¨so if you feel like ordering your copy now I’d greatly appreciate it.¨
You got it John. Looking forward to this one since I was reading the history in the newspapers. (Including the Buchanan columns - he was on the OpEd page.)
David Duke: “In my opinion, the destruction of white Russia would be a great explosion for all of Europe. It would be the end of the European blood heritage. If Russia is destroyed, all of us—including Americans—will be destroyed.”
And there´s the original version of support for Russia based on a blood and soil kinship between white Russians and American Neo-Confederates. The Neo-Confederacies enemies, aside from their own people, is always the United States; allying with a power far away across the sea is a no-brainer for them. (OK, fine, everything is a non-brainer for them. Still.)
¨It won't be socialist Soviet Union. It won't be the Russian empire, but a great state and this territory will inevitably rise. I want to turn the will of history back.¨
That plan is in the middle of failing badly. Now the Russian Federation is even weaker than it was in 1993.
elm
why is so much of changes in political culture simply generational rollover?
A little odd to reduce "economic genocide" - the largest peacetime drop of life expectancy in the 20thC, though I could be wrong - to "Well, the reforms *were* a little burdensome!" Pre-ordered the book.
You also didn't say "Well"! My god, it's almost as if the entire quote were fabricated to express how trivializing the offhand comments about "burdensome reforms" sound compared to the reality! (You don't have to tell me...I know you didn't actually say the exact phrase "burdensome reforms.")
Yes, my point is you're just misreading me and putting words in my mouth — I didn't say they were a little burdensome because I didn't imply that they were trivial, I said they were burdensome because they were burdensome. I quoted the comment about "economic genocide," presumably that's where you read it. And I also noted that it destroyed Russia's economy, standard of living, and caused mass unemployment. You decided I was downplaying the effects for whatever reason, it is not contained in the text.
"Devastated the standard of living" is not synonymous with "drastically increased social deprivation and mortality and suicide rates." There is no mention of the mass death caused by the dissolution of the USSR, at all.
I don't have a "fucking problem," man. I said that I thought that something was missing from the piece - in a way that I hoped would indicate that I didn't think it was some damning intentional omission - and you seem to have immediately taken that it as a malicious attack on your scholarly integrity. I'm not out to get you, I just, from my perspective reading the piece, disagree with how you characterized something. Go try to have a better day or something, jeez.
¨so if you feel like ordering your copy now I’d greatly appreciate it.¨
You got it John. Looking forward to this one since I was reading the history in the newspapers. (Including the Buchanan columns - he was on the OpEd page.)
David Duke: “In my opinion, the destruction of white Russia would be a great explosion for all of Europe. It would be the end of the European blood heritage. If Russia is destroyed, all of us—including Americans—will be destroyed.”
And there´s the original version of support for Russia based on a blood and soil kinship between white Russians and American Neo-Confederates. The Neo-Confederacies enemies, aside from their own people, is always the United States; allying with a power far away across the sea is a no-brainer for them. (OK, fine, everything is a non-brainer for them. Still.)
¨It won't be socialist Soviet Union. It won't be the Russian empire, but a great state and this territory will inevitably rise. I want to turn the will of history back.¨
That plan is in the middle of failing badly. Now the Russian Federation is even weaker than it was in 1993.
elm
why is so much of changes in political culture simply generational rollover?
Pre-ordered!
This is the same Limonov that wrote the foreward to Taibbi's 'The eXile' compilation?
Yup, the eXile had published rather a lot of his columns
Just ordered...looking forward!
A little odd to reduce "economic genocide" - the largest peacetime drop of life expectancy in the 20thC, though I could be wrong - to "Well, the reforms *were* a little burdensome!" Pre-ordered the book.
I didn't say a little burdensome, you said that
You also didn't say "Well"! My god, it's almost as if the entire quote were fabricated to express how trivializing the offhand comments about "burdensome reforms" sound compared to the reality! (You don't have to tell me...I know you didn't actually say the exact phrase "burdensome reforms.")
Yes, my point is you're just misreading me and putting words in my mouth — I didn't say they were a little burdensome because I didn't imply that they were trivial, I said they were burdensome because they were burdensome. I quoted the comment about "economic genocide," presumably that's where you read it. And I also noted that it destroyed Russia's economy, standard of living, and caused mass unemployment. You decided I was downplaying the effects for whatever reason, it is not contained in the text.
"Devastated the standard of living" is not synonymous with "drastically increased social deprivation and mortality and suicide rates." There is no mention of the mass death caused by the dissolution of the USSR, at all.
Look, I don't know what your fucking problem is, but it was not my intention to minimize the negative effects of the reforms.
I don't have a "fucking problem," man. I said that I thought that something was missing from the piece - in a way that I hoped would indicate that I didn't think it was some damning intentional omission - and you seem to have immediately taken that it as a malicious attack on your scholarly integrity. I'm not out to get you, I just, from my perspective reading the piece, disagree with how you characterized something. Go try to have a better day or something, jeez.
Ordered!