One of the more unpleasant things about the Russian media feeds today is the lack of empathy for the Ukrainian dead. Their images are constantly reshared with the claim that their deaths "prove" the West is evil, that the world hates Russians, and that Russia is under threat.
Civilian deaths are instrumentalized as a means to persuade the viewer that the war is necessary, justified, not yet broad enough in scope, that it cannot stop until the "end" is reached. What that end is, of course, remains unspecified, but we know it has to be *extreme*.
All the while, of course, the Russian media is screaming that the West/Ukraine has faked evidence of killings or even killed civilians deliberately in order to justify a war against Russia. It's all projection. It's all totally topsy turvy.
But not once have I seen a post or update that says: "We, Russians, are devastated to see this loss of life. It's a tragedy. We are thinking of the families." No. It's always: "Ukrainians killed Russians. The West wants war. We must destroy."
Everything in the Russian info sphere is repurposed to fight war in the present and future. All empathy is designed to be subjugated to the state’s desires. All language beyond the state’s is unspeakable. This is totalitarianism.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
They’re even claiming that Ukraine rounded up and murdered civilians in Bucha purely to create a provocative news “event” to inflame anti-Russian hatred abroad.
For us, Bucha is a turning point: the visible proof (even if it existed before) that something genocidal is taking place, that Russian troops are out of control, that such executions are perhaps even being ordered. We don’t know. This is why we document and investigate.
Dmitry Medvedev has done another of his oddball Telegram rants: Ukraine wants into the EU, we’ll let them, go right ahead, but you’ll have to join NATO first (gasp). And we won’t let you join NATO.
It contains this example of tortured logic and phrasing (the dude needs to hire a copy editor): “Everyone knows that NATO is headed by Washington, and the EU by Brussels…
“But in NATO Washington is in charge, and NATO is the senior partner in its relationship with Brussels. It’s more developed, a 1949 vintage, unlike the young 30-something EU. So Brussels is totally controlled by Washington, but Brussels doesn’t like to admit it.” WTF?
While we're all fixated on guns, tanks, weapons, and the movements of tank columns, look at what Russia is talking about: Russian economic power and annexing part of Georgia. It's not even that we're on a different page. We're living in different worlds.
At the risk of repeating myself, and for about the 34th day in a row, the act of Russians fighting is totally absent from the Russian media. The Ukrainians are doing the shooting, the Russians merely arrive to discover ruined cities.
Most of the footage you're seeing of shooting from the Russian side is delegated to the Chechen forces, who are easily - and frequently - othered as somehow more animalistic, more brutal, more willing to get dirty than Russians.
Russia's climbing down, right? Today's Pravda lead articles:
- The West sees Russia's existence as an existential threat
- Russia is fated to battle the forces of evil
- Polish PM: Russophobia is mainstream
- Was Istanbul [negotiation] strategic or disgraceful?
The latter article is particularly notable: "The Russian public has responded to the results of the third round of Ru-Ukraine talks with total negativity. Everybody is waiting for the President to give his thoughts."
Vladimir Medinsky is taking flak for wanting peace with the "Banderite Kiev"; Abramovich is attacked for being like Boris Berezovsky - a big public enemy - during the signing of the peace at the end of the First Chechen War in 1996.
Thread 🧵: How does this end? Even in the West, the wars we compare all others to are World Wars I and II: conflicts which had neat and clear ends. The former with an exact time and date we all know. The latter with the achievement of an obvious goal: total defeat for the enemy.
The problem for understanding how this war ends, and how we *want* this war to end, is that the World Wars are an exception when it comes to neat conclusions. Most wars drift into ongoing fighting, endless instability, messy and mucky conclusions.
As media consumers - as humans - we HATE not having an ending. Honestly ask yourself, how many times in the past five weeks have you seen some chink of light and got excited because of the neat ending it promised you? So now, when Russia is signalling peace, you look to the end.
Thread: The lazy crudity of Russian propaganda in a single image - and why it can still be effective.
This page purportedly shows Ukrainian plans to use human shields (the red people) to defend their troops (blue on upper floors).
I’ve seen this shared several times on nationalist and astroturfed Telegram channels. It’s accompanied by angry reaction emojis and racist comments (“Give it to those dirty Ukranazis” etc).
The page is supposedly recovered from a building “liberated” by Russian forces. The Russians obviously brilliantly manage to beat the Ukrainians without touching the civilians.