The tragedy of US-Russian relations

On a serious note, I really do think better US-Russia relations are a good thing for both countries and for the world. Yet I'm not hopeful that will happen in a meaningful and enduring way until all the Cold Warriors on both sides are dead. One of our most important and somewhat moderate statesmen, Sen. John McCain, asserts on national television that the Russia is "a gas station masquerading as a country." Sure, Russia's economy is overly dependent on oil and gas products, but have we any thought to what a shitty, casually insensitive thing that is to say? They hear that, of course, and all that from a country that doesn't even have its own language. Russia is an ancient culture with a complex history. It's contribution to the arts, humanities, and sciences are immeasurable. They sacrificed more for the sake of defeating the Nazis in Europe than the rest of the world combined. Very real horrors have to Russia from Western Europe--far worse than anything the United States has ever experienced in its brief history. Do you remember the time 1 in 10 Americans died in a war for national survival? Of course you don't, but the Russians do because it happened within their living memory. Yet we regard their security concerns as paranoia to be to teased, while we are waging "preemptive wars" with middle-sized countries because they may someday be a threat also in the name of security. Better relations between states, as between people, begins with respect--and to get it you have to give it. We don't. They don't. If they are nothing but a "gas station masquerading as a country", then we are Walmart doing the same. And so the tragedy of great nations continues.

Here is the Kuban Cossak Choir singing a song about the Turko-Russian wars that began long before the "United States of America" was even a dream. Enjoy.

On the nature of intellect and delusion

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-trump-voter-happy-deplorable-perspec-0206-md-20170203-story.html

____________________________________


The author writes, "

I am weary of lectures about what values I should have and how insensitive I am. I am tired of being "guilted" for having a job, finding a way to live comfortably and having a practical sense of priority on global warming. I make choices and decisions based on what can be done and what I can pay for, not on what is said or promised. I don't carry signs, chant, dress up in clever costumes, vandalize or wear pink hats.



But all that doesn't matter. My grandchildren should make these choices themselves, not the current collection of Washington and state government politicos who use my taxes to make empty speeches and buy votes in the next election. Balance the budgets and pay off state and federal debt first. And then we can have all the empty values-centered debates about which cause du jour we want to throw money at.

It seems that the outcome of the last election is understood only by people like me. Frankly, I don't like Donald Trump either. He is arrogant, careless with what he says, overly competitive and insensitive.

I voted for Trump because he was the alternative to letting a collection of free spenders, organizers, race-baiters, intellectuals, tree huggers and professional value arbitrators continue to spend our grandchildren's money."

_______________________________

This kind of thinking is common, contemptuous, and dangerous. It's dangerous because there is more than a kernel of sense in what the author is saying, but this only serves to give a broader delusion credibility. There are legitimate criticisms of the institutions that person thought they were opposing when they voted for Trump. What makes it dangerous is the seamless mix of reason and unreason. The claim you bolded is begging the question, assuming that the daily, practical contexts wherein this individually must choose to deprioritize global warming are not shaped by national-level policies, some of which may actually be efficacious in shifting the home economy. The author subtly assumes with justification the primacy of debt repayment as the determinant their grandchildren's' quality of life. I hate this crap because it shows the horrifying extent to which humans utilize their intellect not to apprehend truth by questioning what is believed, but to defend what is believed. This person, for whatever reason--perhaps because debt management has been an ongoing challenge for them personally, perhaps because a black man was president when they were told the debt was a problem--believes debt is the most important thing and for some reason we can only speculate upon doesn't believe global warming is a problem. Everything else is just an elaborate fancy spun around those beliefs to make them appear more reasonable. They didn't vote for Trump, they voted for the guy with an R by his name, just like they always do.