Kamil Galeev Profile picture
May 31, 2022 12 tweets 3 min read Read on X
Russian regionalist Media «7x7. Horizontal Russia» compiled a map of attacks on the military commissariats (draft & recruiting stations) all over Russia from Feb 24 to May 31, 2022. Unlike most of what passes for "liberal Russian media" in the West, this one isn't based in Moscow Image
«7x7. Horizontal Russia» was established in the northern Komi republic. Having expanded to dozens of Russian regions it still keeps its regional focus. They do massive work on the ground that remains virtually unnoticed in the West semnasem.org
I'm inclined to think that the focus of Western journalists, politicians and (let's be honest) researchers on everything Moscow-related at the expense of the rest of the country is motivated not only by their implicit biases or prejudices but also by simple laziness
How come that the Western media pay nearly zero attention to a wildly successful regional initiative?

1. They're biased
2. They're lazy

And they lack self awareness to realize either of this
Look whom the Western media are quoting and interviewing. Almost always it will be the representatives of a closely interconnected political&media ecosystem of Moscow tusovochka. Those who work in the province get almost zero coverage no matter how much they are doing
Interestingly enough the same Westerners usually can reflect their own biases and prejudices when it comes to their own country. But for some reason they lose their ability when it comes to the Eastern Europe. The can't overcome their basis because they don't know it exists
Why do Westerners give voice only to the Moscow tusovochka? My guess:

1. It's easy
2. It's pleasant. Tusovochka usually has that social polish that will make Westerners feel good. And feeling good is the priority here
2. They think they can add some positive knowledge this way
It's delusion for most part. I would argue that talking to, writing about, quoting the Moscow tusovochka has negative rather than positive value for the progress of knowledge. You give additional representation to people and institutions which are already wildly overrepresented
Giving additional platform and additional representation to the already wildly overrepresented Moscow establishment skewes the already existing bias even further. You are not helping, you are making things worse. Just stop it
Instead of quoting the Moscow media how about quoting the regional ones such as 7*7? Instead of quoting the Moscow politicians and activists how about quoting the regional ones which currently have almost no voice and no representation in the West at all? End of thread
PS Moscow's domination over the regions is not "natural". It's constructed. And its key element is the cultural hegemony which largely results from Moscow being almost the sole intermediary with the West (with the single exception of StP). This cycle must be broken
When you give additional platform and additional voice to Moscow you reinforce its cultural hegemony over the regions. You increase its status and its symbolic capital. You reinforce the current imperial system. It's a political act

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Kamil Galeev

Kamil Galeev Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @kamilkazani

May 2
Fake jobs are completely normal & totally natural. The reason is: nobody understands what is happening and most certainly does not understand why. Like people, including the upper management have some idea of what is happening in an organisation, and this idea is usually wrong.
As they do not know and cannot know causal relations between the input and output, they just try to increase some sort of input, in a hope for a better output, but they do not really know which input to increase.
Insiders with deep & specific knowledge, on the other hand, may have a more clear & definite idea of what is happening, and even certain, non zero degree of understanding of causal links between the input and output

(what kind of input produces this kind of output)
Read 6 tweets
Apr 12
There is a common argument that due process belongs only to citizens

Citizens deserve it, non citizens don’t

And, therefore, can be dealt with extrajudicially

That is a perfectly logical, internally consistent position

Now let’s think through its implications
IF citizens have the due process, and non-citizens don’t

THEN we have two parallel systems of justice

One slow, cumbersome, subject to open discussion and to appeal (due process)

Another swift, expedient, and subject neither to a discussion nor to an appeal (extrajudicial)
And the second one already encompasses tens of millions of non citizens living in the United States, legal and illegal, residents or not.

Now the question would be:

Which system is more convenient for those in power?

Well, the answer is obvious
Read 10 tweets
Apr 5
I have recently read someone comparing Trump’s tariffs with collectivisation in the USSR. I think it is an interesting comparison. I don’t think it is exactly the same thing of course. But I indeed think that Stalin’s collectivisation offers an interesting metaphor, a perspective to think aboutImage
But let’s make a crash intro first

1. The thing you need to understand about the 1920s USSR is that it was an oligarchic regime. It was not strictly speaking, an autocracy. It was a power of few grandees, of the roughly equal rank.
2. Although Joseph Stalin established himself as the single most influential grandee by 1925, that did not make him a dictator. He was simply the most important guy out there. Otherwise, he was just one of a few. He was not yet the God Emperor he would become later.
Read 30 tweets
Mar 16
The great delusion about popular revolts is that they are provoked by bad conditions of life, and burst out when they exacerbate. Nothing can be further from truth. For the most part, popular revolts do not happen when things get worse. They occur when things turn for the better
This may sound paradoxical and yet, may be easy to explain. When the things had been really, really, really bad, the masses were too weak, to scared and too depressed to even think of raising their head. If they beared any grudges and grievances, they beared them in silence.
When things turn for the better, that is when the people see a chance to restore their pride and agency, and to take revenge for all the past grudges, and all the past fear. As a result, a turn for the better not so much pacifies the population as emboldens and radicalises it.
Read 6 tweets
Mar 1
Three years of the war have passed

So, let’s recall what has happened so far

The first thing to understand about the Russian-Ukrainian war is that Russia did not plan a war. And it, most certainly, did not plan the protracted hostilities of the kind we are seeing today Image
This entire war is the regime change gone wrong.

Russia did not want a protracted war (no one does). It wanted to replace the government in Kyiv, put Ukraine under control and closely integrate it with Russia

(Operation Danube style) Image
One thing to understand is that Russia viewed Ukraine as a considerable asset. From the Russian perspective, it was a large and populous country populated by what was (again, from the Russian perspective) effectively the same people. Assimilatable, integratable, recruitable Image
Read 32 tweets
Feb 8
Why does Russia attack?

In 1991, Moscow faced two disobedient ethnic republics: Chechnya and Tatarstan. Both were the Muslim majority autonomies that refused to sign the Federation Treaty (1992), insisting on full sovereignty. In both cases, Moscow was determined to quell them. Image
Still, the final outcome could not be more different. Chechnya was invaded, its towns razed to the ground, its leader assassinated. Tatarstan, on the other hand, managed to sign a favourable agreement with Moscow that lasted until Putin’s era.

The question is - why. Image
Retrospectively, this course of events (obliterate Chechnya, negotiate with Tatarstan) may seem predetermined. But it was not considered as such back then. For many, including many of Yeltsin’s own partisans it came as a surprise, or perhaps even as a betrayal.

Let's see why Image
Read 24 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(