The myth of Russian humiliation

[OUTLAW 09]

We've already had this conversation about your misuse of the term 'neo-imperialism'.



What does the views and experiences of the 'common man on the street in Paris' have to do with Putin's own perceptions and decision-making?



Actually the mainstream criticism of Washington policy towards Russia since 1991 has been that the U.S. not taken into account any of Russia's words, legitimate or not. The U.S. has more or less assumed that Russia is no longer a big deal. And, we've also already discussed your misuse of the term 'fascism'.

Playing fast and loose with the concepts doesn't help anyone, but I'm pretty sure you're not here to actually have a conversation about Russia.



As I've already explained, it's about perception, and that perception is also within the context of historical continuity. I know, difficult concepts. World War II (you know, that conflict that killed up to 25 million Soviet people or 14% of the population) put Russian security paranoia into overdrive and it has not abated much since. It's called national or transgenerational trauma and it's deeply rooted in Russian foreign policy and national security. Combine that with the deficit between Russia's perceived and ascribed status and you have a reciepe for risk-taking in foreign policy.



Like neo-imperialism, fascism, and state risk-taking, I've also already answered this question.



That's your interpretation. I've never used the word 'victim'. And that terminology doesn't provide any value-added to understanding Russia's motives.



And I'll ask my question once again that you have repeatedly avoided: if Russian leadership is "not reacting as normal sane thinking humans" or if they are "irrational" and live in an "altered state of reality", how can you be confident that any Western response will produce the desired results in Russian behavior? You can't have it both ways: either Russia is a rational, predictable state and countermeasures can elicit a predictable response, or Russia is an irrational state and countermeasures will produce unpredictable responses.

See again AP you cannot get the wording correct---in the world of international relations when a country uses the term "humiliation" the "presumption" is that the country is a "victim" of something---or has that not changed in the English language usage these days?

Secondly, really really go back and reread the article concerning the use of the word "humiliation".

She lists a number of "humiliation arguments" that Russia claims to be "aggrieved" on.

Then she takes each one of those "aggrieved complaints apart" and behold it is nothing more nothing less that a standard Russian "myth" used to push it's own geopolitical agenda.

Truly go back and reread then answer the authors arguments.

Thirdly--if you really think the sanctions, sinking oil price, and free falling Rubel has not reigned in nor gotten the attention of Putin and his advisory crew then absolutely nothing will.

If as you argue they are "rational thinking human beings"---then one would say totally defying the laws of economics in the face of a fully collapsing economy is intensely damaging to one's career if you are a leader of a "normal thinking" country.

That is another perfect example of the term you really hate to use "altered state of reality". So if they are not "rational thinking beings" THEN what is driving them to avoid being one?---ethno neo imperialism cloaked in the simple term fascism or DO you have an explanation for the eight Russian mercenary groups which are truly Russian fascists fighting in the Ukraine against from Russia alleged to be Ukrainian Nazi's?

Think about it.