Regarding the video with a castration of a Ukrainian POW, comments from the Russian ДШРГ Русич may give some context to the story:
"I have seen up to ten such clips. They're usually published 1-2 years after the events though to make perpetrators more difficult to identify"
Русич (Rusich) is a Russian Neonazi group fighting in Ukraine. They're reportedly closely associated with the Wagner mercenary company
A Rusich fighter who told he had seen "up to ten such clips" is Evgeny Rasskazov (Topaz). Here you see his post commemorating Hitler's birthday:
"Today is birthday of out comrade who became example for many of us... his Word and Deed inspires us to beat the Ukro-Bolshevik scum"
That's Topaz with Egor Prosvirnin, the editor of *the* most important Russian nationalist media Sputnik and Pogrom which played an important role in setting the ideology of this war. When Putin made his speech, ppl described it as "Putin repeating Prosvirnin's talking points"
Weirdly enough, Western media make very, very few mentions of the main Russian nationalist media, Sputnik and Pogrom when discussing this war. That leads to either intentional or unintentional massive representation of the Russian internal debates. Which led to what we have now
The cultural influence of Sputnik and Pogrom (Спутник и Погром) in Russia is massive. It's so noticeable that the careful omission of them in almost any debate on this war looks almost intentional. Why would they avoid talking about them so carefully?
Because Prosvirnin was an integral part of the Moscow political and media establishment. Once you bring him and the Sputnik and Pogrom up, too many important people get associated. Here you see Prosvirnin hugging Ksenia Sobchak and political scientist Stanislav Belkovsky
Random photos with other media personalities. Nationalist leader Belov, internet guru Nosik, writer Akunin. Regarding the first two, they might share lots of common agenda, I doubt about the third guy. I post this photos to show associations and a level of his connections
Few key media personalities of the "Russian spring". They are little known in the West but very well - in Russia. Some commenters from Russia may deny it, but they 100% heard about them. Prosvirnin, Olshansky, Kholmogorov. They all stand for the war and escalation of violence
I follow pro-war media personalities with great interest, because they're very talkative. For example, in an interview with a Ukrainian journalist Gordon Khodorkovsky @mbk_center wept on camera very persuasively, begging forgiveness. Forgiveness for what?
Perhaps Russian nationalist Kholmogorov may shed some light
Feb 28, 2022
"... we both know you're not pro-Ukrainian. We discussed this in Brussels long after the Crimea. We have no big disagreements except for your conviction that it's you and not Putin who should be in charge"
Any comments from @mbk_center on that would be helpful. Kholmogorov's testimony seems to fit well to what we know about Khodorkovsky. In his interview to @albats he openly proclaimed himself a nationalist. But then she *deleted* this statement from the printed version. Why?
My answer: Moscow media establishment like @albats is systematically whitewashing the figures like @mbk_center or @navalny . She knows that much of what they say isn't gonna be accepted well in the West. So she cuts it out or as I'll show later helps them to avoid responsibility
The theme of Sputnik and Pogrom is avoided so carefully, because once it's brought up, one may wonder in which way Moscow "liberal" opposition is different from Kremlin and how was their positive image constructed. I'll cover it in next material on the Russian liberals. The end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Yes. That's a complete misunderstanding of how categorisation and statistics work in Russia. My family used to have relatives: three brothers from the same parents: Kurt, Walter and Horst
According to their passport data, Kurt was German, Walter was Tatar and Horst was Bashkir
Discussions on "percentage" miss one key factor. In most regions population is heavily mixed. In reality you gonna have many ancestries and many bloodlines. So who you identify with is mostly a matter of choice. And the question is - on basis of what is this choice made
For example, in Tatarstan around half marriages are mixed marriages. Who will the children identify with? USSR era was characterised by the heavy domination of ethnic Russians, so almost all children from mixed marriages would become "Russian" - the higher status community
"There's now a shortage of places on Nizhny Tagil graveyards"
Nizhny Tagil is located in the Urals. It's one of the most heavily industrialised Russian cities. Metallurgy, chemicals, machinery. Uralvagonzavod which is usually considered to be the largest Russian military producer is located in this city
Despite its massive industrial production, Nizhny Tagil is one of the most quickly shrinking cities in the region. People die or leave. All the revenues from the industry are sucked by the insatiable Moscow, while the locals get only the poisoned air and water
Someone X. visited a mid size Russian city. Half a million population. He met with a few people including "the watcher" (смотрящий), the mafia boss controlling the situation in this city. X. can be described as a person widely known in the narrow circles
The mafia boss followed X. closely So when they met he told him:
"Let's talk business. I know Freemasons secretly control everything. And I know you are one of them. How can I join you, guys?"
X. denied his freemasonry. So the mafia boss got angry:
"I knew you won't tell me!"
I find this case very illustrative. Low brow culture, low brow agenda, low brow intellectual concepts are often dismissed as "dumb" or "not serious". No, it's those who dismiss them who are really dumb. Because a lot of people with power and resources *actually believe in them*
You see, too many intuitively plausible assumptions about Russia are wrong. For example the one that the war will be exclusively fought with young men. It was in the beginning. Now however, they are actively recruiting in older ages, around 50 and even plus
Makes sense. Russia is ageing and depopulating country. There is not so much youth to start with. Theoretically you could have used massive human resources of much younger Central Asia. But for a number of reasons Central Asians are extremely unwilling to fight for Russia
That has nothing to do with regime or ideology. That has always been so. During the WWI, Tsar's attempt to mobilise Central Asians (simply for wartime labour) resulted in the massive rebellion of 1916. During the WWII, there was no rebellion. But the desertion rates were enormous
- What is long, green and smells with sausage?
- Moscow-Tver train
Why? Well, under the USSR provincials had to go shopping to Moscow. Their shops had no food, often very literally. Today we'll learn an expression "supply category"🧵
Under the centrally planned economy it was the state which supplied food to the localities. It would assign each city one of four "supply categories" determining how much food there will be on shelves. Moscow was supplied far better than anyone while cities like Tver - horribly
Provincial Soviet cities of the lower supply categories might have no food on the shelves at all. Sometimes very literally. Sometimes they would have only the scraps from the table of the higher status city: like some algae, or the disgusting paste "Ocean"
I find this line of argumentation illustrative of the general state of Russian discourse, whether "patriotic" or "liberal". Everything Turkic occupies the same place in the Russian debates as everything Irish in the Imperial British. The Inner Other and the source of all the evil
Reading the Russian-Ukrainian debates with both sides accusing each other of racial impurity and having too many Steppe admixtures or influences, I noticed that their argumentation is mirroring each other. See this Russian nationalist material for example sputnikipogrom.com/history/15934/…
This mutuality and almost exact symmetry of Russian-Ukrainian accusations reminds me of a brilliant
thread on the British rule over the Ionian Isles. Bach then the discourse was similar. Brits and Greeks were constantly accusing each other of Irishness