/b/ - Random

It's none of my business. I hope the average user of this site is smart enough to ask himself why he's being forced to have such a strong stance on the matter, pro-Ukraine or otherwise.

>>3410
I live in a country that shares a border with Ukraine, does that give me a right to form a strong opinion about it?

>>3409
I think it's good because the world was stagnating and drifting into a very weird direction. Finally people have some sort of solidarity again and have been forced to remember what the privilege of living in a more or less free country means.
Also people completely forgot to give a shit about covid by now, so the hotboy summer 2022 probably wont be cancelled.

The funny thing is that those people who have always been against war and selling weapons and armory are now the ones demonstrating to send more weapons to ukraine.

I hope the new won vigilance, activity and connectivity between western states - especially the wish to be independend from russia gaswise - makes it possible to accelerate the progress of green energy to a state where green energy isn't just a meme for rich managers to cricle jerk about.

Also russia heavily fucked up by underestimating the ukrainian military by only sending old trash there. The war is really important for china to see what would could if they'd attack Taiwan. China has been underestimating the power of the west lately, because the west was as well.

In the end all I want is a more or less stable life without big tech stealing my data, not having to fear starvation or being enslaved by companies and a world in which all of humanity can life under such circumstances. I think the reactions and outcomes of this war can be a step towards this dream, probably not though.

>>3411
>>3409
What are your opinions about it?

>>3410
ouuuuuuuu. Vague and spooky- I like it.

>>3410
How about me, can I have a "strong stance" about it if my country shares a border with Russia and has fought numerous wars against them in the past? Is it none of my business?

>>3414
Of course, smartass, I was talking about how the countries least affected by the conflict are the ones freaking out the hardest about it.

>>3415
I understand that you might find the media hysteria annoying, but you are being irrational if you think countries least affected are "freaking out" the hardest. You don't have a clue how people are reacting in EU countries, especially post-Soviet states and other neighboring countries who have experienced Russian invasion in their past.
For us this is not just annoying hysteria on the TV that you can turn off and take a centrist position like you have done. Our countries have been in the same position as Ukraine: we also had to fight Russia with our blood and flesh to protect our independence. We also had to put up with their aggression, propaganda, false flags and attempts at establishing a puppet government. Sadly it's nothing new to us.
Some people naively believed that Russia would change after the collapse of the Soviet Union. They would become a democracy and happily co-exist with the rest of the free world. With the invasion of Ukraine Putin has finally convinced even the blindest believer that this is not what happened. He continues the long tradition of totalitarian leadership, imperialism and cruelty that Russia has practiced for over half a millenium. It's sad for the neighboring countries but especially sad for the Russian people.
>>3412
I agree with many of your thoughts. The world was indeed becoming stagnated and it's good to see how people are becoming more focused.

>>3418
You're right. I was thinking about non-combatant nations who don't have a chance of being caught in the crossfire, and forgot to say "besides the people at actual imminent risk." The hysteria and polarization is both a trained response (especially in America) and an actively instigated one. I really don't want a war to happen, for the record.

It's really just shown us how it fucks up the average people - Ukrainians getting killed or emigrating, as well as the entire Russian economy getting fucked over.
I don't respect the invasion, but I'm also losing a lot of respect for Zelenskyy who has, for a while, been agitating the conflict along with other globos like the WEF & world leaders

>>3427
>I don't respect the invasion, but I'm also losing a lot of respect for Zelenskyy who has, for a while, been agitating the conflict along with other globos like the WEF & world leaders
Agitating how, exactly? Sounds completely delusional to me. Not surrendering when your country gets invaded is agitation? Responding to the said invasion with economic sanctions is agitation? I don't know, sounds like you have fallen for Kreml propaganda.

>>3430
He made a plea to my country using Churchill's speech, likening this to WW2. He, along with many other leaders and MSM, have been throwing around "WW3" and "Nuclear war" like it's a banana in an ape enclosure. I respect that he's staying in his country and fighting, but the way he tries to appeal to the western world seems distasteful

>>3432
You still haven't really noted what's distasteful?

This is the first instance of a full-scale invasion of a sovereign European nation since WW2. I happen to be quite an optimist when it comes to the possibility of nuclear war. However, I don't see how you can deny this is the closest to it many of us have been in our lifetimes.

>>3432
What makes it distasteful? isn't it quite a well analogy?

Yeah it's bad, buuuut…
The level of news coverage is hypocritical, given that wars with similar humanitarian consequences - such as the ongoing crisis in Yemen - are completely overlooked.

Did you know that the Yemeni war has killed 400,000 people? No? Me neither, because it's never in the news and I had to go looking for articles on it. Latest news is that there is a two-month truce before the air-strikes start again: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-60962188

I wonder why the news coverage is so imbalanced. You could say that it's because the media I follow (in the UK) are closer geographically to Ukraine than Yemen. But this seems irrelevant. People under siege are going hungry in Ukraine. People under siege are starving in Yemen. Humans are suffering terribly in both places, yet one situation is always the most urgent story and the other is meh.

My friend says it's because white people only care when white people are being bombed. It's almost as if we think subconsciously that non-whites are used to being bombed and starving so it's not as big a deal.

>>3488
I don't think either of those explanations are why this gets so much more coverage, I think it's a mix of two things: cultural spheres and holdover attitudes from the Cod War.

Cultural spheres: of course European news orgs are going to care more about European wars (and between what are considered first world nations) than African wars. Especially since all of Eastern Europe is under threat of invasion as well. News spreads first along cultural lines. From Ukraine to all of Eastern Europe, to Western Europe, to the UK; where it is spread all throughout the Anglo-sphere. In America, we hear about it because of our massive cultural ties to the UK, who hear about it from Western Europe, who hear about it form Ukraine/Eastern Europe. And the sensationalizing propagandists we call journalists do the rest. If you're in the UK, think about how little you probably hear about China from the mainstream, despite it being one of the most powerful nations in the world, and being openly opposed to your nation and it's system of government. Because the Chinese are literally more alien, culturally, than Ukraine or Russia.

And the simpler explanation: boomers who still think of Russia as the Soviet Union. The greatest threat to their way of life. Of course they are scared shitless, this is the worst case scenario from 50 years ago made manifest. Obviously things aren't actually that bad, but it's hard to break thought patterns from growing up under the threat of nuclear war with Russia.

>>3488
>>3489
>You could say that it's because the media I follow (in the UK) are closer geographically to Ukraine than Yemen.
>white people only care when white people are being bombed. It's almost as if we think subconsciously that non-whites are used to being bombed and starving so it's not as big a deal.
>boomers who still think of Russia as the Soviet Union. The greatest threat to their way of life. Of course they are scared shitless, this is the worst case scenario from 50 years ago made manifest. Obviously things aren't actually that bad, but it's hard to break thought patterns from growing up under the threat of nuclear war with Russia.

In the discourse regarding the situations in Yemen, Ukraine, and Palestine. I see all of these explanations ringing true.

I've definitely observed the latter two explanations most though, and believe they are correlated. History, and the study of history in schools as we know it, is predominately white. We are taught of European conflicts, American conflicts, and their conflicts with the rest of the world.

Due to this dominant study of history, fresh in the mind of today's Western sphere, the notion that the Soviet Union is an enemy has been maintained. It has also created an incredibly Western-centric view of the world's important places. Ukraine (since we are taught more about it) becomes a much more important and imperative place to us than Palestine or Yemen.

It's also interesting to think about the fact that Ukraine and Russia have been skirmishing since long before the invasion, and nobody outside of Eastern Europe really gave a shit. I think an explanation that's missing is the media realizing that people actually cared this time, and running with it. Politicians, pundits, and corporations realized they could grandstand about it now and get praise for doing so, leading to a slew of coverage and controversies, as they all looked for ways to out virtue signal each other and tear down their opponents virtue signaling. Basically a positive feedback loop of more coverage leading to more responses, leading to more interest, leading to more coverage. Honestly, I'm really fucking sick of hearing about it. I'm American, I'm at no risk as the situation now, and don't think this really has anything to do with me, but I'm constantly beat over the head with news/grandstanding about it. Even the website I use to play chess is talking about it. I wish more people were willing to just be neutral on things.

I've become super skeptical and I still think there isn't even a war.

The west, largely America, pushed for this war. Russia is a lite version of China and the west is looking more like a Bosch painting with each passing year but if I had to choose a side I'd pick Russia just to balance out the power between it and NATO as the latter's hands aren't clean either. Wish there was a union composed of Finland, the Baltics, V4, and Romania instead of being forced between soulless bureaucrats who hate you on an incomprehensible level and sloven cruel oligarchs who would love to outright incorporate you into their borders.
>>3418
Correct me if I'm wrong. Russia used to be a free and socially mobile society due to their roots as a nomadic culture plus viking democracy until the Mongols came and killed or enslaved half the country in under 5 years. The ruling structure of Russian society then became strictly hierarchy as Asian society and many royal/noble families have/had Mongol roots. With the defeat of Novgorod opposing these changed Moscow aliens, we have modern Russia which has been tortured by the FSB to KGB to NKVD to Cheka to Oxrahna to so on.
>>3488
It's just another war backed by the US and Saudi Arabia, they're causing that suffering so why tell their own citizens. Turkmenistan is never talked about in the news aside from some articles saying it's like North Korea (it's not really) because America gets a lot of oil from them.
>>3489
>boomers who still think of Russia as the Soviet Union. The greatest threat to their way of life.
Part of why this war gets so much encouragement I'd like to wager is because these people, politicians and brass, were trained to know of CCCP/Russia and how to understand, spy, conduct war, neutralize, post-war clean-up, establish Democracy(tm) for them. They know nothing else and so now the moment of their lives that was blueballed from them is finally realized and gives them a sense of job security. Same meatsacks who think (or would rather you think as stupid instead of crooks) solar panels drain the sun and nuclear reactors will blow up the planet.
>>3492
Russia has officially invaded and mobilized, that's why it's a deal now.

>>3409
basicly this gif.

even after the fall of the soviet union the imperial ambitions of the kremlin never themselfs went away.

to give the russian rethoric any credence is cringe to say the least and in the end of the day just serves as a justification of killing civillians.

>>3562
>Correct me if I'm wrong.
Your conception of Russian history seems somewhat idealist.
>Russia used to be a free and socially mobile society due to their roots as a nomadic culture plus viking democracy until the Mongols came and killed or enslaved half the country in under 5 years.

Novgorod was more predisposed towards a Roman-style Democracy, because of its function as a merchants republic. One cannot primarily ascribe the centralization of Germanic/Scandinavic Clans towards fiefdoms to cultural factors either. Advances in agriculture allowed for a fundamental decentralization of agriculture, while gradually centralizing the ruling structure. The integration of many former merchants republics was a noticeable characteristic of absolutism, wherein the urban guilds were dissolved into centralized manufacturing geared towards export (Merkantilism).

Though it might seem a modern "Western" democracy reverses this trend, its state apparatus was in fact largely inherited from the absolutism of the 18th century. The local restrictions on trade have shifted towards macroeconomic control and government collusion with naturally forming monopolies, trusts or cartels.

What might be more readily perceivable is, that through Novgorod's annexation by Russia, the state interests there shifted from those of a trader aristocracy of wealthy families and a labor aristocracy organized through guilds towards the absolutist monarchy, that mediated between the land nobility and emerging capitalists. Absolutism acts in the interests of the latter by generally abolishing custom borders and other trade restrictions, yet still reserving privileges to the former, as can be seen by the English Corn Laws or the transformation of serfdom into debt in Russia and parts of Prussia.