Skiluros

In a sense, we were really lucky that Yanukovich was a fool and a coward. Trump too is committed to ignorance and he is definitely a huge coward, but he knows how to “own” his corruption and criminality in a manner that appeals to a significant portion of the US public (perhaps not a majority or even a plurality, but whatever it is, it is large enough to matter). That wasn’t true about Yanukovich.

The killing of protesters in Feb 2014 was the inflection point, a point of no return. That’s when a significant portion of society came to the conclusion that the Yanukovich regime has to go. And the fact that the public pushed back, even with the use of violence by regime goons, is what doomed Yanukovich. The Yanukovich regime was not able to take back Maidan Nezalezhnosti; the “main square of the country”, if a government can’t control it, it de facto does not have legitimacy.

His senior allies started to get worried that they would have to go down with the ship and that they wouldn’t be able to “lawyer their way out of it” and might have to face true justice from the public. I would argue the same was true of the security forces, when the public fought back, they started asking themselves uncomfortable questions about whether it was worth risking their lives for some thugs (who would be focused on saving their own butts).

There really was a sense of “history is being made in front of our eyes” or the apocryphal quote “there are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen.” There was a whole parallel self-organized administration. Tens of thousands of people were flowing in from the regions to Kyiv to back anti-regime protests (not to mention every region had its own protest HQ, even Crimea had protesters opposing the regime). During the day the crowds would swell to hundreds of thousands. People were constantly bringing in supplies (food, medicine, protective gear, I personally delivered donations from foreigners who supported the protesters, but didn’t want to enter Maidan/Khreshatik). In the night the security forces would try and siege the liberated part of the city, you could even see how the barricade line would move through the square over the days (security services gaining a bit, protesters pushing them back in other days).

Of course, America is not Ukraine, but perhaps this is a case in which America can learn something from Ukraine.

This is a pattern of authoritarian drift that Ukrainians are closely familiar with: rapid consolidation of executive power, aggressive use of state capacity against perceived enemies (including former allies who dared defy the president), and a growing insistence that legality is whatever the leader says it is.

In pushing against all that, Americans can take a page from Ukraine’s civil society playbook.

I tend to agree. Life is a strange thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nNFrvGOb9o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwf9EjesvtM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eTuFAR169s

Sure US has its own specific challenges: much more competent and violent security forces, much less “motivated” society (a national liberation movement is a powerful thing), but US also doesn’t have to deal with many challenges that are present in Ukraine. Specifically, an enemy neighbouring country x4-x5 times larger where the overwhelming majority of the population is committed to genocidal imperialism.

US is really turning into russia but with a stronger cultural preference for “freedom” polemics.

I’ve lived for multiple years in both US and russia (I speak English and russian), so I think I have something like a frame of reference.

You are correct, it’s a choice. But no one (IMO even the thread OP) is arguing there is a physiologic reason for the lack of empathy. It’s shorthand for saying they choose not to show empathy and this won’t change any time soon (i.e. definitely not in the next 20-30 years).

Look, I am probably more on your side than our conversation would suggest, but I cannot imagine any realistic scenario of positive developments in American society. Can you? If yes, what is this scenario?

I misunderstood. Apologies.

While I agree that a black and white approach isn’t exactly accurate, you can get to a point where the situation becomes close enough to black/white as a matter of practical considerations (i.e. outcomes). Again, not something specific to the US, it can and does happen everywhere.

I am still clinging to the hope that the Americans will turn things around (i.e. no Obama “hope and change” while avoiding addressing crime and corruption), but it’s becoming increasingly difficult.

And claiming that the overwhelming majority of the US far right is incapable of empathy (or that they are fundamentally supportive of crime and corruption) isn’t factually incorrect to my knowledge.

I disagree with this framing.

I’ve travelled and lived for several years in many countries across NA (including the US), Europe and Asia.

One thing that I’ve learned is that it’s important to keep an open mind, to look at the good things in a given society/culture and to not be overly judgmental. It’s important to not frame thing in terms of expectations from another environment.

That being said there are limits to everything. Looking at the trajectory of American society, it is not unreasonable to speculate that their march towards a chauvinistic, corrupt plutocracy is not going to stop.

I would love to be wrong (it’s a disaster that the US has essentially turned into a mafia state), but to deny reality is the definition of cope.

That’s a fair point, but with software platforms, I don’t think you can make a seamless migration tool without Google’s cooperation. And there a lot of roadblocks and malicious compliance type strategies that US oligarchic institutions can adopt. There is also the issue of monopoly-like network effects.

Considering their administration’s behaviour and the current course of American society, I think it’s better to make a permanent break with US. I do not think they will be able to address corruption and criminality. Even if the centre-right comes to power, it will be some variant of Obama, perhaps competent, but with zero desire to reign in corruption, oligarchs and prosecute criminals. Just like Obama refused to prosecute the financial industry oligarchs, a hypothetical centre-right leader won’t address Meta’s $16 billion raised via conscious enablement of fraud.

Then there will be another election, they’ll seed in some more propaganda about “freedom” and “destruction of America” and you’ll have JD Vance elected or perhaps someone even far worse than Vance or Trump.

To hell with that.

I’ve lived in the US for several years and travelled extensively, I feel confident in what I am saying. A large portion of American society is obsessed with ostentatious posturing about how they are the biggest supporters of “freedom” in the world (and similar self-aggrandizing polemics), that they cannot be engaged with in good faith.

Blacklist of senior US regime collaborators is also a must.

Would help if Russians were banned too.

Sometimes it’s best to deal with an issue early rather then letting it simmer.

Not to mention they could always a implement a Fediverse based foundation (for every country) before implementing a ban. Literally re-direct instagram.com to pixelfed.nl (if you are in the Netherlands). Move all government accounts and let businesses know that it’s in their interest to setup Fedi accounts or other non-US networks (and help them with it).

They should start with banning US tech services, first insta/FB/Twitter/Reddit and then slowly kicking out MS/Amazon/Google and other enterprise providers.

One thing worth considering, is that on a global/historical basis it is not unheard of for whole societies (strong majority if not overwhelming majority) to descend into degeneracy, chauvinism and corruption.

In a sense, this is not something specific to the US. These things unfortunately happen.

I see where you are coming from, but I think it’s dangerous to give too much benefit of the doubt and to look at things as we want them to be, not how they are.

I would disagree (not from the US, but I have lived there, travelled extensively and have American friends who I speak to pretty regularly).

The “low information” environment is a choice (especially nowadays). Scapegoating is a choice. A two party state is a choice. Even the unaddressed material and social grievances is a choice. US is rich enough to solve all these issues with no problem at all.

The real issue is that a significant portion of Americans support corruption, crime and believe lying is good. While at the same time parroting tedious polemics about “freedumz and shiiit”.

And on top of that the majority of the voter base of the centre-right opposition is fundemantely opposed to anti-corruption, anti-crime and governance (in terms of real outcomes, not words). Most of them are simply too well off to risk rocking the boat (until it’s too late).

While this is a gross generalisation, there is a reason why the following stereotype is applied to Americans:

There are no poor people in the US, just soon-to-be billionaires

From my experience living in the US, I would say “dim” is an incorrect characterization. Supportive of corruption, crime and dishonesty is IMO a much more accurate characterization.

From what I remember Biden won with a small margin in 2020 (I remember messaging my American friend about this before the votes were fully tallied).

Trump is a symptom, the cause is American society (not only the far right, much of the centre-right voting public too).

The US is comically corrupt!

The 40% approval rating is damning for the American socio-political system.

At some point one has to realize that over time political systems cannot survive without major reforms.

Imagine showing this news article to someone in 1998 or 2000.

Or perhaps even 2015, which wasn’t that long ago.

Here is a counter-arguement. It is the responsibility of the citizens to make sure things like the Patriot Act or ICE are used in a fair manner with oversight and restrictions.

The notion that “the government” is some external entity is an easy and satisfying polemic, but it’s not helpful in a practical sense.

Did the thugs at the Blackstone criminal gang decide to play hardball with the recent demand to increase the size of bribes?