Putin ensures that the audience understands the gravity of the situation. This is exactly what I’ve been doing with my posts on the collapse of the nation-state. Sadly, the only American politician that I have seen touch this subject, however lightly, was Bill Clinton in a recent interview. Putin says:

First of all, changes in the world order – and what we are seeing today are events on this scale – have usually been accompanied by if not global war and conflict, then by chains of intensive local-level conflicts.

Now, let’s not assume that Western leaders don’t know this. Of course, they do. But they don’t share this knowledge with us because nobody wants to be the bearer of bad news. As I have discovered on this blog, people tend to identify the person telling them about the end of the nation-state almost with being the cause of the nation-state’s demise. But since Putin doesn’t exist within a democracy, he doesn’t have to fear antagonizing the electorate. So he isn’t afraid of sharing the bad news.

This is the point in Putin’s speech where the intelligent part ends. The rest of the speech is a descent into insanity that offers few insights into the future of the planet but tells us a lot about what is happening in Russia:

Yes, many of the mechanisms we have for ensuring the world order were created quite a long time ago now, including and above all in the period immediately following World War II. Let me stress that the solidity of the system created back then rested not only on the balance of power and the rights of the victor countries, but on the fact that this system’s ‘founding fathers’ had respect for each other, did not try to put the squeeze on others, but attempted to reach agreements.

This is, of course, a very self-serving and dishonest retelling of what the Cold War like. The “respect” of Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt (later Truman) for each other can only be discussed in the context of a joke. The entire experience of Cold War was precisely about the warring factions trying to put a squeeze on each other. This fanciful rewriting of the 1945-91 era is Putin’s way of reiterating his favorite talking point about the demise of the USSR being the greatest tragedy of the XXth century. There are few things this cynical insect believes but the greatness of the USSR seems to be a sincere belief of his.

As I mentioned before Putin made an important speech at the final plenary meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club’s XI session in Sochi on 24 October 2014. I am convinced that it is crucial for us to pay attention to what Putin says and also to what message he is trying to transmit. Here is my analysis of this speech.

From the very beginning of the speech, Putin refers to the consequences of the destruction of the nation-state model:

We need to be direct and blunt today not so as to trade barbs, but so as to attempt to get to the bottom of what is actually happening in the world, try to understand why the world is becoming less safe and more unpredictable, and why the risks are increasing everywhere around us.

We have discussed the nation-state a lot on this blog and we know that “the world is becoming less safe and more unpredictable” is a way to refer to the transformation of the state model. (If you are a new reader, please do the search with the words “nation-state” to access these posts.) Putin tackles the new reality head-on and addresses the issue that everybody is noticing but few people are discussing with the attention the emergence of a new state model deserves. This is a very smart thing to do because the people who start a discussion will be in the position to direct its course.

It would be phenomenal if the US didn’t lag behind in this conversation. We are all seeing that “the world is becoming less safe and more unpredictable.” Why isn’t our President giving a foundational speech to explain what our shared course will be? Why are we snoozing while other people are talking about this and trying to figure this out?

Today’s discussion took place under the theme: New Rules or a Game without Rules. I think that this formula accurately describes the historic turning point we have reached today and the choice we all face. There is nothing new of course in the idea that the world is changing very fast. I know this is something you have spoken about at the discussions today. It is certainly hard not to notice the dramatic transformations in global politics and the economy, public life, and in industry, information and social technologies.

We all know that it’s hard to dislike Putin more than I do. However, it is great that he is talking about this epochal transformation and not pretending that it will be business as usual from now on. It isn’t and it won’t be. WTF, people? Why do we need Putin to broach the subject? Have we no leaders of our own?

I just came across something very weird in an article in The Atlantic:

Today, Maher presents Muslim terrorism as purely a product of religious pathology, ignoring the tremendous ongoing violence the United States and its Western allies commit in majority-Muslim countries.

OK, if that’s what Maher does, then he’s an idiot. But what does the “tremendous ongoing violence the United States and its Western allies commit in majority-Muslim countries” have to do with the rise of terrorism? Is this weirdo trying to blame “the United States and its Western allies” for the rise of terrorism in “majority-Muslim countries”? (Sorry for over-quoting but this journalist’s writing is so stilted that I have no choice.)

“Tremendous ongoing violence” that Russia has been exercising against Ukraine for much longer than the US was even in existence hasn’t led to terrorism. “Tremendous ongoing violence” inflicted on Latin America hasn’t either. There is zero evidence that “tremendous ongoing violence” causes terrorism. Zero, none.

Now, in order to remove the religious aspect of the discussion, let me remind everybody that Islam is 500 years younger than Christianity. Let’s strain our intellects and remember what Christians were doing 500 years ago. Burning people in city squares, feeding the babies of the infidels to dogs, trying to keep women locked up and subjected, beheading all and sundry – in short, exactly what ISIS is doing today, minus the YouTube component. I’m not sure what the Jews were doing 3,500 years ago, but maybe this is a normal developmental process for these monotheistic religions: 1500 years into their existence they kill and persecute everybody who doesn’t practice their religion “correctly.”

Soon I will publish a review of a book that discusses terrorism intelligently. Stay tuned.

See the speech or the summary at the link (in English):

Vladimir Putin takes the gloves off http://boingboing.net/2014/10/30/vladimir-putin-takes-the-glove.html

I’m too tired today but tomorrow I will comment on Putin ‘ s speech.

Against Public Video Screens https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/technology-and-learning/against-public-video-screens

This is an example of an article that starts well but then collapses into complete neurosis. I also find loud restaurant music annoying, but this author seems angry at the entire world for distracting him. Surely, the activities that it’s so easy to distract one from are not worthy of being engaged anyway.

“I emigrated to Israel for the sake of my kids. And I’m happy to report that they are ecstatic.”

” Great! So what do they do in Israel?”

“Oh no, they stayed back in Ukraine.”

We loved Buddha’s Hand so much that I came to the store for two more. It is absolutely sublime, giving tea a divine fragrance. It is also the best way to achieve fresh breath fast. Just chew a little piece, and you don’t have to fear leaning over students during group assignments.

I don’t know what I will do when the store runs out of them.

I keep getting questions about psychoanalysis and I’m very glad to see an interest in the topic in a culture where pill – taking and misery as a way of life have been deified. Remember that I’m answering these questions strictly in a capacity of a highly educated recipient of the service but not a provider of any related services.

Here are some of the questions I hear a lot:

1. “I already know that I’m lazy / a liar / immature / irresponsible / dependent / have low self – esteem / [insert any self – disparaging term you can think of]. So why do I need an analyst to tell me all this?”

Answer: the possibility that an analyst will tell you any of this (or much of anything,  to be honest) is pretty much the same as that of your dentist starting to weep, tear out his hair and yell, “How could you betray me like this and destroy my faith in humanity, you evildoer?” after seeing a cavity in one of your teeth.

The room where your analysis is conducted is a space of complete and unquestionable acceptance of you. Your truth is the only one that exists. The analyst starts from the conviction that you are a good person. And that conviction never goes away. The point of analysis is not to judge you but to make the voices in your head that tell you how immature / lazy / irresponsible,  etc you are to go away. The analyst resides in a world where you are not stupid, lazy and irresponsible but in the world where you are trying to shed this dangerous and wrong mythology about yourself.

An analyst knows that there is nothing more destructive than guilt and will never foster it in you.

Hostilities are ongoing in Ukraine, in the same regions as before. If you got an impression from the news that things have been getting better, you are mistaken. Putin withdrew a small part of his troops and hasn’t been trying to amplify the hostilities (just yet), that’s all.

Putin realizes that he’s only got 2 years left before Americans elect a president who might not be as indifferent to foreign policy. Hysteria is being ramped up in Russia today to the point where I can’t shake the feeling that Putin is about to bring back across the border the troops he withdrew and add a lot more to them.

Obama is everything Putin ever hoped for and he is not wasting a second of this golden opportunity.