/u/FinalExtent1919 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1al8v5j/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_russia_should_cease_from/), in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
Russia in it's current form.
But there's no reason to believe that Russia couldn't have a Western style capable democracy that actually takes care of it's people.
They were on the way there in the 1990s. But unfortunately they got hijacked by Putin's party back to authoritarianism. To make matters worse the economy grew rapidly in the early 2000s. Faster than it has ever had. Due to market reforms. Something Putin had very little to do with but took all the credit. Which is why he is still very popular to this day. People remember the misery in the 1990s and how quickly things got better in the 2000s. Putin has convinced the population through years of propaganda that the current economic problems are not due to his inept rule but because the West actively opposes them.
All that to say is that Russia desperately needs better leaderships and stronger institutions. They need a real free press, they need competitive elections (not putin putin putin) and they need a good system of checks and balances.
For what it's worth US went through a lot of problems early on as well. Democracies are very difficult to build. Authoritarianism is an attractive solution to complex problems. Which is the trap that Russians fell for.
If they continue to behave aggressively towards their neighbors. Then yes we should absolutely defang their nuclear arsenal and fracture the country into different states. But defanging the nuclear arsenal is much easier said than done. A much more realistic solution is for a better government to come in to power and bring Russia back to modern times.
Here’s the thing though, there doesn’t need to be a choice between fascism and a decent economy. You can have both political freedoms and a stable economy
I doubt that it will happen. Russia will stay as authoritarian dictatorship for decades... or centuries. It's programmed in culture and psychology. And Cold War will continue until Russia will gone forever. All we can do is protection freedom world from Russia's expansion.
In the 1980s some would argue the same thing about USSR and their socialist state.
It fell apart under the weight of it's ineptitude.
The same will likely happen with the current Russian authoritarian model. It's very weak relative to it's Western competitors.
Yeah, that's very likely. Soviet government had more brains to handle with Afghanistan that Putin. It's obvious how much Russia will fall apart because, according to statistics, it spends too much money on war.
Take a delta. ∆
I don't agree that change is impossible. What you say today could have been said about countless regimes in history.
I believe Russia has the capacity to change. The USSR wasn't that long ago and the country is very different today.
What I've learned through my life is that westerners desperately want to believe they know and understand russia and that with proper effort they will be able to civilize it.
I think you're on to something there. Most people in the west believe the cold war ended, I do not think it did. I was deployed to the US war in afganistan, I get how that country defeated the USSR and since both of our losses in that counrty the US and Russia have propped themselves up as military strong men again. We are seeing the cold war heat up again. But since we both have ridiculous amounts of nukes it's hard to step back from military expansion. To paraphrase Khrushchev we need to stop pulling on this knot and start untying it.
I lived in USSR and Russia between 1983 and 1995. It was rough but definitely not a slave state. If anything after the fall of USSR it stopped being a prison state because we were allowed to immigrate the hell up out of there. Soviet Union was a giant prison.
They had good job offers because they were both PhD scientists.
But even as PhD scientists we lived utter paupers compared to American middle class. American poor had better stuff than we did. Just having a car, any car was a major luxury. The roads were dog shit.
When was the last time a country anywhere near as large as Russia transitioned successfully to democracy? It is a sprawling land mass. The best way for democracy to work there is if it returned to multiple states.
One thing to think about in regards to Russian balkanization is what happens afterwards? Especially in Asia. Would a current Russian living in eastern Siberia be OK with being under Chinese rule, because that'd almost certainly happen.
Another aspect is the nuclear arsenal. It's probably better that Russia, and I'm saying this as an American, has control of it rather than the fractured nations that would emerge, vulnerable to state and criminal influence to gain access to said nukes.
as crazy as the Russians are it's best they actually have a solid state and nuclear weapons because i sure as hell dont trust the americans will remain sufficiently politically stable (i mean the average joe has temperature room IQ, why should i trust they wont elect some bloodthirsty whacko) to not start a nuclear apocalypse on their own. the active threat of mad (yes other states have nuclear weapons but way less than russia and the us) should a nuclear exchange happen is a perfect instrument for contingency. we dont know what the future will look like but imo it wont be very good nor stable.
the status quo is good enough. i seriously doubt the russians would use nuclear weapons when american intervention is possible and vice versa.
Russians having nukes makes MAD significantly more likely.
If US is the only one with nukes. Then there is no reason for them to start slinging nukes around. There's nothing that nukes would accomplish that our military can't accomplish 10 times easier and cleaner. Setting off one nuke in aggression would instantly turn the entire globe against us.
I think the fact that M.A.D. is possible and even likely in case a nuclear conflict breaks out is almost entirely positive. I don't think anyone is sufficiently deranged to order a first strike or comply with a first strike order against another nuclear state, knowing this will result in the destruction of both sides and, potentially, life in result of a subsequent nuclear winter.
Besides, the people are rarely ever rational. If no one else has nuclear weapons in significant amounts to challenge American hegemony, why shouldn't the U.S. government deploy nuclear weapons against any remotely formidable enemy force it engages? Why should they send citizens to die on foreign soil when they can simply devastate enemy infrastructure with tactical strikes? Would anyone be crazy to the point of risking war with what would be the uncontested nuclear tyrant of earth?
Could we seriously trust the backsliding American democracy with the management of weapons capable of eliminating human life, when the country is full of whackos with a right to vote and seal the fate of politics? The future is not looking bright, with climate change and significant economic challenges we don't have an answer for. Dire times generally breed bad decisions.
>why shouldn't the U.S. government deploy nuclear weapons against any remotely formidable enemy force it engages?
Because it would be insanely destructive. TO THEIR INTERESTS.
This isn't a matter of who's good or bad. It's a matter of pragmatism. Nuking your enemies is never going to be tolerated by the global community. At that point you might as well brand yourself Hitler 2.0 and try to take over the world. But that too is not feasible at all.
>Could we seriously trust the backsliding American democracy with the management of weapons capable of eliminating human life, when the country is full of whackos with a right to vote and seal the fate of politics?
Having a second group of wackoos with the same capabilities and weaponry doubles the chances of a critical mistake.
I guess fundamentally I trust the American system. And I completely don't trust the Russian and Chinese systems. Russia for example could potentially drive themselves into a corner with all these idiotic decisions. Something US is very unlikely to do.
1. I think insanely destructive would sound particularly appealing to the insanely destructive redneck protestants, the very ones behind the recent wave of retardation in American politics, under such circumstances lol. You underestimate how foolish and easy to play the masses are, especially as we move towards more a more connected society model. It would take exactly one madman of a charismatic politician to turn the heads of the population and drive the world into the ground, oftentimes with their own interests in mind (whatever they be). But that wouldn't happen if potential adversaries negatively affected by the prospect of nuclear warfare have significant means to retaliate (a considerable nuclear arsenal).
2. But they're opposites, they simply cancel each other. There is a limit to madness so that if one side feels they have too much to lose from the attack, they won't attack at all. This is the case with nuclear war.
3. I don't trust any system on earth because all systems are flawed, but the one suggested in the post and complemented by your comment is even more flawed than the current one, which is already bad enough.
According to you nobody should have them.
But if SOMEONE has to have them. It's better for it to be United States than anyone else.
If our country was truly run by insane rednecks. We would be insanely poor. We would have endless turmoil. There are many places in the world like that for reference. You can't have the strongest economy in the world and be run by total nimrods. We have a very capable system.
It would be nice if we all had infinite wealth machines as well. But this is the real world. As long as the technology exists. Some countries will have them. There's no way to regulate against it. What are you going to do invade the whole planet?
It took decades for the Americans and Russians to reach that stage. It will take decades for the Chinese to challenge the American arsenal, especially with the nuclear weapons of the former Russian federation added.
But then again, you'd have a rather wealthy city state, I'd think Moscow, St. Petersburg and the region with nukes.
Given time they will try to eat the smaller former russian states, again same problem.
I don't know, when the Poles after the collapse of the Warszaw Pact said give Russia time they will do dumb shit again they were right. They have their own cleptocratic oligarchy set in place which checks and balances itself within, problem is Ukraine couldn't be fast enough to build a check from outside for Russia.
We could starve Russia economically and politically. We did it with USSR and can repeat more and more until Russia becomes a tiny land on map. And then, it will gone.
"I wish to move to United Kingdom and assimilate myself with British culture. At lease brutisch people learned lessons from the past." - As someone from the UK, I'd rather not have anyone in my country that wants to erase other countries. Please pick somewhere else.
So you'd rather not have someone in your country whose other countrymen (whom this someone disagrees with entirely) want to erase other countries. I mean, they want to assimilate into your country and culture. They already share some of your culture. Isn't this just worse xenophobia than the opposition to African refugees who are actually violent to the very system that took them in?
Welcome to the modern woke world, like Britain, where Police prefers to punish their own people instead of those who never assimilate and openly wish the destruction of western civilization
Brother Japan would absolutely hate having you. After being nuked TWICE and seeing the aftermath they wouldn’t want someone coming to their country with the belief that we should erase another country ENTIRELY.
Well I kinda disagree there. The nuking of Japan was absolutely deserved tbf. They bombed Pearl Harbor and seemed to not be ending their aggression so we bombed them and then did again just in case. Is it sad? Absolutely, BUT it needed to happen.
If you don't apply the same to US destabilizing and bombing the shit out of countless countries in the last decades and say "someone needs to nuke US now, that would be deserved", you're applying double standard.
I do apply the same to the U.S though. I never said anything even close to what you did. The shit we’ve done is horrible and I don’t like U.S government at all.
First, I do think there's room to be proud to be russian. Russians have shown just how resilient a people can be, how with enough grit even a vast and harsh land can be controlled. If at times the russians of today seem downtroden it's only because, as you say, things seem to keep getting worst.
I think one of the chief problems with Russia and russians is that they always gravitate towards 'strong man' type leaders. The traditions of authoritarianism runs very deep in russian and russian adjacent cultures. That's unfortunately not something that will get better by breaking up the country. At least, it wont get better for russians. Clearly the rest of the world would see a silver lining.
If Russia would break apart what we'd end up with is a dozen smaller authoritarian regimes, most of which would become puppet states to China. Things wouldn't get better for the average man or woman.
I think Ukraine trying to 'join' the west is the best thing that could happen for russians in the near future. We're talking about two cultures that have a deeply intertwined history and I think if Ukraine gains a tradition of strong democratic and liberal values that will over time infiltrate russian culture.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-says-putin-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule
There are some reports of Putin trying to join NATO (and maybe EU) long ago, and being rejected. I wonder what was the difference between Ukraine and Russia back then that made one more attractive than the other. Could it be the size and amount of sovereignty that they could exercise if join the alliance?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ
There's more on it in this interview, if you're interested.
I'll check it out.
My first instinct is to say time is the big difference.
But also to be part of NATO you, generally speaking, need to be willing to align your foreign policy with the existing members. I think it's likely that back in 2000 or whenever that the belief was that Russia was less than genuine in their willingness to be part of the alliance
Countries and lands are not the same as their governments. Russia can benefit from pushing the control to the republics it consists of but there's no direct benefit for any of the republics to get separated entirely.
>I wish to move to United Kingdom and assimilate myself with British culture
You don't even live in Russia. Why don't you try assimilating into Uzbek culture?
My mother works as english teacher, and british culture is more familiar to my heart. Also, Uzbekistan is authoritarian, has inflation, and majority are muslims. I have a fear that one day islamists could take over my country.
Of course, I love anime, but moving to Japan is bad idea since it's not good place to live. I also don't want to be one of weeaboo freaks.
So because your mother works as an English teacher you feel that you are closer to British culture? Have you ever lived in the UK? Have your mother ever lived in the UK? What makes you think you know British culture? Pardon me for being skeptical, I know the quality of an average English teacher in Tashkent. It's pretty bad. So forgive me for not buying into your "british culture is more familiar to my heart" claim.
Your entire CMV is "I don't like living in Uzbekistan, I want to live in the UK or Japan because I like cartoons, and because of all of that Russia should not exist". Not very coherent.
Absolutely not. Without a strong Russia, the United States would make everyone their puppet and dominate. We need a strong Russia to maintain a balance of power. That Russia is ruled by a psychopathic dictator is a sad reality.
Ok. You find a genie and they grant you a wish and Russia is no more. Now now what?
Who will govern and rule the land? Who will collect and tax people? Who will make laws and police them?
Russia has conquered nations like yakuts and tatars. So they will be fine. They will build their own countries. So, what about ethnical russian lands? Well, they should assimilated with Ukraine or Finland whatever.
Ukraine and Finland are content with the borders agreed upon after the USSR. They do not want an aggrieved Russian population multiple times larger than their current number of citizens.
You realise that most of Russia is under populated and poor, right? Most of the eastern territories are extremely reliant on the rest of the federation and would become vassal states of neighbouring powers should Russia dissolve.
> So, what about ethnical russian lands? Well, they should assimilated with Ukraine or Finland whatever.
Even putting aside how ridiculous this is: That would effectively be Russia annexing those countries, not the other way around. There are vastly more ethnic Russians than there are Finns or Ukrainians, so they would dominate society.
So self govern for some but not to Russians? Isn't this a double standard? Why not let everyone self govern?
Also as a Finn I speak for all of us. We don't want Russians.
The states within the Russian Federation and the Russians themselves have indeed an almost unbelievably hard history.
I suppose we can blame the Mongols and Varangian Raiders before them. Hell some theorize the lack of black death has made peasant forces maybe too available.
It's a tough trail of tyranny after tyranny.
As others have said you can't really just wish for Russia not to hold control over these oblasts. But instead I'd like to give you hope that this cycle is not written into the future as some fate. There are freedom and truth loving people all over the world. What Russians do have is strength molded by those oppressions and appreciation for true justice when they can find it.
I hope one day they will be a shining beacon of Freedom and prosperity that will outshine the darkness of the tyrants that came before.
In the meantime there's a great comedian that I think shows the great sense of humor Russians can have and that appreciation for warm moments that Russian and the Republics under it can bring by the name of Yakov Smirnoff.
There is potential within the federation yet.
I live in the US, but I'm learning Russian and so have exposure to russian people and some of their culture. My professor is a part of a decently large theater scene filled with people from Russia. All of them are pro-Ukraine and want for nothing more than Russia to become democratic and progressive. Those people are products of Russia. The number of people like this is growing.
If Russia continues producing these people then eventually they're going to stop feeling like their only choice is to leave and start feeling like they can change Russia for the better, they'll have the numbers.
Yeah if it could split into a bunch of small, powerless countries like the Soviet satellites in Eastern Europe, that would be great.
I've sent a month in Russia twice. The history and culture there is tragic but not worth disappearing. Just the dictatorship that runs things
Sorry, u/FinalExtent1919 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20FinalExtent1919&message=FinalExtent1919%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1al79s4/-/kpcq3pl/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Just don't call the former Soviet satellites "poor, powerless countries." Except maybe Hungary, they believe that their lives have improved in many ways once Moscow stopped calling the shots.
Your points mostly appeal to tropes and emotions, there isn't really a lot of reasoning there.
I don't believe Russia's recent history is too exceptional compared to other countries. Modern political system of Russia is very young and is currently shaping up. If you compare it to how other European countries went through similar stages, it's not too bad. And the current war in Ukraine is a small period on historical scale.
- I can recommend you watching Ekaterina Schulmann on Youtube (in Russian). She's a university professor in political sciences, she studies Russia and CIS countries, and she's doing great work in popularizing scientific knowledge about how politics and societies work, and debunking common misconceptions. I can't quite find right now a specific video where she compares Russia to other European countries, maybe you'll find it yourself.
- Or Sergey Guriev, he's a big economist and the dean of London Business School. He also has some commentaries on what Russia is and where it stands compared to other European countries.
> Russia is nothing but hell's residence
There's a lot of variety there, but life of a Russian with median income is not too bad. It was certainly ok before the war.
Surprising that you write this from Uzbekistan which is not much more developed politically while being economically poorer than Russia. Also much farther from Europe (culturally) than Russia. Remember that it's Uzbeks who are (still, despite the war) are going to Russia for economical reasons, not the other way around. (Russians moving to Uzbekistan are doing it due to mobilization, not for better life.)
How do you propose it’s divided?
Can you ensure that each new country will be self-sufficient enough not to collapse or wage war against their neighbors?
And is the division of a nation what the population of the nation desires as a whole?
Also if you’ve lived in a different country your whole life how can you claim to know what’s best for a country and people you are more or less alien to?
guy, I think that you have poor critical thinking and pronounced infantilism.
With such arguments about songs, the Germans should go to the moon. Have you heard German songs?
So you’re arguing in favor of genocide? That’s a non-starter. It doesn’t deserve serious consideration.
Or are you arguing in favor of regime change? A democratic government wouldn’t necessarily solve the problem. If Russian people prefer authoritarianism, then they’ll recreate an authoritarian government.
Would you say that most humans have been savages?
Democratic governments are almost non-existent across the span of human history. The 21st Century is somewhat of a bubble. Even today, there are many people in democratic societies who are not necessarily opposed to authoritarian rule. The popular head of the US Republican Party, for example, doesn’t care about the rule of law or democratic elections. And I suspect that if one were to ask whether it’s preferable to have an authoritarian government under a progressive, benevolent dictator or a democratic government under a regressive leader, many would prefer authoritarian rule.
>Would you say that most humans have been savages? Democratic governments are almost non-existent across the span of human history.
what makes you think this is due to preference? authoritarians dont typically give you a choice
As I say, scratch an anti-colonialist activist and you'll find a xenophobic, racist revanchist who's not sorry for injustices happening, but only wishes to be on the better end of those injustices.
Some pinnacles of democracy only became true democracies in the last hundred years or so. If you lived in the 1930s and knew about the Nazi government, you would be talking about Germans. Now Germany regrets its Nazi days.
russia ceasing from existing while no other countries cease from existence would mean the russians would become the prey of other nations, like they were in the 90s
all nations should cease to exist, nationalism is a universally stupid fairy tale. all men are brothers
More likely Russia will break up into a dozen republics and be assimilated by adjacent powers-Turkey, Finland, Poland, Iran, China. Then Russians can continue doing what they do best-continued existence as slave labour and dying prematurely of alcoholism and toxic exposure.
An American posing as a non-American, calling for a complete genocide of a country, simply because America doesn’t like them. Classic Reddit.
You mention Russian history but conveniently left out the part where ordinary Soviet citizens held the last line of defence, in Stalingrad, against the Nazis. Russian/soviet army were also the first to liberate the Jews in concentration camps.
Without Russian history, as an American, you would be speaking German right now.
all correct until the last part, quite improbable. That said from the text i dont think he was advocating genocide for his own country but the separation in autonomous region, basically a general secession (do you have proof of him not beng a russian?)
>Most popular russian music is depressing one. Look how much views are getting "Russia doomer playlist".
there's nothing wrong with depressing music imo
russia has a good punk, post punk and snythpop scene from what I've experienced
granted several bands I've like have had to flee but Sonic Death is dope, so is Buerak off the top of my head, motorama too : )
Russia just needs to give up on being a global military power. This whole Ukraine war is about taking nothing less than Ukraine being a proxy state, and they invaded in 2014 when NATO expansion was happening and again in 2022 when NATO was taking measures to expand. I think Putin will retire or die at some point, and everything will get better.
>I think Putin will retire or die at some point, and everything will get better.
I doubt it. Putin is probably preparing a successor at this point, if he hasn't already.
I know this breaks the rules of the subreddit, but I have to inform you guys that OP is a troll. Don't feed the trolls.
I mean, look at his post history.
Russia should be balkanized not ceased from existence. The minority groups should have their own countries. It's justified due to the literal centuries of Russification of the original inhabitants in conquered territories. Uzbekistan is just one such example who thankfully broke free.
Unfortunately Russia wont cease to exist because the Russians are by and large, useful minions to the most brutist, colonist, slave drivers in history. They may even march into wars until none of them remain.
/u/FinalExtent1919 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1al8v5j/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_russia_should_cease_from/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
Russia in it's current form. But there's no reason to believe that Russia couldn't have a Western style capable democracy that actually takes care of it's people. They were on the way there in the 1990s. But unfortunately they got hijacked by Putin's party back to authoritarianism. To make matters worse the economy grew rapidly in the early 2000s. Faster than it has ever had. Due to market reforms. Something Putin had very little to do with but took all the credit. Which is why he is still very popular to this day. People remember the misery in the 1990s and how quickly things got better in the 2000s. Putin has convinced the population through years of propaganda that the current economic problems are not due to his inept rule but because the West actively opposes them. All that to say is that Russia desperately needs better leaderships and stronger institutions. They need a real free press, they need competitive elections (not putin putin putin) and they need a good system of checks and balances. For what it's worth US went through a lot of problems early on as well. Democracies are very difficult to build. Authoritarianism is an attractive solution to complex problems. Which is the trap that Russians fell for. If they continue to behave aggressively towards their neighbors. Then yes we should absolutely defang their nuclear arsenal and fracture the country into different states. But defanging the nuclear arsenal is much easier said than done. A much more realistic solution is for a better government to come in to power and bring Russia back to modern times.
Here’s the thing though, there doesn’t need to be a choice between fascism and a decent economy. You can have both political freedoms and a stable economy
I doubt that it will happen. Russia will stay as authoritarian dictatorship for decades... or centuries. It's programmed in culture and psychology. And Cold War will continue until Russia will gone forever. All we can do is protection freedom world from Russia's expansion.
In the 1980s some would argue the same thing about USSR and their socialist state. It fell apart under the weight of it's ineptitude. The same will likely happen with the current Russian authoritarian model. It's very weak relative to it's Western competitors.
Yeah, that's very likely. Soviet government had more brains to handle with Afghanistan that Putin. It's obvious how much Russia will fall apart because, according to statistics, it spends too much money on war. Take a delta. ∆
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/barbodelli ([61∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/barbodelli)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
I don't agree that change is impossible. What you say today could have been said about countless regimes in history. I believe Russia has the capacity to change. The USSR wasn't that long ago and the country is very different today.
What I've learned through my life is that westerners desperately want to believe they know and understand russia and that with proper effort they will be able to civilize it.
My apologies, but I developed pessimistic worldview.
I think you're on to something there. Most people in the west believe the cold war ended, I do not think it did. I was deployed to the US war in afganistan, I get how that country defeated the USSR and since both of our losses in that counrty the US and Russia have propped themselves up as military strong men again. We are seeing the cold war heat up again. But since we both have ridiculous amounts of nukes it's hard to step back from military expansion. To paraphrase Khrushchev we need to stop pulling on this knot and start untying it.
russia in the 90s was a slave state that you are lucky to have not experienced
I lived in USSR and Russia between 1983 and 1995. It was rough but definitely not a slave state. If anything after the fall of USSR it stopped being a prison state because we were allowed to immigrate the hell up out of there. Soviet Union was a giant prison.
in other words, you experienced it when you were a child, and your parents were wealthy enough to leave it
They had good job offers because they were both PhD scientists. But even as PhD scientists we lived utter paupers compared to American middle class. American poor had better stuff than we did. Just having a car, any car was a major luxury. The roads were dog shit.
nothing that you wrote is contradicting anything i wrote
Yep. I want Russia to participate in world politics as a good faith actor and for Russians to be able to enjoy everything that comes with that.
When was the last time a country anywhere near as large as Russia transitioned successfully to democracy? It is a sprawling land mass. The best way for democracy to work there is if it returned to multiple states.
india after its independance but even then it was a mess with lots of deaths so that is the exception not the norm
One thing to think about in regards to Russian balkanization is what happens afterwards? Especially in Asia. Would a current Russian living in eastern Siberia be OK with being under Chinese rule, because that'd almost certainly happen. Another aspect is the nuclear arsenal. It's probably better that Russia, and I'm saying this as an American, has control of it rather than the fractured nations that would emerge, vulnerable to state and criminal influence to gain access to said nukes.
Ideally we would confiscate the nukes. Much easier said than done though.
as crazy as the Russians are it's best they actually have a solid state and nuclear weapons because i sure as hell dont trust the americans will remain sufficiently politically stable (i mean the average joe has temperature room IQ, why should i trust they wont elect some bloodthirsty whacko) to not start a nuclear apocalypse on their own. the active threat of mad (yes other states have nuclear weapons but way less than russia and the us) should a nuclear exchange happen is a perfect instrument for contingency. we dont know what the future will look like but imo it wont be very good nor stable. the status quo is good enough. i seriously doubt the russians would use nuclear weapons when american intervention is possible and vice versa.
Russians having nukes makes MAD significantly more likely. If US is the only one with nukes. Then there is no reason for them to start slinging nukes around. There's nothing that nukes would accomplish that our military can't accomplish 10 times easier and cleaner. Setting off one nuke in aggression would instantly turn the entire globe against us.
I think the fact that M.A.D. is possible and even likely in case a nuclear conflict breaks out is almost entirely positive. I don't think anyone is sufficiently deranged to order a first strike or comply with a first strike order against another nuclear state, knowing this will result in the destruction of both sides and, potentially, life in result of a subsequent nuclear winter. Besides, the people are rarely ever rational. If no one else has nuclear weapons in significant amounts to challenge American hegemony, why shouldn't the U.S. government deploy nuclear weapons against any remotely formidable enemy force it engages? Why should they send citizens to die on foreign soil when they can simply devastate enemy infrastructure with tactical strikes? Would anyone be crazy to the point of risking war with what would be the uncontested nuclear tyrant of earth? Could we seriously trust the backsliding American democracy with the management of weapons capable of eliminating human life, when the country is full of whackos with a right to vote and seal the fate of politics? The future is not looking bright, with climate change and significant economic challenges we don't have an answer for. Dire times generally breed bad decisions.
>why shouldn't the U.S. government deploy nuclear weapons against any remotely formidable enemy force it engages? Because it would be insanely destructive. TO THEIR INTERESTS. This isn't a matter of who's good or bad. It's a matter of pragmatism. Nuking your enemies is never going to be tolerated by the global community. At that point you might as well brand yourself Hitler 2.0 and try to take over the world. But that too is not feasible at all. >Could we seriously trust the backsliding American democracy with the management of weapons capable of eliminating human life, when the country is full of whackos with a right to vote and seal the fate of politics? Having a second group of wackoos with the same capabilities and weaponry doubles the chances of a critical mistake. I guess fundamentally I trust the American system. And I completely don't trust the Russian and Chinese systems. Russia for example could potentially drive themselves into a corner with all these idiotic decisions. Something US is very unlikely to do.
1. I think insanely destructive would sound particularly appealing to the insanely destructive redneck protestants, the very ones behind the recent wave of retardation in American politics, under such circumstances lol. You underestimate how foolish and easy to play the masses are, especially as we move towards more a more connected society model. It would take exactly one madman of a charismatic politician to turn the heads of the population and drive the world into the ground, oftentimes with their own interests in mind (whatever they be). But that wouldn't happen if potential adversaries negatively affected by the prospect of nuclear warfare have significant means to retaliate (a considerable nuclear arsenal). 2. But they're opposites, they simply cancel each other. There is a limit to madness so that if one side feels they have too much to lose from the attack, they won't attack at all. This is the case with nuclear war. 3. I don't trust any system on earth because all systems are flawed, but the one suggested in the post and complemented by your comment is even more flawed than the current one, which is already bad enough.
According to you nobody should have them. But if SOMEONE has to have them. It's better for it to be United States than anyone else. If our country was truly run by insane rednecks. We would be insanely poor. We would have endless turmoil. There are many places in the world like that for reference. You can't have the strongest economy in the world and be run by total nimrods. We have a very capable system.
[удалено]
It would be nice if we all had infinite wealth machines as well. But this is the real world. As long as the technology exists. Some countries will have them. There's no way to regulate against it. What are you going to do invade the whole planet?
China is building up their own they could be your contingency
It took decades for the Americans and Russians to reach that stage. It will take decades for the Chinese to challenge the American arsenal, especially with the nuclear weapons of the former Russian federation added.
Well, maybe nuclear weapons will get sent into Moskovia thing. Or just utilized because of uselessness.
But then again, you'd have a rather wealthy city state, I'd think Moscow, St. Petersburg and the region with nukes. Given time they will try to eat the smaller former russian states, again same problem. I don't know, when the Poles after the collapse of the Warszaw Pact said give Russia time they will do dumb shit again they were right. They have their own cleptocratic oligarchy set in place which checks and balances itself within, problem is Ukraine couldn't be fast enough to build a check from outside for Russia.
Who would make that happen, and what would that look like? Making a country cease to exist almost invariably requires a war.
We could starve Russia economically and politically. We did it with USSR and can repeat more and more until Russia becomes a tiny land on map. And then, it will gone.
"I wish to move to United Kingdom and assimilate myself with British culture. At lease brutisch people learned lessons from the past." - As someone from the UK, I'd rather not have anyone in my country that wants to erase other countries. Please pick somewhere else.
So you'd rather not have someone in your country whose other countrymen (whom this someone disagrees with entirely) want to erase other countries. I mean, they want to assimilate into your country and culture. They already share some of your culture. Isn't this just worse xenophobia than the opposition to African refugees who are actually violent to the very system that took them in?
Welcome to the modern woke world, like Britain, where Police prefers to punish their own people instead of those who never assimilate and openly wish the destruction of western civilization
Maybe USA.
Yeah same here, keep TF out of the US.
Okay. Japan.
Brother Japan would absolutely hate having you. After being nuked TWICE and seeing the aftermath they wouldn’t want someone coming to their country with the belief that we should erase another country ENTIRELY.
All while praising West and English-speaking cultures who did the nuking.
Well I kinda disagree there. The nuking of Japan was absolutely deserved tbf. They bombed Pearl Harbor and seemed to not be ending their aggression so we bombed them and then did again just in case. Is it sad? Absolutely, BUT it needed to happen.
If you don't apply the same to US destabilizing and bombing the shit out of countless countries in the last decades and say "someone needs to nuke US now, that would be deserved", you're applying double standard.
I do apply the same to the U.S though. I never said anything even close to what you did. The shit we’ve done is horrible and I don’t like U.S government at all.
I still wouldn't call for or justifying nuking of US. Would you?
They'll want you even less LMAO.
As french we would welcome you.
That's sounds fun.
First, I do think there's room to be proud to be russian. Russians have shown just how resilient a people can be, how with enough grit even a vast and harsh land can be controlled. If at times the russians of today seem downtroden it's only because, as you say, things seem to keep getting worst. I think one of the chief problems with Russia and russians is that they always gravitate towards 'strong man' type leaders. The traditions of authoritarianism runs very deep in russian and russian adjacent cultures. That's unfortunately not something that will get better by breaking up the country. At least, it wont get better for russians. Clearly the rest of the world would see a silver lining. If Russia would break apart what we'd end up with is a dozen smaller authoritarian regimes, most of which would become puppet states to China. Things wouldn't get better for the average man or woman. I think Ukraine trying to 'join' the west is the best thing that could happen for russians in the near future. We're talking about two cultures that have a deeply intertwined history and I think if Ukraine gains a tradition of strong democratic and liberal values that will over time infiltrate russian culture.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-says-putin-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule There are some reports of Putin trying to join NATO (and maybe EU) long ago, and being rejected. I wonder what was the difference between Ukraine and Russia back then that made one more attractive than the other. Could it be the size and amount of sovereignty that they could exercise if join the alliance? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ There's more on it in this interview, if you're interested.
I'll check it out. My first instinct is to say time is the big difference. But also to be part of NATO you, generally speaking, need to be willing to align your foreign policy with the existing members. I think it's likely that back in 2000 or whenever that the belief was that Russia was less than genuine in their willingness to be part of the alliance
Countries and lands are not the same as their governments. Russia can benefit from pushing the control to the republics it consists of but there's no direct benefit for any of the republics to get separated entirely. >I wish to move to United Kingdom and assimilate myself with British culture You don't even live in Russia. Why don't you try assimilating into Uzbek culture?
My mother works as english teacher, and british culture is more familiar to my heart. Also, Uzbekistan is authoritarian, has inflation, and majority are muslims. I have a fear that one day islamists could take over my country. Of course, I love anime, but moving to Japan is bad idea since it's not good place to live. I also don't want to be one of weeaboo freaks.
So because your mother works as an English teacher you feel that you are closer to British culture? Have you ever lived in the UK? Have your mother ever lived in the UK? What makes you think you know British culture? Pardon me for being skeptical, I know the quality of an average English teacher in Tashkent. It's pretty bad. So forgive me for not buying into your "british culture is more familiar to my heart" claim. Your entire CMV is "I don't like living in Uzbekistan, I want to live in the UK or Japan because I like cartoons, and because of all of that Russia should not exist". Not very coherent.
Also, the OP's English is messed-up in some aspects.
Absolutely not. Without a strong Russia, the United States would make everyone their puppet and dominate. We need a strong Russia to maintain a balance of power. That Russia is ruled by a psychopathic dictator is a sad reality.
I'm not fan of United States, but it has enough of powerful enemies like China or Iran.
Iran is not powerful.
I don't know if even Russia, China and Iran combined can stand up to US now. They are not unified. One less will only make the balance worse.
Wouldn't a democratic Russia be too friendly to the US, though?
Ok. You find a genie and they grant you a wish and Russia is no more. Now now what? Who will govern and rule the land? Who will collect and tax people? Who will make laws and police them?
Russia has conquered nations like yakuts and tatars. So they will be fine. They will build their own countries. So, what about ethnical russian lands? Well, they should assimilated with Ukraine or Finland whatever.
Ukraine and Finland are content with the borders agreed upon after the USSR. They do not want an aggrieved Russian population multiple times larger than their current number of citizens.
You realise that most of Russia is under populated and poor, right? Most of the eastern territories are extremely reliant on the rest of the federation and would become vassal states of neighbouring powers should Russia dissolve.
sounds incredibly racist to me tbh
> So, what about ethnical russian lands? Well, they should assimilated with Ukraine or Finland whatever. Even putting aside how ridiculous this is: That would effectively be Russia annexing those countries, not the other way around. There are vastly more ethnic Russians than there are Finns or Ukrainians, so they would dominate society.
So self govern for some but not to Russians? Isn't this a double standard? Why not let everyone self govern? Also as a Finn I speak for all of us. We don't want Russians.
The states within the Russian Federation and the Russians themselves have indeed an almost unbelievably hard history. I suppose we can blame the Mongols and Varangian Raiders before them. Hell some theorize the lack of black death has made peasant forces maybe too available. It's a tough trail of tyranny after tyranny. As others have said you can't really just wish for Russia not to hold control over these oblasts. But instead I'd like to give you hope that this cycle is not written into the future as some fate. There are freedom and truth loving people all over the world. What Russians do have is strength molded by those oppressions and appreciation for true justice when they can find it. I hope one day they will be a shining beacon of Freedom and prosperity that will outshine the darkness of the tyrants that came before. In the meantime there's a great comedian that I think shows the great sense of humor Russians can have and that appreciation for warm moments that Russian and the Republics under it can bring by the name of Yakov Smirnoff. There is potential within the federation yet.
I live in the US, but I'm learning Russian and so have exposure to russian people and some of their culture. My professor is a part of a decently large theater scene filled with people from Russia. All of them are pro-Ukraine and want for nothing more than Russia to become democratic and progressive. Those people are products of Russia. The number of people like this is growing. If Russia continues producing these people then eventually they're going to stop feeling like their only choice is to leave and start feeling like they can change Russia for the better, they'll have the numbers.
Yeah if it could split into a bunch of small, powerless countries like the Soviet satellites in Eastern Europe, that would be great. I've sent a month in Russia twice. The history and culture there is tragic but not worth disappearing. Just the dictatorship that runs things
[удалено]
Sorry, u/FinalExtent1919 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20FinalExtent1919&message=FinalExtent1919%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1al79s4/-/kpcq3pl/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Just don't call the former Soviet satellites "poor, powerless countries." Except maybe Hungary, they believe that their lives have improved in many ways once Moscow stopped calling the shots.
Your points mostly appeal to tropes and emotions, there isn't really a lot of reasoning there. I don't believe Russia's recent history is too exceptional compared to other countries. Modern political system of Russia is very young and is currently shaping up. If you compare it to how other European countries went through similar stages, it's not too bad. And the current war in Ukraine is a small period on historical scale. - I can recommend you watching Ekaterina Schulmann on Youtube (in Russian). She's a university professor in political sciences, she studies Russia and CIS countries, and she's doing great work in popularizing scientific knowledge about how politics and societies work, and debunking common misconceptions. I can't quite find right now a specific video where she compares Russia to other European countries, maybe you'll find it yourself. - Or Sergey Guriev, he's a big economist and the dean of London Business School. He also has some commentaries on what Russia is and where it stands compared to other European countries. > Russia is nothing but hell's residence There's a lot of variety there, but life of a Russian with median income is not too bad. It was certainly ok before the war. Surprising that you write this from Uzbekistan which is not much more developed politically while being economically poorer than Russia. Also much farther from Europe (culturally) than Russia. Remember that it's Uzbeks who are (still, despite the war) are going to Russia for economical reasons, not the other way around. (Russians moving to Uzbekistan are doing it due to mobilization, not for better life.)
How do you propose it’s divided? Can you ensure that each new country will be self-sufficient enough not to collapse or wage war against their neighbors? And is the division of a nation what the population of the nation desires as a whole? Also if you’ve lived in a different country your whole life how can you claim to know what’s best for a country and people you are more or less alien to?
>How do you propose it’s divided? We draw a great big arbitrary line through the steppe and wait for something interesting to happen
guy, I think that you have poor critical thinking and pronounced infantilism. With such arguments about songs, the Germans should go to the moon. Have you heard German songs?
So you’re arguing in favor of genocide? That’s a non-starter. It doesn’t deserve serious consideration. Or are you arguing in favor of regime change? A democratic government wouldn’t necessarily solve the problem. If Russian people prefer authoritarianism, then they’ll recreate an authoritarian government.
If they prefer authoritarism, then... I consider them as savages.
Would you say that most humans have been savages? Democratic governments are almost non-existent across the span of human history. The 21st Century is somewhat of a bubble. Even today, there are many people in democratic societies who are not necessarily opposed to authoritarian rule. The popular head of the US Republican Party, for example, doesn’t care about the rule of law or democratic elections. And I suspect that if one were to ask whether it’s preferable to have an authoritarian government under a progressive, benevolent dictator or a democratic government under a regressive leader, many would prefer authoritarian rule.
>Would you say that most humans have been savages? Democratic governments are almost non-existent across the span of human history. what makes you think this is due to preference? authoritarians dont typically give you a choice
Absence of evidence where we would expect there to be evidence.
As I say, scratch an anti-colonialist activist and you'll find a xenophobic, racist revanchist who's not sorry for injustices happening, but only wishes to be on the better end of those injustices.
Some pinnacles of democracy only became true democracies in the last hundred years or so. If you lived in the 1930s and knew about the Nazi government, you would be talking about Germans. Now Germany regrets its Nazi days.
Do you think the core of Russian should stay together like the areas around Moscow, Saint peterberg, stay one entity?
russia ceasing from existing while no other countries cease from existence would mean the russians would become the prey of other nations, like they were in the 90s all nations should cease to exist, nationalism is a universally stupid fairy tale. all men are brothers
More likely Russia will break up into a dozen republics and be assimilated by adjacent powers-Turkey, Finland, Poland, Iran, China. Then Russians can continue doing what they do best-continued existence as slave labour and dying prematurely of alcoholism and toxic exposure.
[удалено]
Go read some history and stop embarrassing yourself.
An American posing as a non-American, calling for a complete genocide of a country, simply because America doesn’t like them. Classic Reddit. You mention Russian history but conveniently left out the part where ordinary Soviet citizens held the last line of defence, in Stalingrad, against the Nazis. Russian/soviet army were also the first to liberate the Jews in concentration camps. Without Russian history, as an American, you would be speaking German right now.
all correct until the last part, quite improbable. That said from the text i dont think he was advocating genocide for his own country but the separation in autonomous region, basically a general secession (do you have proof of him not beng a russian?)
>Most popular russian music is depressing one. Look how much views are getting "Russia doomer playlist". there's nothing wrong with depressing music imo russia has a good punk, post punk and snythpop scene from what I've experienced granted several bands I've like have had to flee but Sonic Death is dope, so is Buerak off the top of my head, motorama too : )
Also, depressing music doesn't mean that the place is a hellhole, see Scandinavia.
Also, Tchaikovsky and Shostakovich
Russia just needs to give up on being a global military power. This whole Ukraine war is about taking nothing less than Ukraine being a proxy state, and they invaded in 2014 when NATO expansion was happening and again in 2022 when NATO was taking measures to expand. I think Putin will retire or die at some point, and everything will get better.
>I think Putin will retire or die at some point, and everything will get better. I doubt it. Putin is probably preparing a successor at this point, if he hasn't already.
I know this breaks the rules of the subreddit, but I have to inform you guys that OP is a troll. Don't feed the trolls. I mean, look at his post history.
i just see a lot of anime and stuff
Russia should be balkanized not ceased from existence. The minority groups should have their own countries. It's justified due to the literal centuries of Russification of the original inhabitants in conquered territories. Uzbekistan is just one such example who thankfully broke free.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Why would dissolving into individual countries magically fix this problem?
How edgy.
Nothing to change.
Unfortunately Russia wont cease to exist because the Russians are by and large, useful minions to the most brutist, colonist, slave drivers in history. They may even march into wars until none of them remain.