Kremlin has a problem. Since it didn't declare war, it can't jail the military who just refuse to go to fight to Ukraine. But senior officers can add bad remarks to their personal files. Like this:
"Inclined towards alcohol and drug abuse, towards theft and anal orgies"
Last remark about "anal orgies" is very illustrative. It's not so much about homophobia as a Westerner could presume as about the prison culture. Prison culture permeates society, especially the army, police and state security *far* deeper than foreigners would believe
Prison has very complex sexual code. First and most importantly, *active* homosexualism is okay. It's not even perceived as homosexualism, but as a way to reinforce the social hierarchy. Passive role though is shameful and is reserved for the non-touchable, the "cocks" (петухи)
To become a cock you need to be "moved down" (gang raped, usually). Now you become a non touchable. Nobody can touch you except for sex, otherwise they also become the ritually unclean (законтачиться). If they want to beat you, they should do it with legs, not by hands
Social hierarchy has a spatial dimension. The cocks get their own place in the prison canteen so that normal ones can avoid contact with them. They must sleep near the toilet, ideally on the floor. They get a special spoon with a hole, marking their outcast status
Why do I discuss a fringe topic so meticulously, you may ask? Because it is not fringe. Prison culture shapes the Russian public discourse. Consider Lavrov who "mocked" the French pointing out to their national symbol. A very witty observation, apparently
When Lavrov looks at the Gallic rooster, first thing he thinks about is a prison cock. Why? Because he is deeply influenced by the prison culture, as nearly 100% of the Russian ruling class. Prison culture defines their thinking and behaviour, they just can't think in other terms
Prison culture largely defines the modern Russia. You can't understand its discourse, its sociopolitical hierarchy, its economy, if you don't take into account the deep effect of prison values on how the Russian society works. Russian ruling elites think in prison terms, too
I strongly recommend this drama of 1989, "Беспредел". It's only in Russian but I hope someone will add the English subtitles. I will argue that you can't get how either Russian politics or economy work without understanding such basics as pictured here
Regarding the initial photo, I took its from a Telegram channel "Military ombudsman". Basically he is a lawyer who helps the Russian military to sue the higher ups or to defend from their lawsuits. Since February he seems to be buried under work. The end
PS A political prisoner Ivan Astashin produced a very succinct but good description of the prison sexual code here. It's in Russian but you can google translate it. It gives good understanding about a system of values, set of taboos, etc
Yes, and that is super duper quadruper important to understand
Koreans are poor (don't have an empire) and, therefore, must do productive work to earn their living. So, if the Americans want to learn how to do anything productive they must learn it from Koreans etc
There is this stupid idea that the ultra high level of life and consumption in the United States has something to do with their productivity. That is of course a complete sham. An average American doesn't do anything useful or important to justify (or earn!) his kingly lifestyle
The kingly lifestyle of an average American is not based on his "productivity" (what a BS, lol) but on the global empire Americans are holding currently. Part of the imperial dynamics being, all the actually useful work, all the material production is getting outsourced abroad
Reading Tess of the d'Urbervilles. Set in southwest England, somewhere in the late 1800s. And the first thing you need to know is that Tess is bilingual. He speaks a local dialect she learnt at home, and the standard English she picked at school from a London-trained teacher
So, basically, "normal" language doesn't come out of nowhere. Under the normal conditions, people on the ground speak all the incomprehensible patois, wildly different from each other
"Regular", "correct" English is the creation of state
So, basically, the state chooses a standard (usually, based on one of the dialects), cleanses it a bit, and then shoves down everyone's throats via the standardized education
Purely artificial construct, of a super mega state that really appeared only by the late 1800s
There's a subtle point here that 99,999% of Western commentariat is missing. Like, totally blind to. And that point is:
Building a huuuuuuuuuuge dam (or steel plant, or whatever) has been EVERYONE's plan of development. Like absolutely every developing country, no exceptions
Almost everyone who tried to develop did it in a USSR-ish way, via prestige projects. Build a dam. A steel plant. A huge plant. And then an even bigger one
And then you run out of money, and it all goes bust and all you have is postapocalyptic ruins for the kids to play in
If China did not go bust, in a way like almost every development project from the USSR to South Asia did, that probably means that you guys are wrong about China. Like totally wrong
What you describe is not China but the USSR, and its copies & emulations elsewhere
What I am saying is that "capitalist reforms" are a buzzword devoid of any actual meaning, and a buzzword that obfuscated rather than explains. Specifically, it is fusing radically different policies taken under the radically different circumstances (and timing!) into one - purely for ideological purposes
It can be argued, for example, that starting from the 1980s, China has undertaken massive socialist reforms, specifically in infrastructure, and in basic (mother) industries, such as steel, petrochemical and chemical and, of course, power
The primary weakness of this argument is that being true, historically speaking, it is just false in the context of American politics where the “communism” label has been so over-used (and misapplied) that it lost all of its former power:
“We want X”
“No, that is communism”
“We want communism”
Basically, when you use a label like “communism” as a deus ex machina winning you every argument, you simultaneously re-define its meaning. And when you use it to beat off every popular socio economic demand (e.g. universal healthcare), you re-define communism as a synthesis of all the popular socio economic demands
Historical communism = forced industrial development in a poor, predominantly agrarian country, funded through expropriation of the peasantry
(With the most disastrous economic and humanitarian consequences)
Many are trying to explain his success with some accidental factors such as his “personal charisma”, Cuomo's weakness etc
Still, I think there may be some fundamental factors here. A longue durée shift, and a very profound one
1. Public outrage does not work anymore
If you look at Zohran, he is calm, constructive, and rarely raises his voice. I think one thing that Mamdani - but almost no one else in the American political space is getting - is that the public is getting tired of the outrage
Outrage, anger, righteous indignation have all been the primary drivers of American politics for quite a while
For a while, this tactics worked
Indeed, when everyone around is polite, and soft (and insincere), freaking out was a smart thing to do. It could help you get noticed