It's now okay to demonize Russians

[Aldaris]

Dehumanization at its finest, remembers me of a certain period some 80 years ago. Facking disgusting. Also 'they do it too!' isn't an argument, even if it was true in the first place. Which isn't.

[B01AB20]

I don't understand if you agree or disagree with me.

Russia is an Antifa state and no hate speech towards Ukrainians is tolerated.

lol.
I read in russian TV, controlled by Putin as there're no free opinion in Russia, they're saying things like this.



Automatic translation.

The tone, as well as the forms and vocabulary, are changing with respect to the start of the war. And not in a constructive sense precisely. As evidence accumulates of the deadlock of the Russian Army in Ukraine, the kremlin's main propagandists in the pro-government media are adopting a more radical and extremist tone, posing in their interventions scenarios such as an atomic war, or even armed incursions into NATO territory.

More so. Articles openly advocating a kind of collective punishment of the Ukrainian nation, with deportations of the population and "re-education" processes, are beginning to appear in the Russian state media, following the realization that the vast majority of citizens, including Russian speakers, oppose the invasion and Moscow's plans. In Russia, a country where there is no longer any loophole for freedom of expression, the interventions of these communicative gurus are considered a kind of thermometer of the mood in the Kremlin.

Among the cast of pro-government commentators, the most representative voice is undoubtedly Vladimir Solovyov. And as Grigory Golosov, head of the Department of Political Science at the European University of St. Petersburg, points out to EL PERIODICO, the character, "a mainstream commentator" according to his description, "has become very radicalized" in recent times. Indeed, one of his most high-sounding statements came a month ago, when he demanded that NATO military contingents in Eastern Europe withdraw to pre-1997 positions, completely reshaping the results of the twentieth-century cold war.
And he did not bite his tongue when issuing threats in case of non-compliance with these demands, formulated by the Kremlin leader. "If you think we're going to stop in Ukraine, think about it 300 times; I remind you that Ukraine is only the intermediate stage in the task of providing strategic security to the Russian Federation," he said on his program, Night with Vladimir Solovyov.

Concern about the drift of Russian propagandists has been growing after a long article appeared a few days ago under the title What should Russia do with Ukraine? in the government agency Ria Novosti written by Timofei Sergeitsev, a political scientist and specialist in public relations, a character little known so far but ideologically linked to influential figures in vladimir Putin's entourage. The publication of the document created such a stir that in the comments after its dissemination, many analysts equated the explicit with a kind of final solution or genocide for the Ukrainian state and its citizens.

According to the author, "the denazification of Ukraine is necessary" since a significant part of the people "has been dominated and attracted by the Nazi regime" before which, its members "cannot be directly punished as war criminals." "This mass of population," the document continues, must be subjected to "re-education, which is achieved through strict censorship, not only in the political sphere, but also in the cultural and educational sphere." Considering that "Ukrainian-Ukrainianism" (Ukrainian Nazism) represents "a threat to peace and to Russia superior to that of Hitler's Germany," Sergeitsev proposes to "cleanse all local organs of government, police or defense of Nazi elements," in addition to suppressing the word "Ukraine".

The territory would be divided into republics loyal to Moscow, while the five western provinces of "Catholic majority", considered "enemies of Russia", must be "demilitarized" and have "a neutral status". Carrying out such a process will require "no less than one generation", or what is the same, "25 years".

The analyst Golosov recalls the low weight among the officialdom of the author of the letter and considers that these positions "do not yet represent" the Kremlin's plans, although he does not rule it out in the future. Of course, he understands that its dissemination at this precise moment suits the Government and "drives the narrative" prevailing among the elite that the armed conflict "must continue."

Article in spanish

[Hexachordia]

What is courage it might be misrepresented by Ukraine now, it is true many ukrainian soldiers are fearless at the same time armed with the best weapons in the world. But the situation is similar to French Revolution when many people were incited against each other causing many death, also to October Revolution, funded by many foreign interests. Can we call those people incited and armed by specious influences to kill and maim as courageous? Ukrainian people are courageous, true, but not all who are fighting and killing. Aristotle calls rashness as insensible, the fearlessness in the extreme is insensible.

The brave man fears the greatest thing, death, in the noblest circumstances of danger: he is brave who is fearless in face of a noble death (1115a30).

Aristotle calls he who exceeds in fearlessness insensible, and he who exceeds in confidence rash (1115b25). The rash man is a pretender to and imitator of courage:as the brave man is with regard to what is terrible, so the rash man wishes to appear (1115b30). In his analysis, Aristotle overlaps the genres of rashness and cowardliness by claiming that the rash man acts in both ways:

It is questionable to honor people who are fighting in specious conditions as courageous. Courage should fear death, not insensible to it. However Russia can be wrong, the west is exploiting the situation to some occultic interests, so the problem is beyond the ethical debate about an aggression and defense of respective parties. The west does not mean any good, China and Ukraine should be careful, during WW2, the west helped and shipped many weapons to USSR now today they dehumanizing russian people, treating them worse than nazis. If they do not treat your opponents as humans, then they might not consider you as human as well.

[Hexachordia]

It is interesting to note that the west traditionally do not treat their opponents in war as humans too, not just russians and germans, they bomb civilians randomly and nobody question their ethics. How come we get the impression that the west promotes humanitarian values? Just a capitalist label. Both Russia and the west know when comes to war, everything human is just a bubble, all tactics will be employed for respective interests. When some interests go beyond the war, the tactics and measures will get strange and inscrutible. I guess there are objectives beyond the immediate scope of this war, like vultures and scavengers, to exploit the situation to the last bit of sparkle and smoke(well, it is just a natural rule) . It is hard to accept the fact the Russia could be facing a huge change and people are not ready to recognize yet, whatever, China is very wrong to sit aside as ordained by the USA, at least should send advicers to Russia and also send special observers to the west and USA. China must more actively participate in the whole process of war and close strategic observations.

[Hexachordia]

At least one thing is clear, if this war get protracted, we must all get involved in certain ways, or more involved. There will be no bottomline to the level of involvements as this war develops in complexity and scale. The real purpose of sanctions is to cover up this is a WW3, telling everybody to sit aside, not just China. I give it one year to end, 22nd, Febrary, 2023.