China and Russia openly mock Biden Admin

Watch
Pythian
Badges: 18
#21
Report 4 weeks ago
#21
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
Yes.

No. Countries can invade other countries if they so choose.

Yes.

(My point isn't that countries should or shouldn't do this but that they can. Strong countries can essentially wipe their arse on International law which makes it worthless)

the strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must
Thanks for replying.

You say that "countries can invade other countries if they so choose", and it's true in the sense that you could load a rifle and shoot your neighbour. You could say "Look. I'm wiping my ass on domestic law". But, it doesn't say anything beyond that.

Freedom is militated not just from absence of restraints, but from the likely consequences that would flow behaviour. If I knew I'd be shot for stealing, it would have an effect on behaviour. Anarchy is indeed the axiomatic foundation of all international relations. But there is - in fact - a subtle structure and order beneath the surface. International norms are part of it.

I am not sure I get that last quote. International relations have come some way since antiquity.
0
reply
Pythian
Badges: 18
#22
Report 4 weeks ago
#22
(Original post by Napp)
In what way is fascism in the ascendency? Are you referring solely to China or?

I would point out that conflating China and Russia serves little purpose other than undermining your point though. Russia is not even remotely comparable to China in terms of abuse of citizens, lack of free speech etc (even if the Kremlin would like otherwise). I've said it once, ive said it a thousand times, the west made a dreadful error when it made it a policy choice to alienate Russia and push it towards the Celestials. Russia and China on their own are not much to be feared but together they are happily a match for the US in various sectors. Be it Russia and its talent for making rather good weapons or Chinas proclivity for outbuilding everyone. Never mind the eastern border problems are a self created problem, one that we could do without.
I would describe Russia as authoritarian. Not fascist.

Edit: Perhaps I overstated my point. I may have been striving for the poetic.
Last edited by Pythian; 4 weeks ago
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#23
Report 4 weeks ago
#23
(Original post by Pythian)
I would describe Russia as authoritarian. Not fascist.

Edit: Perhaps I overstated my point. I may have been striving for the poetic.
Authoritarian, sure. Although i would note that trying to ever talk of somewhere as vast and diverse as Russia in absolutes is inherently problematic. Just as the liberals of Petersburg are not the same as those who live in the provinces so is their politics. It is a shame that Putin has abandoned even the pretence of being answerable to the people but the facts on the ground are still different to what even he would have them be. Merely look at the protests that stemmed from Navalney or Moscows being a **** to the Far East etc. :lol:
The point being, its an impressively diverse country in everything from ethnic groups to its politics, despite what the ejits at CNN or whatever would have people believe.
0
reply
Pythian
Badges: 18
#24
Report 4 weeks ago
#24
(Original post by Napp)
Authoritarian, sure. Although i would note that trying to ever talk of somewhere as vast and diverse as Russia in absolutes is inherently problematic. Just as the liberals of Petersburg are not the same as those who live in the provinces so is their politics. It is a shame that Putin has abandoned even the pretence of being answerable to the people but the facts on the ground are still different to what even he would have them be. Merely look at the protests that stemmed from Navalney or Moscows being a **** to the Far East etc. :lol:
The point being, its an impressively diverse country in everything from ethnic groups to its politics, despite what the ejits at CNN or whatever would have people believe.
Diverse as a nation that size would be; it has very little bearing on defining the government itself. Don't you think?
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#25
Report 4 weeks ago
#25
(Original post by Pythian)
Diverse as a nation that size would be; it has very little bearing on defining the government itself. Don't you think?
Depends on how you wish to look at it, in terms of central government youre right. I was more looking at the macro picture of the nations politics, not just that of the UR.
Putins dictats are one thing, what the Russians themselves and the regional governments think is quite another.
0
reply
Pythian
Badges: 18
#26
Report 4 weeks ago
#26
(Original post by Napp)
Depends on how you wish to look at it, in terms of central government youre right. I was more looking at the macro picture of the nations politics, not just that of the UR.
Putins dictats are one thing, what the Russians themselves and the regional governments think is quite another.
When the Salisbury attack happened, I heard an interesting & well-informed pundit on TV say that the attack may have been directed by some political quarter using the FSB. Apparently, there are smaller factions and groups that can use the FSB. Mafia? Either way, it does weaken the argument about how ostensibly centralised the central government is? Just how much corruption is there.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#27
Report 4 weeks ago
#27
(Original post by Pythian)
When the Salisbury attack happened, I heard an interesting & well-informed pundit on TV say that the attack may have been directed by some political quarter using the FSB. Apparently, there are smaller factions and groups that can use the FSB. Mafia? Either way, it does weaken the argument about how ostensibly centralised the central government is? Just how much corruption is there.
I wouldnt be surprised. The inner workings of the Russian government are no different than any other in that there are different power groupings in constant conflict with each other. The only notable difference is, unlike other first world countries, they tend to be more than happy to go to extremes :lol:. It's not quite as bad as in the 90's/early 00's when there were literal mini wars playing out across the country but nevertheless.
As a general rule (thus subject to the problems of 'general rules') the major decisions will continue to rest with Putin and his inner circle with appropriate input sought when wanted. Other than that, mini empires exist throughout government. Rather like you'd find in Westminster albeit on an incomparable scale. There's a good reason theres a dedicated academic discipline called 'kremlinology' in that its so bafflingly complex it requires its own field (even if said field tends to be full of people talking out of their asses :lol: )

If nothing else, its a fascinating country, and for those interested in politics, a fascinating variation to study.
0
reply
Pythian
Badges: 18
#28
Report 4 weeks ago
#28
(Original post by Napp)
I wouldnt be surprised. The inner workings of the Russian government are no different than any other in that there are different power groupings in constant conflict with each other. The only notable difference is, unlike other first world countries, they tend to be more than happy to go to extremes :lol:. It's not quite as bad as in the 90's/early 00's when there were literal mini wars playing out across the country but nevertheless.
As a general rule (thus subject to the problems of 'general rules') the major decisions will continue to rest with Putin and his inner circle with appropriate input sought when wanted. Other than that, mini empires exist throughout government. Rather like you'd find in Westminster albeit on an incomparable scale. There's a good reason theres a dedicated academic discipline called 'kremlinology' in that its so bafflingly complex it requires its own field (even if said field tends to be full of people talking out of their asses :lol: )

If nothing else, its a fascinating country, and for those interested in politics, a fascinating variation to study.
I was a bit surprised because it was FSB! Not some tax office or some such dept. However, I think I read that assassinations required the direct approval of the President of Russia. So, maybe he was talking out of derriere. Who knows! But I like this word 'kremlinology' ... sounds like magic - the dark arts!
1
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#29
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#29
(Original post by Pythian)
Thanks for replying.

You say that "countries can invade other countries if they so choose", and it's true in the sense that you could load a rifle and shoot your neighbour. You could say "Look. I'm wiping my ass on domestic law". But, it doesn't say anything beyond that.

Freedom is militated not just from absence of restraints, but from the likely consequences that would flow behaviour. If I knew I'd be shot for stealing, it would have an effect on behaviour. Anarchy is indeed the axiomatic foundation of all international relations. But there is - in fact - a subtle structure and order beneath the surface. International norms are part of it.

I am not sure I get that last quote. International relations have come some way since antiquity.
Thanks for your interest

I could do just that and in any functional society the police or army would come in and shoot/arrest me virtually every time and I would be totally overpowered. Law is dependent on the monopoly of violence.

The same is not true of international affairs.

States don't attack other states not because they signed a bit of paper but because of the balance of power. In that sense that quote by Thucydides is as relevant today as it was then. If it is in their advantage to break a treaty or scrap international law and nobody is strong enough to oppose you no state with a competent Leader would not do so.

You can opt out of international law particularly if you are strong enough or have nukes hence China being able to get away with semi genocide. You can't opt out of domestic law (,unless you're in charge and fuhrer or something)

For a time the US was powerful, rich and stupid enough in some ways to act as a world policeman. Arguably it did an appalling job installing dictatorships, supporting terrorists and using waterboarding and other nasty methods (whilst promoting Democracy, rule of law and Human Rights of course ) as well as generally making a fool out of itself in Vietnam and the middle East.

So at best you had a world policeman that was incompetent, unreliable, corrupt, selective, biased, hypocritical and increasingly unpopular with its donors (US taxpayer). Without the US muscle the UN is just a glorified debating club.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What factors affect your mental health the most right now?

Anxiousness about lockdown easing (145)
4.86%
Uncertainty around my education (440)
14.75%
Uncertainty around my future career prospects (335)
11.23%
Lack of purpose or motivation (417)
13.97%
Lack of support system (eg. teachers, counsellors, delays in care) (139)
4.66%
Impact of lockdown on physical health (180)
6.03%
Loneliness (256)
8.58%
Financial worries (109)
3.65%
Concern about myself or my loves ones getting/having been ill (121)
4.05%
Exposure to negative news/social media (135)
4.52%
Lack of real life entertainment (162)
5.43%
Lack of confidence in making big life decisions (263)
8.81%
Worry about missed opportunities during the pandemic (282)
9.45%

Watched Threads

View All