The new Russian history textbooks appear superb.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/01/world/europe/russia-textbooks-ukraine-war.html

https://meduza.io/en/feature/2023/08/07/such-unique-times-are-rare-in-history

17 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

The new Russian history textbooks appear superb.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/01/world/europe/russia-textbooks-ukraine-war.html

https://meduza.io/en/feature/2023/08/07/such-unique-times-are-rare-in-history

Silly Russian educators, the Internet exists and you not going to stop people who have a vested interest in the truth about the invasion 

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

Silly Russian educators, the Internet exists and you not going to stop people who have a vested interest in the truth about the invasion 

This is not a particularly enlightened comment when it comes to the question of how internet use can be limited and how people are affected by what they are taught.

1 hour ago, xzar_monty said:

This is not a particularly enlightened comment when it comes to the question of how internet use can be limited and how people are affected by what they are taught.

Not really, in Russia there is not restricted Internet access as far as I know. And if you watch any of the videos from the likes of Daniil  Oriian you will see lots of Russians  he interviews who comment on the numerous  questions and they respond generally in 3 ways based on the fact "anti-war " sentiment  can mean jail time 

• they support the state and everything the Russian propaganda says
• they dont want to comment but you can see they would be critical of Putin and many of the developments like the draft and the reason for the state of the Russian economy
• they openly critical of the war and the reason for the failures  and consequences of the war 

And the last 2 respondents often talk about  how people must  " stop only watching Russia media " and " reference international news sources" 

The point being if a person in Russia wants to know the truth about the invasion and the state of the war they can still use the Internet and this is confirmed by Russians on Codex. Its not like China or NK, yet, where they  have effective Internet control and do control the reality of available information

 

 

 

2 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Not really, in Russia there is not restricted Internet access as far as I know. And if you watch any of the videos from the likes of Daniil  Oriian you will see lots of Russians  he interviews who comment on the numerous  questions and they respond generally in 3 ways based on the fact "anti-war " sentiment  can mean jail time

Daniil Orain is doing commendable work, but to regard that as representative of how things are in Russia and with Russians in general is naive almost in the extreme.

So, when the school system is being inundanted with propagandistic material, you cannot scoff it away as easily as that, by pointing at "silly Russian educators" whose schemes can be easily bypassed. No: if their plans come to fruition, the results are going to be devastating (in terms of historical truths) on a massive scale. There is no doubt that there will still be people who are interested in truth and will go to great lengths to find out about it, but you seem to completely miss one of the main aims of this drastic change in the curriculum: to ensure that less and less people will be honestly curious in the first place. Like, for example, any terrorist trainer will tell you: start indoctrinating them when they're young enough and they'll be yours. This is the aim.

15 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

Daniil Orain is doing commendable work, but to regard that as representative of how things are in Russia and with Russians in general is naive almost in the extreme.

So, when the school system is being inundanted with propagandistic material, you cannot scoff it away as easily as that, by pointing at "silly Russian educators" whose schemes can be easily bypassed. No: if their plans come to fruition, the results are going to be devastating (in terms of historical truths) on a massive scale. There is no doubt that there will still be people who are interested in truth and will go to great lengths to find out about it, but you seem to completely miss one of the main aims of this drastic change in the curriculum: to ensure that less and less people will be honestly curious in the first place. Like, for example, any terrorist trainer will tell you: start indoctrinating them when they're young enough and they'll be yours. This is the aim.

I hear you but I think there are a couple of considerations, firstly I disagree that the interviews that Daniil Orain does arent relevant to the overall views of Russians in general and how things are in Russia 

In fact I would argue they are  one of the most effective and revealing ways to understand the psyche of normal Russians and there views on the state and the war, he  interviews literally hundreds of normal citizens in different parts of the country and asks them questions on a range of topics. And he also doesn't just focus on big cities like Moscow which is relatively removed from the consequence of the war 

I consider the responses to be often more  insightful than anything we get from most outsider sources of media or opinion pieces and Im not dismissing all outsider sources that often we post that are relevant and accurate. Im saying the lived experiences and views of Russians still in Russia are relevant 

But I do agree what the Russian education system is trying to do is egregious and very worrying for the future  of Russia and how they will view and understand the war. But many Russians dont trust the state anyway, for example they only achieved a 55% vaccination rate which is one of the lowest in Europe 

And this was despite the fact the Russian state was saying " take the jab, Sputnik good ". The Russians arent like the Chinese who generally dont question anything that the CCP tells them

So in  summary I dont think creating revisionist history from grades 10-12 is fundamentally going to  change the cynicism or lack of trust many Russians feel about the direction the country is going. That doesn't mean anti-war laws wont be enforced and Russian citizens will publicly criticize the war and Putin himself

Thats a given but thats an outcome of the draconian laws around the autocracy that Putin has created. But that doesnt mean thats what all Russians believe. There is a difference 

 

Reznikov (Ukrainian Defence Minister) has been fired.

Not surprising though. First rumours he was going were back in January due to corruption (iirc not specifically his but in the ministry/ armed forces in general), so not 'counter'offensive related.

Ukraine insists that Russia exploded drones in Romania, while Romania insists no such thing happened and on the other hand you have claims from some Russian sources that drones were launched from Estonia. If this whole ****fest doesn't blow up in the world face I think we can count ourselves as lucky.

39 minutes ago, Sarex said:

Ukraine insists that Russia exploded drones in Romania, while Romania insists no such thing happened and on the other hand you have claims from some Russian sources that drones were launched from Estonia. If this whole ****fest doesn't blow up in the world face I think we can count ourselves as lucky.

Ukraine's desperation to get NATO involved is funny.

Give the poor man an Oscar already

Edited September 4, 20232 yr by HoonDing

First Challenger 2 knocked out- and pretty comprehensively so. Doubt even the most hopeful Ukrainian supporter thinks that one is getting towed back to Poland for a quick fix.

There goes the myth that a Challenger was never destroyed in battle.

14 hours ago, Sarex said:

If this whole ****fest doesn't blow up in the world face I think we can count ourselves as lucky.

Why the constant support for Russia, then?

I suppose one can make a joke that this is at least the second example in a hundred years of Russia and Germany planning a future for Europe and it backfiring spectacularly...

32 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

Why the constant support for Russia, then?

What support? Either way how would supporting anyone here help?

33 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

I suppose one can make a joke that this is at least the second example in a hundred years of Russia and Germany planning a future for Europe and it backfiring spectacularly...

What was the first?

Molotov- Ribbentrop Pact, presumably.

35 minutes ago, Sarex said:

There goes the myth that a Challenger was never destroyed in battle.

To be fair, it wasn't precisely a myth. One hadn't been destroyed by enemy action until whenever that video was shot, just one destroyed accidentally by the Brits themselves.

(OTOH, them surviving getting hit by eleventy billion 70 RPG rounds in Basra always seemed to be about as hyperbolic as, well, calling 70 eleventy billion)

27 minutes ago, Sarex said:

What support? Either way how would supporting anyone here help?

The support that comes down to you saying fairly explicitly that you have "nothing against" Russia in this[*]. That just seems to contradict rather sharply with the other sentiment you just expressed, the one I responded to. As for your second question, you're quite right: nothing that we express here either helps or hinders anything.

And yes, I was referring to Molotov - Ribbentrop, like Zoraptor said.

 

[*] My memory may fail me, in which case apologies. The two words I put in quotes I do seem to remember fairly well, though.

 

EDIT: Btw, upon recently reading A People's Tragedy: The Russian Revolution by Orlando Figes, I learned that not only does revolution devour its own children, as the famous saying goes, but the children of revolution also devour their own children, literally. There are thousands of documented cases from Russia after the revolution, starting, especially, from November 1921. Direct quote: "In our village everyone eats human flesh but they hide it. There are several cafeterias in the village -- and all of them serve up young children." The country directly to the east from where I live has really had far more than its fair share of brutally traumatizing events.

Edited September 5, 20232 yr by xzar_monty

2 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

To be fair, it wasn't precisely a myth. One hadn't been destroyed by enemy action until whenever that video was shot, just one destroyed accidentally by the Brits themselves.

(OTOH, them surviving getting hit by eleventy billion 70 RPG rounds in Basra always seemed to be about as hyperbolic as, well, calling 70 eleventy billion)

The amount of action it has seen is a big contributor, to say nothing about believing UK reports. But I guess we will see if this is a fluke or not. Also I find it pretty funny how much PR the German tanks have been getting lately to counteract the bad press they have received so far. This war is one big commercial, but then again I guess any war is.

1 hour ago, xzar_monty said:

The support that comes down to you saying fairly explicitly that you have "nothing against" Russia in this[*]. That just seems to contradict rather sharply with the other sentiment you just expressed, the one I responded to. As for your second question, you're quite right: nothing that we express here either helps or hinders anything.

I'm pretty sure I never said that. I am not on any side in this, but I do not think that Ukraine is innocent in this whole thing either.

1 hour ago, xzar_monty said:

And yes, I was referring to Molotov - Ribbentrop, like Zoraptor said.

Poland/Ukraine does not an Europe make.

Edited September 5, 20232 yr by Sarex

1 hour ago, Sarex said:

 I do not think that Ukraine is innocent in this whole thing either.

Right??? ! Like, what was she doing in that place alone late night with so much make-up and shorty short miniskirt? 

1 hour ago, Sarex said:

I am not on any side in this, but I do not think that Ukraine is innocent in this whole thing either.

I'd love to hear a convincing argument for this. I can't think of one myself. There is no question that corruption, for instance, is still a big problem in Ukraine, but to regard the victim of an aggression like this as somehow culpable doesn't sound reasonable in the least.

You can, of course, fiddle with words and argue that a country with a corruption problem cannot, technically, ever be "innocent", no matter what the circumstances, but that would be such a cop-out.

 

EDIT: Whoops. Bugger that bugarup.

Edited September 5, 20232 yr by xzar_monty

5 minutes ago, bugarup said:

Right??? ! Like, what was she doing in that place alone late night with so much make-up and shorty short miniskirt? 

Yes of course but she also wanted  to join NATO, had Nukes in her bag and she was a Neo-Nazi so she deserved it 

 

3 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

I'd love to hear a convincing argument for this. I can't think of one myself. There is no question that corruption, for instance, is still a big problem in Ukraine, but to regard the victim of an aggression like this as somehow culpable doesn't sound reasonable in the least.

You can, of course, fiddle with words and argue that a country with a corruption problem cannot, technically, ever be "innocent", no matter what the circumstances, but that would be such a cop-out.

@Sarex

I also am interested in a convincing argument, go into details?

20 minutes ago, bugarup said:

Right??? ! Like, what was she doing in that place alone late night with so much make-up and shorty short miniskirt? 

Apparently setting fire to a building full of Russian civilians.

3 hours ago, Sarex said:

What support? Either way how would supporting anyone here help?

You see, if you're not always posting how evil Russians are innately, then you're pro Russia to him.

3 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

To be fair, it wasn't precisely a myth. One hadn't been destroyed by enemy action until whenever that video was shot, just one destroyed accidentally by the Brits themselves.

(OTOH, them surviving getting hit by eleventy billion 70 RPG rounds in Basra always seemed to be about as hyperbolic as, well, calling 70 eleventy billion

Could be 70 RPGs that weren't armed.  You'd think a tank crew or other commanders would get binned for getting into a situation where 70 AT weapons were fired at you. 

23 minutes ago, Sarex said:

Apparently setting fire to a building full of Russian civilians.

What is this referring to?

6 minutes ago, Malcador said:

You see, if you're not always posting how evil Russians are innately, then you're pro Russia to him.

 

Not really, thats not what most people expect when you have opinion on the invasion. This gets repeated but its not accurate

What most people who support Ukraine would assume is ideological consistency and the same level of outrage we witnessed when the US invaded Iraq. Remember the whole " the US lied and invaded a country, bad warmongering US " !!!!

But you dont see that, we find endless justification and whatoutabism from people who support Russia like the 3 big N lies

I dont think anyone on this forum is like that but its exists on places like Codex