Tucker Carlson to interview Putin

[zazen]

Everyone's making good points here. The conversations evolved to the macro of what political system is better but overlooks the possibility that a system can be more fair but less good. Further, it may be good in domestic politics but bad in foreign policy - one can criticize a countries foreign policy whilst admiring its more developed domestic policies and culture.

A system is only made good by the agents within the system.  Similar to Ken Wilbers state vs structure we can say a system is only made good or bad by the state of being/mind of those within it. Is a democracy that dictates beyond its borders better than a dictatorship only dictating within its borders?  In other words it is democratic within its borders but dictatorial beyond them and is often found meddling, regime changing and causing chaos globally.

Just this weekend Imran Khan in Pakistan won an election that is being rigged and contested by the army and corrupt  opposition who are Western puppets and ousted him previously. He was imprisoned on flimsy charges and had previously come out on BBC and in other interviews stating the US interference and a coup took place on good authority - silence from the West. Is it really a good idea to meddle with the 5th most populated nuclear powered nation who is on a fault line with another nuclear powered nation (India)? All because Imran Khan was independent and clear that they will act independently in their own countries interest and not allow for a US base to be set up due to past troubles.

We can look at human right abuses within less developed nations, but that doesn't absolve more developed nations from doing bad. A democracy isn't immune from corruption or plutocracy - these are just more intricately woven into the fabric of government and done with sophistication. Democracy means rule by the people for the people - the implication that this is superior is based on the assumption that you have a informed populace who know whats good for them over a ignorant one that don't - more informed than entertained.  In a classical dictatorship the dictator is overt, out in the open, dictating everything top down. In a imperfect democracy that is a form of inverted dictatorship the dictators are in the shadows of corporate boardrooms and lobby groups who dictate policies not aligned to the people from within.

 

Edited February 12 by zazen

[zazen]

Insisting that Russia and China accept behavior from the US that the US would never accept from them is simply endorsing global subservience to the US empire. Those who suggest Russia should just accept Ukraine's NATO integration or that China should endure US military presence in the name of "freedom and democracy" essentially advocate for unchecked US influence worldwide - a uni-polar world, not a multi-polar one. They can approve of democracy - the rule of the people (ie more than one) within their country, but are against the existence of multiple powers globally co-existing.

It's not that the US isn't a power or won't be (decline doesn't mean collapse), its that its no longer the only power on the world stage and needs to acclimate to this new reality. It can't just keep being a geopolitical titanic navigating the sea and expect other powers to remain 'contained' in dingy boats along side it being submerged by the waves it causes by its actions. 

 

[Consept]

24 minutes ago, zazen said:

We can look at human right abuses within less developed nations, but that doesn't absolve more developed nations from doing bad. A democracy isn't immune from corruption or plutocracy - these are just more intricately woven into the fabric of government and done with sophistication. Democracy means rule by the people for the people - the implication that this is superior is based on the assumption that you have a informed populace who know whats good for them over a ignorant one that don't - more informed than entertained.  In a classical dictatorship the dictator is overt, out in the open, dictating everything top down. In a imperfect democracy that is a form of inverted dictatorship the dictators are in the shadows of corporate boardrooms and lobby groups who dictate policies not aligned to the people from within.

The obvious argument against this perspective is that in a democracy, young and speak out against those in power. There are numerous examples of protest and public opinion changing policy, in fact most democracies have to take into account what the majority are saying otherwise no one would even consider them for office. Or of course they have to at least spin it in a way where they are tackling policies the people want tackled. 

That being said of no system by itself is going to be perfect and as you say it's down to individuals within that system. 

In a dictatorship the people literally have no power and no right to speak out against those in power. As I said Putin has literally killed or imprisoned those that have spoken out against him and his regime. He can basically do bad shit and not be called on it, whereas those in power that do bad shit in democracies may not get another term or maybe impeached or whatever. 

I don't think you'll find any dictatorships throughout history or at present that would be less corrupt than democratic nations and where the people are better off. 

[erik8lrl]

In reality, the people always have a certain degree of power even in the worst dictatorship. The type of total control like the 1984 Orwellian dystopian is unrealistic and most likely not possible in our reality. In reality, if most population's survival needs are not met, the people will revolt and they will overthrow the government. The reason why this doesn't happen to Russia or China is because the dictatorship or authority does fulfill their people's survival needs despite corruption (at least for now). Yes, Putin is a very corrupt dictator, but to everyday people, life in Russia is very normal, and the standard of living generally speaking has improved over the years. None of these dictators are fully evil beings, they are extremely selfish beings but they do at least to a certain degree care about their nation and the people's interests. They are smart enough to understand that without the people and society, they are nothing. Depending on who you are, there are pros and cons to living in these nations, the same as you would in Western democracies. There are trade-off that comes with every system. But generally speaking, most Western democracies have a much better standard of living compared to Russia, or North Korea. With China getting close to the same standard of living as the West in the future. All in all every government is in the process of becoming a democracy, for if they don't they will either not sustain or be overthrown. The complexity and differences in different political systems are the result of complex causal effects of the historical and cultural context of each region and its people, which when tried to influence from outside without context will often lead to negative effects. When you implement a democracy to a population that is not at a developmental stage capable of adopting it, the democracy will become corrupt. Non-democratic systems are born as a transitional period toward democracy, a good non-democratic system can implement policies to prepare the people for democracy, through education and economic development. When the people are educated and highly developed it's almost impossible to not develop into a more democratic system either naturally or through revolutions. Ultimately it's all following the developmental stages of the collective and boils down to the development of each individual. 

[Rafael Thundercat]

On 09/02/2024 at 1:06 AM, Husseinisdoingfine said:

 

Tucker Barelly Breath while Puting Speaks 

[Tudo]

9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

There is a whole field of science of various systems of government and how they function.

We are not using definitions from the US government or CIA, we are using definitions from political science. Putin has not invented some unique form of government. It's a very typical extractive kleptocracy.

There are objective, neutral measures of every country's level of development:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index

https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

Putin acts as if political science doesn't exist. Political science is not merely a Western invention. As if political science does not apply to Russians. This Duginesque Russian exceptionalism is a joke.

The Heritage Foundation's ranking is not a good source, even right wing people are skeptical about it. You should be more careful about your sources.

Edited February 12 by Tudo

[Rafael Thundercat]

19 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The core problem that Putin has with the West, and what fuels this conflict, is that his authortrian grip on power would never be allowed in a Western democracy. It is because Putin wants life-long power that he must oppose the West. Yes, the CIA tries to overthrow him because he refuses to leave office and he suppresses any organic political opposition.

The CIA is wrong in their meddling but Putin is not right either. It would be better for Russia if there was genuine democratic opposition and term limits.

This in a small family analogy would be like a hippie freestyle that let their kids run wild and do whatever they like come to my house and I am a more autoritarian father that dont go with the hippie ideals and the hippie father come to my house trying to teachi me and/or even demanding me to change my leadership style otherwise he will take me to the court. If I enter in your house and try to tell you how to lead your family, would you like it? even if you were corrupt and biased in maintaining your power. I know is more complicated than this since we know that sometimes there is the need to stop a crazy leader from expanding (Hitler for example) But from Putin POV US should just go back to his house and take care of his own Shit. And Is US taking good care of its own Country? Is Citzens? Its Health? 

[Consept]

2 minutes ago, Rafael Thundercat said:

This in a small family analogy would be like a hippie freestyle that let their kids run wild and do whatever they like come to my house and I am a more autoritarian father that dont go with the hippie ideals and the hippie father come to my house trying to teachi me and/or even demanding me to change my leadership style otherwise he will take me to the court. If I enter in your house and try to tell you how to lead your family, would you like it? even if you were corrupt and biased in maintaining your power. I know is more complicated than this since we know that sometimes there is the need to stop a crazy leader from expanding (Hitler for example) But from Putin POV US should just go back to his house and take care of his own Shit. And Is US taking good care of its own Country? Is Citzens? Its Health? 

Using your analogy it would be more like there is a strict father who lives on the street and doesnt want to be part of the neighbourhood alliance. He doesnt like the fact that his neighbour has joined the alliance. He keeps encroaching on his neighbours land and moving his fence further and further. When the neighbour complains he uses aggression toward the neighbour and threatens to take over his house. The rest of the street dont think its fair and demand the strict father stops doing what hes doing, but the strict father refuses because he doesnt like the alliance as he feels he should be able to treat his neighbour as he wishes. 

No one has a problem with most dictators or those with different beliefs running their countries, no ones trying to war with North Korea for example even though they are arguably worse. The issues come when they try and do stuff to other countries.The whole point of the EU, Nato etc is to protect these smaller countries, and its worked as there was the longest period without war in the EU, so should we just leave everyone to it to take over and war with each other, or would it make more sense to work together?

[Rafael Thundercat]

For the the thing get interesting at 1:10:10 when Putin talk about provocation and mercenaries from Poland, US and Georgia. We all know that War involve money and where there is money someone always will take advantage. Is he true about the Mercenaries? 

Do the United States Need This? Dont you have better things to do?

You have issues on the border, migration? Debts etc.. 

US blew up Nord Stream pipeline in covert operation, says top investigative journalist
 

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/us-blew-up-nord-stream-pipeline-in-covert-operation-says-top-investigative-journalist/articleshow/97812841.cms?from=mdr

Look For Someone who is INTERESTED and who is CAPABLE ? goog questions, even for contemplating other areas of life and survival

Nord Stream - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream#/map/0   I love this pratical Map 

[Rafael Thundercat]

What do you guys think about what Putin say about Elon Musk , AI ? Genetics ? Unregulated = Threatning

[Consept]

1 hour ago, Rafael Thundercat said:

What do you guys think about what Putin say about Elon Musk , AI ? Genetics ? Unregulated = Threatning

Anything he can't control that can have an impact on the world will be threatening to him

[Gennadiy1981]

I personally would support this interview. Everyone if you noticed for the past 10 years, we don’t have real interviews, all news outlets just propagate their agenda. Whatever channel you watch is what you expect to hear, I think the last real journalist was Barbara Walters, who actually interviewed Saddam Hussein, Fidel, Castro, and others. A real journalist should ask questions regardless of political faction. Honestly, this days, whoever is invited on the respect to talk show we already know what you’re gonna say, there’s no debates anymore, real debate everything is just staged,Honestly, this days, whoever is invited on the respect to talk show we already know what you’re gonna say, there’s no debates anymore, real debate everything is just staged 

[Bobby_2021]

22 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Ask yourself why the US is not overthrowing the government of Japan or Sweden.

Um coz they do not have oil reserves?

Now I have to explain why US do not overthrow governments lol. 

Most of the cases, it is to advance their business interests and exploit their natural resources. Democracy and human rights are the mask they use to cover their business interests.

They would do a calculation. How much resources they have or how much is the threat this country is to the US? Then how much resources are needed to overthrow them. Then based on this calculation, including a whole other bunch of factors they would go forward.

US is acting as stage orange while Leo thinks they act as stage Green/Yellow. That is the whole confusion.

A few notable examples: 

1) Do you think that US gives a shit about China invading Taiwan is it wasn't for high end chips?  lol no. But US would make the whole thing about how they are protecting the democracy in Taiwan, potentially risking a war with China. That is not the case at all. 

2) Likewise, US would fund Pakistan to keep the tensions with India high so that they can sell more weapons to both states. Does the US care about the corruption and blatant military funded terrorism in Pakistan? Nope. Getting India to high tensions with Pakistan will always mean western weapons will be in high demand. 

22 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

But what the West would destroy is Russian corruption. And that's the rub.

And NATO expansion, breaking pacts made with the USSR, is how you destroy Russian corruption?

Then you are basically asserting that waging a proxy war with Russia is how you combat the Russian corruption.  Which is totally fine. But that implies that you value the destruction of Russian corruption more than the lives of the families of the soldiers that die in the war.

I would rather keep the Russian corruption rather than sacrificing hundreds and thousands of lives and hundreds of billions in damage to property.

I thought that you should do whatever it takes to avoid the war at all costs.

And it is yet to see if this war is making Russia/Putin more powerful than it/he already it. I have been seeing thousands of predictions of how Russia is going to collapse the next month and nothing of that sort is happening quite yet. Russia is selling oil at prices much higher than the imposed price cap, western tech finding its way to Russian markets through alternate routes, and Ukraine economy is wrecked beyond repair. 

22 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

and putin hardcore dictators in their place

nice pun.

[Karmadhi]

40 minutes ago, Bobby_2021 said:

nice pun.

It was a typo, i just noticed it  

I am wondering why are so many people mad for the interview? It is good to get the other side POV even if it can seem wrong from ours.

Personally I do not support the war but it is always interesting to hear the other perspective in this conflict which is quite complex.

If the West does not like Tuckler then they can put someone else there that will challenge Putin the way the West might want to.

They just like labeling him as a "Evil dictator" and be done with it. 

Basically the West gives Piers Morgan version of the conflict.

Very lazy.

Edited February 13 by Karmadhi

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Bobby_2021 said:

Um coz they do not have oil reserves?

That's some silly logic. Norway and Saudi Arabia have oil reserves. The US is not that thirsty for oil.

Quote

Now I have to explain why US do not overthrow governments lol.

If you contemplate it then maybe you will see that your logic doesn't hold water. Not for my sake, for your sake.

Quote

Most of the cases, it is to advance their business interests and exploit their natural resources. Democracy and human rights are the mask they use to cover their business interests.

Yes, of course that's a factor. But democracy is also a factor because it is necessary for solid business. It's hard to do business in a corrupt dictatorship.

Quote

US is acting as stage orange while Leo thinks they act as stage Green/Yellow. That is the whole confusion.

I don't hold the CIA in high regard. Of course they operate in a Tier 1, not a Tier 2 manner.

Obviously they are weighing all sorts of corporate interests. But you can't reduce the Russia relationship to that.

I don't see any realistic scenario where the US gets to steal Russian oil. At most what can happen is some partnerships between Russia and US oil companies. Which would be mutually beneficial.

Edited February 13 by Leo Gura

[zurew]

46 minutes ago, Bobby_2021 said:

I thought that you should do whatever it takes to avoid the war at all costs.

No.

Thats like essentially saying you will obey whatever nonsense excuse or reason any country will come up with, cause they said if you don't do it they will go to war. Like giving a free ticket and control to the global political landscape. - Of course there are lines that needs to be drawn somewhere, where you evaluate the reasons put on the table.

1 hour ago, Bobby_2021 said:

I would rather keep the Russian corruption rather than sacrificing hundreds and thousands of lives and hundreds of billions in damage to property.

You can say that, but on the other hand lets not forget that such corruption destroys millions of lives and more given how long a corruption will stay alive. 

In this case. there is not much difference between doing vs allowing harm.

[Leo Gura]

In the end it's Ukraine's choice whether they wanna keep fighting or not.

If they don't wanna fight, they can surrender any day. So it's not like the US is making them fight Putin.

Ukraine has its own national identity that wants to defend itself.

Edited February 13 by Leo Gura

[Karmadhi]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

That's some silly logic. Norway and Saudi Arabia have oil reserves. The US is not that thirsty for oil.

I notice USA does not care if you are dictatorship as much as they care whether you bow down to them or not.

UAE, Saudi Arabia, Chile under Pinochento etc are not democracies yet USA did not try to overthrow them. Actually USA put Pinochento there to begin with. Alongside other dictatorships in Latin America.

So the reason why most democracies tend to not be invaded by USA I think is because they also tend to be on good terms with USA.

Western Europe, South Korea, Japan, Canada etc all are on good terms with USA. Even India mostly.

Meanwhile when Gaddafi went against the West, West attacked Libya. This has happened many times.

It is not a function of being a democracy as much as a function of whether you are USA's bitch or not is what I am trying to say.

Russia is quite similar. Why did it attack Georgia in 2008 and never attacks Belarus? Because Georgia in 2008 went against Russia while Belarus does not.

Also Russia took Crimea literally next thing after their pro Russian leader in Ukraine was decoupled in 2014. 

 

[erik8lrl]

https://x.com/disclosetv/status/1757368561998209339?s=20
https://x.com/unusual_whales/status/1757114422630424870?s=20
Lol time to buy some Nvidia stocks 

Edited February 13 by erik8lrl

[VictorB02]

On 2/10/2024 at 6:10 PM, Leo Gura said:

Because they are not conscious enough to see it. All politicians are mired in profound group-think. Their job depends on them not seeing it.

BTW, Putin suffers from the same problem. It's not like he's open to the Western Green worldview.

On 2/10/2024 at 6:18 PM, Leo Gura said:

Exactly!

That's the pivot for all political conflict.

Makes sense. I can see that clash of collective survival agenda's - really cool to observe honestly.

 

On 2/12/2024 at 2:45 AM, Leo Gura said:

Ask yourself why the US is not overthrowing the government of Japan or Sweden.

Putin acts as if the West is so domineering, but look at Japan. Japan sided with the West and it has kept its unique culture fully entact. It's not like Americans are oppressing Japan into being American. Nor is there any risk of Americans invading or bombing Japan. And Japan has a better economy and standard of living than Russia.

Russia could go the way of Japan. The only real problem with that for Putin is that he could not hold life-long power. He would have to share power with others. So that's really the issue. And also, Russia would have to open itself up to stage Green. But this will happen after Putin leaves office anyway.

It's not like the West is going to destroy Russian culture. But what the West would destroy is Russian corruption. And that's the rub.

Damn this is a good insight. Noted.

Edited February 13 by VictorB02