applicable to all candidates for such positions, too.

A group of persons will never be unable to get such clearance. It includes those who on February 25, 2010 through February 22, 2014 held the posts of the president, prime minister, first deputy prime minister, government minister, national bank, security service, Kiev’s prosecutor or regional prosecutor.

The same restriction applies to all senior officials who were taking their posts between February 25, 2010 and February 22, 2014, in other words, during the Viktor Yanukovich presidency, law enforcers, civil servants and local self-government officials who caused harm to the life health or property of Euromaidan participants, as well as those who before August 19, 1991 took commanding positions in the Soviet Communist Party or the Young Communist League, political commissars of the Soviet Armed Forces and the Soviet Interior Ministry, former secret service officials and persons “involved in the political persecution of Ukrainian national-liberation movement during World War II or post-war years.

 

[dylanredefined]

I read a book once that claimed Stalin may have deliberately let his army get smashed to start with. He'd seen what blitzkrieg had done to other countries and thought it better to let the Germans advance far into soviet territory. It's a similar plan to the one Alexander used against Napoleon. Never seen it written anywhere else so almost certainly bollocks but what would of happened if everything had been thrown against the Germans on day one?

They had a plan to beat the Germans Unfortunatly the Russian Army at that point couldn't do it lacking a lot of stuff they needed to carry it out. If they had been on a higher state of readiness might have scared the Nazis off. Hitler knew he had a small
window of opptunity to defeat Russia. Unfortunatly his plan were based on some wrong ideas like Russia couldn't build lots of tanks etc.

 

[seventh bullet]

Despite its hardships and cruelties there was a large base of support for Stalinism, and as you said before, the racism of the Nazis playing its awful role in how they saw the people/s they set out to conquer...

After the experience of WWI and the civil war the Soviet military (like its western counterparts) had early on started to transform a 'foot and hoof' army into a mechanised force. Not just in terms of research and development, but in accompanying new theory, strategy and tactics (the 'motor-mechanised unit' etc). The industrial base to do so on a large scale wasn't there to start with, not until the Stalinist plans made it possible.

 

[Idris2002]

Despite its hardships and cruelties there was a large base of support for Stalinism, and as you said before, the racism of the Nazis playing its awful role in how they saw the people/s they set out to conquer...

After the experience of WWI and the civil war the Soviet military (like its western counterparts) had early on started to transform a 'foot and hoof' army into a mechanised force. Not just in terms of research and development, but in accompanying new theory, strategy and tactics (the 'motor-mechanised unit' etc). The industrial base to do so on a large scale wasn't there to start with, not until the Stalinist plans made it possible.

"We are one hundred years behind the west, we have ten years to make good the difference".

 

[seventh bullet]

 

[likesfish]

It was still using horses by the end of the war.
Their was a piece by studs trekel a red cross worker at the end of the war.
Who was laughing about the "red menace" the red army was as tired as the british only america rich happy and safe was in a good state