Conservative

hideshow 15 child comments

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (11 children)

I mean, we won't educate the Chinese exchange students either. The US education system is increasingly diploma mills and sinecures for friends of public officials.

Trump's doing the "$5M Visa" gambit. He thinks he can announce "We're going to invite so many students! The best students!" and then slide in a mechanism for channeling kickback into his pocket. But no sane student is going to take him up on this deal. And no quality school is going to want students coming through such a program.

hideshow 11 child comments

parent

[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 point 1 year ago (10 children)

The US education system is increasingly diploma mills and sinecures for friends of public officials.

TIL that sinecure is a Latin word. In Russian it sounds a lot like "a place where you smoke something blue, or emitting blue smoke, or making you blue".

On the subject - the US still designs some of the most advanced things on this planet, so some people do get educated.

hideshow 10 child comments

parent

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (9 children)

the US still designs some of the most advanced things on this planet

We're rapidly tearing all the wiring out of the walls. Just look at the dismantling of the CDC, the FAA, and NOAA. Mass arrest and deportation of some of the smartest and most talented people in their fields, because they aren't native born (or merely white enough to pass the paper bag test). Feds moving to block the trade of high end electronics or the construction of modern power systems and modes of transport. The sheer volume of financial scams coming on the heels of an enormous tech bubble, combined with mass layoffs across software, automotive, and agriculture sectors.

It's bleak, man. Real "you're a Russian landing your first job in 1989 Moscow" bleak.

hideshow 9 child comments

parent

[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 point 1 year ago (8 children)

It’s bleak, man. Real “you’re a Russian landing your first job in 1989 Moscow” bleak.

In 1989 there was literally US food aid being unloaded in Moscow, so it was already bad and the future wasn't so bleak, many people were hopeful. I was born in 1996, so can't speak for the 90s, but it appears it wasn't such a bad time in the sense that people became free to talk and dream and be honest to each other. It was something dark, but pure. It was a bad time for people who were hungry. Unfortunately, while the majority was trying to somehow survive and exploring that newly gained ability to look at the world in its true colors, the minority was preparing what there is now.

But ok, I got your meaning.

The purpose of the bubble, I think (for those who are intentionally helping it), is an intentional drying of the environment for that re-industrialization they want, which requires a change in labor market. It wouldn't be a bad idea if it worked, but that is also true for Russia's shock therapy in the 90s, which didn't.

(BTW, the difference of both Yeltsin's and Putin's regimes from most of the "anti-western" world is that they were not really that, they just weren't accepted, which made them look for alternatives ; perhaps both make it seem like personal ego of the leader, but honestly what USA did in Yeltsin's time was indeed adversarial - basically they used Yeltsin's willingness to make all the leaps of faith to become a NATO member or at least an ally to snatch what's possible and humiliate Russia as possible, and then took a "we didn't sign anything" pose.)

hideshow 8 child comments

parent

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (7 children)

it appears it wasn’t such a bad time in the sense that people became free to talk and dream and be honest to each other.

That's some grade A propaganda. The mid-90s Russia was a brutal Mafia state that preluded a number of ugly conflicts, most notably in Chechnya.

The only thing resembling "freedom" to talk was the rash of ethno-nationalism and reactionary social conservatism which would become the hallmarks of United Russia.

honestly what USA did in Yeltsin’s time was indeed adversarial - basically they used Yeltsin’s willingness to make all the leaps of faith to become a NATO member or at least an ally to snatch what’s possible and humiliate Russia as possible

Russia was being converted into a Western client state, on par with Mexico or Indonesia. Yeltsin opened the doors to a US based looting of the former USSR. Putin came into power on a wave of nationalist sentiment that closed the door and internalized the wealth of Russia again (to Putin's cartel of guys).

The idea that this was some kind of liberalization of Russian politics requires you to ignore everything but the superficial token liberalist parties that never had a popular base of support.

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 point 1 year ago (6 children)

That’s some grade A propaganda. The mid-90s Russia was a brutal Mafia state that preluded a number of ugly conflicts, most notably in Chechnya.

How is that propaganda and why are you answering it with things orthogonal to what I said? You have a disability, perhaps, making you incapable of understanding texts taken in full?

The only thing resembling “freedom” to talk was the rash of ethno-nationalism and reactionary social conservatism which would become the hallmarks of United Russia.

Those were present in the public perception, thus those were present in politics. No, ER is not partial to any specific ideology. They are the ruling party and do whatever they want. That's their only ideology.

Russia was being converted into a Western client state, on par with Mexico or Indonesia. Yeltsin opened the doors to a US based looting of the former USSR.

Yeltsin thought differently. When he realized that, he also realized he has no plan. Thus the weird moves after 1996 and ultimately passing power to Putin.

Putin came into power on a wave of nationalist sentiment that closed the door and internalized the wealth of Russia again (to Putin’s cartel of guys).

He didn't close any doors. Just slowly accumulated power, as a side effect pressing out other interests.

The idea that this was some kind of liberalization of Russian politics requires you to ignore everything but the superficial token liberalist parties that never had a popular base of support.

What you wrote doesn't have any connection to what I wrote.

But since that's wrong as well - no, roughly in 1989-1993 Russian politics existed for real. And in 1993-1999 there was growing understanding that things went the wrong way in 1993. And the 1996 election was competitive among the populace, even if CPRF the party clearly intended to lose politically.

In any case what I wrote was about the society and culture, not about politics, you just can't perceive anything outside of your partisan bullshit, can you?

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

How is that propaganda

Because it's factually untrue and largely a product of American criticism of Societ Era politics.

You have a disability, perhaps, making you incapable of understanding texts taken in full?

Western propaganda in a nutshell. You're so invested in your hatred of a foreign country that you attribute any rebuttal to mental illness.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

Because it’s factually untrue and largely a product of American criticism of Societ Era politics.

I must have imagined everything I know of the 90s in Russia, including all read, heard and seen.

Western propaganda in a nutshell. You’re so invested in your hatred of a foreign country that you attribute any rebuttal to mental illness.

There was no rebuttal, I live in Russia and you are arguing like a typical American. You don't know how hard it was to keep a more specific description in.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

I must have imagined everything I know of the 90s in Russia

You definitely got fed a load. Boris Yeltsin had to shell Parliament into submission to prevent himself from being removed. A year later, Russians were in Chechnya doing what Americans would repeat in Iraq ten years later.

Like, what on earth do you think Interior Ministry Order 870 was in response to? Were all those civil protests and demonstrations of the 90s getting a twenty one gun salute?

I live in Russia

Then you should fucking know better

parent

[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

You definitely got fed a load.

You didn't yet specify where.

Boris Yeltsin had to shell Parliament into submission to prevent himself from being removed.

Correct, that happened in year 1993, which is the reason for me having it as a separation point.

A year later, Russians were in Chechnya doing what Americans would repeat in Iraq ten years later.

No. First Chechen war was a failure with many human losses, newspapers and TV (including state channels) and associations of soldiers' mothers and such were howling both at the operation itself and at the losses, and it ended with Khasavyurt accord signed by general Lebed on Russia's behalf (he was quite popular, BTW, and held pacifist enough views, being himself a participant of the war in Afghanistan ; later became a politician and died in a helicopter crash).

If anything, First Chechen war showed that Russian society does still have some spine.

And the Second Chechen war happened after a few people (one can say politicians) visible since late 80s were killed, and power balance changed.

That doesn't change the fact that censorship existed in the USSR, freedom of movement inside the country was limited, and political parties other than the CPSU didn't exist. While roughly between 1989 and 2012 Russian society had freedom of thought at least.

Like, what on earth do you think Interior Ministry Order 870 was in response to?

It's year 2002, when Putin still hasn't destroyed his (oligarchic, and honestly now those people don't seem much nicer) opposition, and federal troops in the Northern Caucasus were in some regards similar to an occupying force. I think it was in response to that, but also, as you might have noticed, these people don't need formalities to get something done.

I don't know what you're trying to say. If you are somehow imagining USSR before breakup as something like the USA of today, just communist, I'm afraid it was not. It was a country almost entirely living in "safe poverty", where you wouldn't generally starve, but other than that it was pretty depressive. I mean, you should watch some Soviet movie classics, even the more cheerful kind will educate you on that.

The 90s were a failure of trying to fix that thing when it stopped working. Yes, it was a catastrophe, but the USSR before it wasn't some heaven on earth or even a good place to live. Take Chikatilo (the serial murderer) - one suspect before him was tortured for admission of guilt and executed.

parent

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

You didn’t yet specify where.

You're being deliberately obtuse.

Yes, it was a catastrophe, but the USSR before it wasn’t some heaven on earth

Imagine saying this about Ukraine pre-invasion.

parent

[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 point 1 year ago

You’re being deliberately obtuse.

I'm being patient, trying to help you understand. Not accepting bare statements is not being obtuse.

Imagine saying this about Ukraine pre-invasion.

This comparison is delusional. USSR was already ruined by 1989. The question was only where to go from there. You are comparing some of its systems conclusively crashing to a war.

What happened in 1991 is that there was narrow balance on the consensus on a new union treaty, but the GKChP coup attempt (real or not) shattered that balance, allowing leaders of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus to sign its dissolution just so, and nobody protested.

They didn't have the mandate for that, but the Soviet society in general was shaken by those few days of tanks on the streets and jammers being turned on first in a few years. Nobody wanted a totalitarian state back (after "glasnost" policy).

So - before the coup attempt most of the union voted for its preservation (meaning a new union treaty, leaving things as they are wasn't an option, simply because nothing worked). After the coup you'd be hard pressed to find anyone supporting its preservation.

Before the coup and during it the center also soiled its pants by trying to solve all ethnic conflicts with similar elegance (enraging locals, committing some crimes against civilians, then fucking right off) - them stopping the pogroms in Baku was probably the only bright spot (it's officially a day of mourning for Azeris, they call it the Black September, and western politicians too mourn those poor looters raping and burning Armenians all over the city, and condemn Soviet troops ; BTW, I mentioned Lebed before - he was the commander of that force).

So in 1991 Yeltsin was a hero (unfortunately).

Now between 1991 and 1993 the "shock therapy" and privatization happened, conducted in such a way that by 1993 like half of the populace thought that it's been enough. The other half kinda thought the same, but was more frightened of something like united communist and neo-Nazi reaction, thus supporting Yeltsin.

It has to be clarified that in the crisis of 1993 the parliament really did consist of mostly communists and neo-Nazis, a really weird hybrid. While Yeltsin's supporters seemed "normal", and just for some liberal democracy.

The constitutional court ruled that both presidential and parliament snap elections must be held, thus rotating both parties of the crisis, but then Yeltsin, as you've mentioned, shelled the parliament building and had his way.

And like since 1993 to the 1996 election there was outrage over such a resolution of it all, and the 1996 election saw first widespread use in Russia of USA-style political campaigning, and there were protests, and and many people thought the election was stolen and Zyuganov actually won, but Zyuganov removed himself from that debate, so it was Yeltsin's victory in the end.

Then, yeah, that clan sort of cemented their rule (and power in media) enough to successfully present Putin, well, as the second best thing after communists winning instead of Yeltsin in 1996, playing on resentment, and thus he won his only real election.

The reason I've described all this is to explain that it was a gradual process, not some immediate apocalypse. And yes, in 1991 it went the wrong way, and in 1993 again the wrong way. But in the 1989 it didn't, and, say, when they talk about looting and ruin of Soviet industries - that too was happening gradually. Many of those actually stopped existing in the 00s, surviving 90s and even functioning well enough.

And about level of life - I don't think you realize how much higher it became in the 00s in Russia as compared to both 90s and Soviet 80s.

parent

[–] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

If someone were actually trying to weaken the US in favour of Russia and/or China I truly can't think of a better way to do it than what he's doing.

parent

[–] j0ester@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

Go blame your states, for not teaching properly. Even young kids now a days are fucking glued on to their tablets… always using it for entertainment purposes.

My nephew who’s 9 visits us a lot, and he’s glued to his iPad.. even when he’s trying to pick up a chair and bring it somewhere else. It’s disgusting.

parent

[–] PotentialProblem@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

That sounds like a parent issue not so much a state issue. I guess you could argue that maybe both the kids parents are working too much and are too tired to parent… which could be considered a state issue.

Anyone know why we keep building schools instead of hiring teachers? I swear every school near me has gotten replaced but the class size is 30 to 1.

parent

[–] selkiesidhe@sh.itjust.works 42 points 1 year ago (3 children)

China figured out that the orange cancer is a cheap whore and paid for it...

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)

Doubtful. This was out of a meeting with the South Korean President. Trump probably just got confused and announced the name of the wrong country.

parent

[–] MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

Wait, isn't China the really big one east of Europe?

parent

[–] Redjard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 year ago

What did they pay though? Any new gold ingots been spotted recently? Some curious real estate gifts?

parent

[–] Lucky_777@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

Dementia and Tacos. What a dynamite combination

[–] DarkDecay@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago (1 child)

But his administration is gutting education. How many students are really going to want to study here. Heck you could be deported the very next day with flip-flop trump in control

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago

Now that he cut the NIH, there would be zero reason for Chinese science students to study in the US, China is much better funded.

parent

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 54 points 1 year ago (4 children)

🎵🎶 TACO's modern life (TACO's modern life) 🎶🎵

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Don't drag Rocko into this, he doesn't deserve that.

Fun fact, that show is now 32 years old, and the final season aired 29 years ago. TIL Netflix made a Rocko's Modern Life special in 2019.

parent

[–] Rcklsabndn@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Laundry day is a very dangerous day.

parent

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago

I'm so old.

parent

[–] fittedsyllabi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

He must be an intellectual.

parent

[–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 year ago*

hates china

hates immigrants

wants chinese immigrants

🤔

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 61 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Lol conservatives circle racist logic. White people are genetically superior, but are also oppressed. White people are the smartest, but Asians are the best at math and computers. White people are the strongest, but black people just are naturally gifted at sports. White people are the reason we have great things like the engine, but Jews control everything. White people are just harder workers, but Hispanic people need to be the ones doing the hard jobs. Make it make sense Republicans.

hideshow 12 child comments

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's just fascism. The enemy is strong and weak at the same time, depending on what the fascists need at that moment.

parent

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

I honestly would respect them more if they just said it out loud. It's like dealing with a five year old when you catch them in a lie but they just refuse to admit it. Grow a pair and stand ten toes down on your beliefs. But they won't. Cowards.

parent

[–] clif@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

"stand ten toes down on your beliefs"

That's an interesting idiom(?). Never heard that one before.

parent

[–] don@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 year ago (1 child)

Make it make sense Republicans.

I’ve heard some tall orders in my day, but this is akin to taking a deep breath, walking out to the sun, and moving it around with your bare hands.

parent

[–] Auntievenim@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

parent

[–] devolution@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I'll have you know I'm a black person who is terrible at sports thank you.

parent

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 12 points 1 year ago

Just met a 6ft 8 in black college student. Never played basketball in high school or college. Never was interested. I told him he left a herd of crying coaches in his wake.

parent

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

parent

[–] ksigley@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

parent

[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

"conservatives" are capitalist handlers that use whichever line brings them the most money at the time. As long as they have good doggies who lap up what they are fed and lie down when told they can target and support Hispanics while profiting off cheap and powerless labor.

parent

[–] ganksy@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I would preface that with "conservative elites" are the ones focused on money alone. Most conservatives make choices against their own welfare in exchange for fear and rage. They get to be the "winner" in some ideological game and that's enough for them.

parent

[–] CatDogL0ver@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

And white people are mixed. They have minority DNA..

parent

[–] radiohead37@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Head scratching. That doesn’t even align with the conservative agenda. Which university is filling Trumps pocket for him to make this decision?

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] grue@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

Don't get me wrong, Trump is 1000% a corrupt grifter who's never seen a bribe he didn't take. But I think there's more (and less) to it than that. If you look at his pattern of making decisions based on whatever he saw on Fox News most recently, it's increasingly clear that he's just fucking losing it and becoming dangerously suggestible as his dementia progresses. Any other leader with access to have a one-on-one discussion with him plays him like a damn fiddle.

parent

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 3 points 1 year ago

And he's got Stephen "PeeWee Himmler" Miller whispering poison in his ear like Wormtongue. Many of the worst things coming out of this administration are straight from PeeWee Himmler.

parent

[–] flandish@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

this is because trump is not a conservative, he’s a capitalist. like all republicans and democrats. they will phase in an out of various agendas if it means more profit.

parent

[–] ganksy@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hardly a capitalist. I know in practice capitalism rigs the system for the ultra rich but theoretically it's supposed to be free market. He's a perfect example of a kleptocrat.

parent

[–] flandish@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

kleptocracy is a child of capitalism in its aged state.

parent

[–] ganksy@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago

I agree. It's late-stage capitalism in practice.

parent

load more comments (1 reply)

[–] LordCrom@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Trump probably thinks more along the lines of 600,000 new workers he can abuse ala FoxConn style. A.k.a. let's import 600k workers who won't complain about shit work conditions and little pay, or even payment in company dollars that can only be used in the company store

https://foreignpolicy.com/2008/02/15/mao-offered-kissinger-10-million-chinese-women/

[–] tal@lemmy.today 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

Mao offered Kissinger 10 million Chinese women

SAToday‘s "OnDeadline" blog finds some choice morsels from newly released transcripts of Henry Kissinger’s 1973 meeting with Mao:

You know, China is a very poor country," Mao is quoted as saying during the exchange. "We don’t have much. What we have in excess is women. So if you want them we can give a few of those to you, some tens of thousands." The Chinese leader drew laughter when he returned to the proposition a few minutes later. "Do you want our Chinese women? We can give you 10 million." he said, adding: "We have too many women … They give birth to children and our children are too many."

It’s not clear whether Mao is at all serious — he was a pretty crazy dude, after all — but Kissinger’s response is precious:

It is such a novel proposition, we will have to study it.

EDIT: I'd also add that I was fairly sure that there was a second quote from some other diplomatic exchange in which someone, I thought Mao, offered 1 million Chinese people (not specifically women), with the phrasing something like "What is it that you want? Is it people? We can provide 1 million people", but I guess it's possible that I'm just misremembering some reference to the above.

considers

Might have been me accurately remembering Kissinger mis-remembering too, since I've read some of his material on diplomacy with China, and the source material wouldn't have been declassified at the time the books were written, so I assume that he wouldn't be able to directly use it in writing his books.

[–] ruan@lemmy.eco.br 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Your source is not credible.

It's not clear wheter Mao os ar all serious

Yeah, the original transcript is really not clear whether Mao joking or not with that sentence...

Dr. Kissinger: We think they will give it to us. It will be a difficult battle, but we are quite certain we will win. We are proposing it also in such general language that we can remove discrimination that still exists towards the People’s Republic.

Chairman Mao: The trade between our two countries at present is very pitiful. It is gradually increasing. You know China is a very poor country. We don’t have much. What we have in excess is women. (Laughter)

Dr. Kissinger: There are no quotas for those or tariffs.

Chairman Mao: So if you want them we can give a few of those to you, some tens of thousands. (Laughter)

Prime Minister Chou: Of course, on a voluntary basis.

Chairmain Mao: Let them go to your place. They will create disasters. That way you can lessen our burdens. (Laughter)

[Page 131]

Dr. Kissinger: Our interest in trade with China is not commercial. It is to establish a relationship that is necessary for the political relations we both have.

Chairman Mao: Yes.

Dr. Kissinger: That is the spirit with which we are conducting our discussions.

...

Chairman Mao: (Laughing) Those are honest words.

Dr. Kissinger: This is our position.

Chairman Mao: Do you want our Chinese women? We can give you ten million. (Laughter, particularly among the women.)

Dr. Kissinger: The Chairman is improving his offer.

Chairman Mao: By doing so we can let them flood your country with disaster and therefore impair your interests. In our country we have too many women, and they have a way of doing things. They give birth to children and our children are too many. (Laughter) [Page 132]

Dr. Kissinger: It is such a novel proposition, we will have to study it.

Chairman Mao: You can set up a committee to study the issue. That is how your visit to China is settling the population question. (Laughter)

Complete source: https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1969-76v18/d12

Ahh, actually the transcript said there was laugther all along that exchange about China being poor and having an excess of woman population, how could this Foreign Policy writer have guessed if Mao was being serious ir not?!

Edit: And I just read a little bit more of the transcript of this conversation, futher down:

Chairman Mao: (Looking toward Miss Shen.) The Chinese have a good command of English. (To Prime Minister Chou.) Who is she?

Prime Minister Chou: Miss Shen Jo-yun.

Chairman Mao: Girls. (Prime Minister Chou laughs.) Today I have been uttering some nonsense for which I will have to beg the pardon of the women of China.

Dr. Kissinger: It sounded very attractive to the Americans present.(Chairman Mao and the girls laugh.)

Mao apologises for his jokes about women in China that were made Just a few moments before... Damn, but who would expect a Foreign Policy article writer to just have read the full transcript of this conversation he was quoting before wondering If Mao was really offering 10 million chinese women as a serious deal... We will really never know If that was a real offer by this Crazy Mao guy to the Saint Dr. Kissing gentleman... 🙄

parent

[–] Deflated0ne@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

What makes him think 600,000 Asian students would want to come here?

Where they'll be abused, mistreated, potentially kidnapped and trafficked because some fat powertripping chud can't distinguish between Asian and South American?

The education is garbage. Expensive garbage. And getting shittier all the time.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago

I guess China has something on trump. At least they operate the same way as trump.