• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Shambles

Jews in Eastern Ukraine advised to "register" as Jewish by Russian paramilitaries

With all due respek
Is that not a contradictory statement ? If you accept that their reporting of some aspects of russian foreign policy appear to be coming straight from the Kremlin then surely everything they say about anything is just towing the line too ?
While yes its impossible to present a story without bias and yes they're all as bad as each other, Ive always felt their agenda has been more obvious..
IMO its aimed at stirring dissent in the west. Didn't they run a story about 911 being an inside job for example ?

I do watch it, from time to time, but IMO its no better than fox or CNN. I think that people some pretty clever people seem to trust it more because it has a subtle anti US vibe to it.
 
I don't think it's contradictory at all. I think it says I think that the Kremlin likes to keep tight control over certain issues pertaining to Russian policy but takes a more hands-off attitude in relation to foreign news. This seems to be a widespread view of RT and fits with the bits I've seen. Much of what goes on in the world has no real relation to Russian policy on anything and what may be considered "the opposition" tend to dig their own holes which RT report on in far less biased fashion than most Western news outlets cos they don't have to pander to Western agendas. I'd suggest RT is good for non-Russian news in similar way that Al-Jazeera is good for foreign news but I wouldn't trust it to do an unbiased documentary on Israel, for example. It's common sense really.
 
Anyway all this focus on those laws is merely propaganda by the West to isolate Russia, African countries like Uganda are passing vile homophobic legislation yet they still get official government aid
 
Mental Kenny said:
Anyway all this focus on those laws is merely propaganda by the West to isolate Russia, African countries like Uganda are passing vile homophobic legislation yet they still get official government aid
Click to expand...

And they shouldn't be for precisely that region. Although it's perhaps a bit complicated depending on what that aid is actually used for. Wouldn't be right to make vulnerable people in extremely difficult situations who have nothing to do with what the government decides on to suffer as a result of incredibly ignorant and quite frankly vile government decisions. But it really makes no difference how bad other countries' stance on homosexuality is to how bad Russia's is - Russian policy on homosexuality is a disgrace in the modern world (and the olden world too but there's no excuse for it nowadays). Trying to shift the focus to an irrelevant and unrelated point in that way suggests even you are finding it hard to justify that policy. You can support Russia and admire Putin without agreeing with every aspect of Russian policy. It's not all or nothing. I'm sure there are some very progressive and entirely sensible laws in Russia (well, maybe not sure but see no reason why there shouldn't be) but that one happens to be completely backwards and wrong.
 
Mental Kenny said:
Anyway all this focus on those laws is merely propaganda by the West to isolate Russia, African countries like Uganda are passing vile homophobic legislation yet they still get official government aid
Click to expand...
Which I would withdraw in a heartbeat -- even going as far as destroying items already collected, in front of them, if necessary -- until they passed LGBT equality laws to our standard or better. No aid for queer bashers.
 
^ "backwards" and "wrong" are very subjective terms.
Cultural relativity is a pretty sticky business in regards to issues of geopolitical importance.

In regards to RT being a reliable source - of course it's not; but neither are any of (even the best) western, Anglo/American news sources. As much respect as I have for certain Western news outlets, so many of their sources are deeply flawed, as this is a war of information IMO.
Keeping your eye on both, thinking critically and looking at the big picture is the best way to get some understanding of what is actually going on in these situations. Two polarised propaganda machines can be quite interesting to assess; therefore RT is a vital (though clearly not impartial!) source of information.

That bullshit about the West prancing around on various legislative high-horses regarding gay rights (and the other terms concepts embodied in this very simplistic phrase) is utter hypocrisy. I'm fairly certain the same rules apply for donating blood here in Australia - and while there is a lot of state sanctioned brutality against LGBTI activists and individuals, the fight for equality, respect and legal recognition is hardly done and dusted in the West.
It's propaganda and spin on both sides - some things never fucking change (except at least the Soviet Union was an interesting human sociopolitical development) - now we just have 2 oligarchies in a race to be the most oppressive imperialistic earth-raping swine. No good vs evil. No glorious revolutionary romantic bullshit.
Just my mafia-state vs your mafia-state. just that the US have more experience IMO.

Digging your posts here, parttime crackhead.
Have you been following this thread in CE&P sub forum?
If not, I think your contribution could help inject some life into it....if you'll please excuse the pun.
 
Last edited:
spacejunk said:
^ "backwards" and "wrong" are very subjective terms.
Click to expand...

'Backwards' in the sense of it being a backwards step - they didn't used to have such extreme discriminatory laws in regards to homosexuality and they changed to more repressive laws. That's a backwards step.

'Wrong' because discrimination on the basis of sexuality is wrong. I don't see how there's any subjective component to that if somebody believes in equality. If somebody believes some people are more equal than others or that some people are less deserving of their freedom to find love with another human being I'd suggest they were wrong too.
 
RT news is good for news on Middle East Policy but they have an agenda, just as Al Jazeera, Fox and anybody else.

On the Uganda issue, I would cut all aid, but I wouldn't meddle in their own internal affairs, they want to make homosexuality a death penalty crime, their business, I might not agree with it, but I wouldn't interfere, it would just be perceived as neo-colonialism and "the white man" telling us what to do.

Which is basically what the Ugandan president said after receiving criticism from Western leaders.
 
Shambles said:
'Backwards' in the sense of it being a backwards step - they didn't used to have such extreme discriminatory laws in regards to homosexuality and they changed to more repressive laws. That's a backwards step.

'Wrong' because discrimination on the basis of sexuality is wrong. I don't see how there's any subjective component to that if somebody believes in equality. If somebody believes some people are more equal than others or that some people are less deserving of their freedom to find love with another human being I'd suggest they were wrong too.
Click to expand...

"Backwards" is a perfectly sound concept from a 21st century, Western "progressive" perspective - but just to play the devil's advocate (I don't disagree with you, I just think it's much more complicated than that); to talk about steps forwards or backwards in terms of politics implies a linear passage of human social development.
I would suggest that the West is experiencing anything but a general progression over time, and that (despite certain ideas of equality and acceptance becoming more institutionalised) we - as a culture - are perhaps regressing at a frightening rate.
But how do we judge such things?
We can't - except in certain areas of human achievement.

Does enslaving populations in developing nations to manufacture our over-priced, brand-name running shoes (or mobile phones, cars, battery-operated sex toys) while traditional manufacturing communities across the West face un(/der)employment and social problems count as a move forward?

The corporations would have us believe so. I dare say lots of politicians would also.

Social and political acceptance is but one tiny element of social evolution and global politics.
If we are, as Julie suggests, to not give foreign aid to countries that have homophobic attitudes (if I read that correctly) - could (and more importantly should) similar judgements not be put on countries like the US, UK and Australia for committing crimes against humanity in the name of "the war on terrorism"?

Sure - we have made ourselves unaccountable in international law, but does the West's actions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria (not to mention extra-judicial drone executions in apparently "friendly" countries such as Pakistan and Yemen in recent times) make the Western powers any less "backwards" than an election-stealing, media-controlling "ex-KGB" Oligarch in Moscow?
Lets not pretend the military actions of NATO, "the Coalition of the Willing" or any number of covert US regional-destabilising, regime-toppling, rebel-arming operations implicate America's allies any less than "the Great Satan" him/herself.

The US relies on military bases, satellites, communications networks across the globe and with cooperation (from our admittedly heavily censored understanding of such things) - but do any of us truly think that a few humanistic pseudo-progressive social reforms really make "us" any more "advanced" than "them"?

Advanced global propaganda - certainly
Advanced military mass murder capabilities - seems so
Advanced use of such power for the good of all mankind/life on earth? Fuck no.
We're all on the same existential road to oblivion - be it through war, environmental destruction or other forms of aggression and - to use the "backward/forward" dualism - regression.

With so many regional conflicts based around environmentally harmful forms of energy (oil, coal, gas, uranium etc) it seems like the biggest developmental shifts in energy have been made in recent times by China! B]!
(In the form of the development of solar power technologies that are cheaper and able to be used far more extensively than any time previously - thus providing an option for relatively clean electricity production in much of the world)

....but they still execute dissidents and members of religious groups such as the Falun Gong.
So...are they backwards? Or forwards?
Either way, their kiddies make a damn fine smart phone for a couple of $US/week.

Backwards?
Forwards?
Standing still?

All depends on your vantage point.
From down 'ere, I'd say we're all fucked (ethically, politically, environmentally)
 
Last edited:
^ er, thanks - I think it was a bit of an off topic rant, personally - but some thoughts cannot be articulated in the length of a goddamn twitter post (but I wish i was more concise at times).
Intended to provoke discussion - rather than silence it...
 
Agreed - good post spacejunk. It's often what we'd call the 'indigenous' or 'tribal' people that are the most 'advanced' at what's important - certanly in terms of awareness of the fragility of the environment (chomsky always gives examples of ecuador and canada first nations); and just in basic practical individual human intelligence like living of the land without wrecking it (and not having a load of colonies to pinch off like we did), or lighting a fire...
 
parttime crackhead said:
The UK is entirely based on that fact.
Click to expand...

I quite agree but don't like it. Kinda depends which measures of equality you're focussing on though. I was meaning more basic human rights than division of wealth. I'm actually not a Communist and don't really go in for that type of thinking. I think the degree of financial inequality in the UK (and everywhere else for that matter) is disgusting but don't think everybody should just have exactly the same no matter what or owt like that. And as for power, much as I do like the anarchist ideals I also know they would be impractical and quite frankly undesirable in some ways. Mentioned recently how dull going to all those committee meetings would be. I mostly just wish people were less selfish and didn't need to be forced to pay their share of taxes or whatever. That people would be decent cos they are decent. A lot to ask I know.

spacejunk said:
"Backwards" is a perfectly sound concept from a 21st century, Western "progressive" perspective - but just to play the devil's advocate (I don't disagree with you, I just think it's much more complicated than that); to talk about steps forwards or backwards in terms of politics implies a linear passage of human social development....

*snipped for size*
Click to expand...

I agree with more or less all of what you say. I'm not for one moment suggesting that the UK or "The West" is somehow superior to other countries. We've all got plenty problems and issues of our own - including all those you list and I quite agree on. I do believe that certain basic human rights can never be relative though. People have the right to be who they are whichever country they happen to have been born into. It's not right to discriminate on grounds of sexuality any more than it is to discriminate on grounds of gender or race or disability and any of the others that slip my mind right now but we all know. It really shouldn't matter which country or what tradition or which religion the society you find yourself in through an accident of birth - human rights are human not British or European or Western - human. They apply to everybody, everywhere and at all times.

I might agree that 'backwards' was perhaps an unfortunate word to use as it could be seen to have implications which I did not intend to be implying. I really was meaning simply a regressive step - taking away rights from a given population has to be a regressive step, a step backwards. That's not to say that there is a linear progression in all things and all nations will one day be as glorious as us in the West. That would be a sarcastic use of the word 'glorious' for obvious reasons. When it comes to basic human rights there is a progression though - you legally gain them (obviously they already exist but are of no use if not recognised legally) as a step forward and you have them taken away as a step backwards. There may be sidesteps along the way (Civil Partnerships instead of marriage perhaps? Dunno. Seemed like a pretty good alternative to me that I suspect many straight couples wouldn't mind the option of) but can't think of anything else off top of head which wouldn't be either forwards or backwards.

spacejunk said:
^ er, thanks - I think it was a bit of an off topic rant, personally
Click to expand...

Welcome to EADD - you've clearly gotten the hang of this place ;)
 
Even our famously sarcasm-dodging American friends seem to be just fine with lashings of it when they come visit here. Not quite sure whether that means we attract the higher class of international visitors or the absolute dregs. I suspect it means neither and that stereotypes are not the most reliable judges of national characteristics.

That aside, was talking to one of my younger brothers about the situation in Ukraine yesterday. He spends a lotta time over there and is back and forth regularly. He just got back a week or so ago as he's just married a Ukrainian girl (she's still not allowed into the UK (immigration is not necessarily as easy as it's made out to be) so he divides his time between here and Kiev). His view of what's going on there is that is has precious little to do with popular uprising of ethnic Russians and a lot to do with Russia interfering in distinctly underhanded fashion seeding dissent and generally stirring things up to their own advantage. I know Kiev is supposedly less big on stronger ties with Russia but he also happens to spend a fair bit of time in Crimea and his opinion is formed as an overall picture. Is but one man's view (and that of his Ukrainian (didn't ask whether she has Russian ancestry, ethnicity or family ties) g/f for several years and now wife) but thought it might be of interest as I doubt any of the rest of us have any direct experience or interaction with the country itself or anybody who lives there.

He did mention that his experience of Crimea is that you'll find more Turks than Russians in the general population which surprised me. Don't think Turkey is trying to claim Crimea for itself though so not as newsworthy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top