Yandex warns of bond repayment and supply risks
reuters.comNormally you'd have simply floated another bond (not a puttable one this time). Credit is a funny thing, it becomes unavailable the moment you need it most ...
Credit exists when you’re able to pay it.
It also exists if you can obscure the risk and shift it to somebody else. See mortgage backed securities in the US in the run up to the 2008 crisis.
And when you are not blacklist
The Yandex filing spends a significant amount of text reiterating they’re not on a blacklist though
Yandex going belly up would certainly send a message to Russia
Like Google Search going out in the western world
send message and then what? the propaganda there would tell that west is using any chance to put russia down and here is another example.
People in the west are too naive to realise that in russia no body asks what people think. The level of propaganda is so strong that people would believe whatever they are told.
The idiocy of those in the west who think that russians can decide something once they face sanctions is overwhelming. In the very long therm it may be but thus completely inadequate measure in the moment.
Another idiocy is to think that claiming that NATO isn’t the part of the conflict can prevent them to actually become a part of the conflict. The moment russia will decide they will invent the cause to attack just as they did with Ukraine.
As someone who is poorly informed on the subject, I already learned to not make such definitive statements. Before russian invasion I heard a lot of opinions that Russia will not attack Ukraine, as it makes no logical sense or because true invasions are surprise attacks, and yet the reality verified this kind of thinking.
Now we hear how sanctions will not change russian opinions, but it seems these already started to change, as some cracks appear: some politicians speak against war, some oligarchs criticize putin, some Russians are also migrating to Finland [1], as well as a protest started in Nizhnekamsk [2].
This is not to say that you're entirely wrong, it indeed is very hard to convince someone as heavily indoctrinated as russian nation, but I think it is possible.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pHglSTvgbI [2] https://twitter.com/ilya_shepelin/status/1500073553055657986...
> no body asks what people think. The level of propaganda is so strong that people would believe whatever they are told.
In my experience, these statements are contradictory. When nobody asks what the people think, the people notice, believe little, and keep their own thoughts close.
> Another idiocy is to think that claiming that NATO isn’t the part of the conflict can prevent them to actually become a part of the conflict. The moment russia will decide they will invent the cause to attack just as they did with Ukraine.
To their credit, the NATO officials and European leaders who are normally prone to think this way are backing up their deescalatory talk with defensive troop movements and jet fighter deployments.
By your description seems idiocy is in the East, more than the West.
They cannot think, so we are stupid for not adjusting to their limitations / conformity?
> the propaganda there would tell that west is using any chance to put russia down and here is another example
Aren't we?
russians have worked very hard to deserve such attitude. let’s not swap the cause and effect.
btw sending ballistic rockets to bomb Kiev’s population is hardly justified by anything anyway.
No we are not. And this absurd fake news that the west is responsible needs to end.
Well, I asked because in the face of similar events, I never remember a reaction as strong as the one that we are adopting against Russia. So I think it indeed has something to do with Russia, and not with the event itself.
Similar events? Please specify at least a couple of the similar events you have in mind…
2003 invasion of Iraq, just to give a recent example?
2003 invasion of Iraq happened largely in the desert. It was also done relatively quickly and didn't level huge portions of the cities like is being done in Ukraine right now. This is what Russia is doing to several Ukrainian cities right now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Grozny,_the_capital_city_...
You are too naive to think the people can't see what's going on.
Putin brought this on his people for some idealogic crusade. Not everyone will understand but some will.
Sure, some will. But we've seen how well propaganda works here in the US over the last 6 years, I feel less and less and certain that we'll be able to agree on a common reality here at home.
The number of people that still argue about how the last election was stolen just blows my mind.
Look at how uniform the Ukrainian coverage is if you think we can’t agree on a common reality. In principle I am pro Ukrainian I guess, although the gas prices are pissing me off, it’s too obvious to see the uniform lack of anything but one side story being told everywhere online and in media
Can you elaborate on this? I've seen a lot of reporting across various outlets on how Ukraine is impacting the markets. What is the side of the Ukraine conflict that you're not seeing being reported right now that you wish would be?
Edit: some examples
Fox News: https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/gas-prices-ukraine-russi...
CBS: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gas-prices-5-dollars-gallon-rus...
CNBC: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/03/how-the-ukraine-russia-confl...
USA Today: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2022/03/03/gas-prices-u...
This isn't exhaustive but I tried to cover the main political spectrum here.
Thanks for the links. Mainly mean that a uniform perspective of the situation is being communicated to US citizens. I don’t know if Russia has any legitimate reasons (maybe rational is the better word) because everything is painting the invasion from one perspective. Therefore most us citizens likely believe one form of reality on the issue.
Just makes me feel a little uneasy to see everything from every news source having the same general point of Russia bad Ukraine good. Because it illustrates the power still held over US citizenry.
The unease is because said uniformity makes me believe there is a form of propaganda inlaid with the news US citizens are receiving on the issue - even if I am unsure of the characteristics of it.
Hopefully my point makes sense.
I understand what you're saying. I honestly think that the truth lies somewhere in the middle of a field of variables (full disclosure: I used to work in software for a news org).
Firstly, there are reputable outlets out there covering alternate angles of the Ukraine conflict, like Aljazeera[0], but they can be hard to find. One of the biggest problems I see with curation generally is that it makes people lazy and not take the effort to find the outlets that are providing counter commentary. Just because you're not seeing a particular perspective being covered doesn't mean that isn't. I think there's a much bigger discussion to be had around the efficacy of curation because it very easily leads to this bias.
Second, media companies are businesses, and like any business, they give and receive influence based on a variety of internal and external factors. For example, it's well-known that organizations like AIPAC lobby on a variety of fronts to push particular agendas, which can easily skew perspectives on certain issues (like the double standard between how we see Ukrainians and Palestinians). This is a consequence of America's embrace of lobbying.
Third, media companies are becoming more reactionary than ever because they now have data on what kinds of stories get clicks in ways that they didn't 20 years ago. In an ad-driven world, you bet media companies are constantly looking to see what kinds of content drive the most traffic to their site.
I think we are seeing patterns emerge that do drive homogeneous, coordinated behaviors on the part of media companies, but I don't think it's as simple as nefarious government-driven propaganda. I think there are many interests, public and private, which vie for particular narratives and stories via lobbying in the exact same way that companies bid on ad space via Google Ads, because its perfectly legal to do so.
One could argue that public relations firms are professional propaganda creators depending on your viewpoint.
0: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/27/western-media-cover...
I don't see how letting Russia run roughshod over Ukraine with no Western response would fix the gas price issue. Oil markets price in wars as higher oil prices, especially when big oil producers get into major wars.
The vast majority of Republicans approve of Trump. In other words, they approve of perpetual, blatant dishonesty, or at least don't think it is important enough to change their opinion. Very disheartening.
>”In other words, they approve of perpetual, blatant dishonesty, or at least don't think it is important enough to change their opinion.”
Or it’s the case that they see the other side as being perpetually and blatantly dishonest.
Edit: Which is more likely, one political faction is objectively correct and the other is objectively wrong, or that partisan people view the world in such a way that their own side isn’t lying and the other is?
If you wonder how such people can approve of lies and blatant dishonesty it’s because they fundamentally don’t see such things as lies to begin with. They see it as the truth.
> Or it’s the case that they see the other side as being perpetually and blatantly dishonest.
That's a logical fallacy. One's honesty has nothing to do with whether or not other people are honest. It turns out you can actually disapprove of all dishonest people, no matter whether other people are dishonest too.
I don't think it'll send the message you or the West think it will. I'm not even Russian and I think this all amounts to bullying by the West because they're petulant and can't stand the fact that they are powerless to step in with actual force.
In response to one country invading their neighbour you think that economic sanctions are petulant bullying? What do you think a more appropriate response would be?
This is just Yandex, but I'm sure other Russian companies would be in the same boat...
Does anyone know when debt events for other Russian bluechips, and possibly even Russian government bonds themselves are?
They already defaulted via regulation
https://dcweekly.org/2022/03/04/russia-halts-payments-on-bon...
Not arguing against sanctions in general, but for South Africa, the collapse of the soviet union, which had been propping up the south african economy, played a more important role.
https://reason.com/2013/12/06/did-economic-sanctions-help-en...
Economic pressure is usually cited as a primary factor leading to the end of apartheid, beginning in 1990, which is before the collapse of the former Soviet Union. I'm not disagreeing that the collapse played a part, but I think it's safe to say there was no single cause. Without ever-increasing sanctions the ball might not have started rolling in 1990. Without Soviet collapse it might not have unraveled quite as fast or in the way that it did.
The article is revisionist BS. There was no "misunderstanding" of what Apartheid and its value system were, it is just that back then, institutional racism wasn't a deal breaker for allies involved in overt and covert proxy wars against communism in southern africa. The South African government negotiations with Mandela predate the fall of the Berlin wall and the Soviet collapse. The post facto rationalization to say "Apartheid was the real socialism, and should have been rejected for that reason" rings a little hollow when it's said in retrospect, but it's on-message for reason.com
That was kind of my thinking too, the ball was right rolling 2-3 years before the Soviet collapse. Though I know 1994, after the collapse, was a major milestone is finalizing the end of apartheid, so I'm not sure if the Soviet collapse had a large effect... I'm don't know (I didn't think) the Soviets had much influence in SA, but it seems plausible that the upending of world power structures in general broke down the realpolitik dynamics that might have preserved toxic power structures like apartheid, even indirectly. I honestly don't know, except to say that change began before the collapse.
Good article. However it doesn’t say the Soviet Union propped up South Africa.
Rather it says that the ANC (opposition) was supported by the Soviets. So the apartheid government argued that apartheid was necessary to keep out communism.
When the Soviets collapsed, this argument weakened and more people were convinced to dismantle apartheid.
I think it's clear to most that the USSR were not friendly with apartheid SA.
There are some theories floating around that claim that one of the reasons Apartheid was instituted or started forming as an idea was because of a scare about Communism taking root in South Africa among the black population.
There will be collateral damage. ~20% of Kyrgyzstan’s GDP is remittance from Russia. Sanctions should be kept on Russia. This is an opportunity to further unite.
Supporting these affected nations is a win for all involved, except Russia. We should prevent them from going into recession, enable them to reduce their dependence on Russia, while strengthening our relationship with them.
>Supporting these affected nations is a win for all involved, except Russia. We should prevent them from going into recession, enable them to reduce their dependence on Russia, while strengthening our relationship with them.
I mean.. do you really think this is going to happen? No one will pay attention to Kyrgyzstan just at they aren't paying attention now. I don't understand these flowery, optimistic arguments that have no bearing to reality. Russia is still the local superpower in the area and they will likely continue to lean on them for support. The alternative is to entirely change their economy to rely on western support, and except western countries to actually bother to try and prop up Kyrgyzstan
That makes zero sense. The apartheid government was staunchly anti-Communist.
I hope development on Clickhouse doesn't go south.
ClickHouse, Inc spun out of Yandex last year and is now a private company HQ in the bay area, although their funding is partially from participation by Yandex. No idea if this moved any portion of their development. Would be curious to see if this has any impact, or if they're going to get lucky and evade Yandex's current problems.
I believe the sanctions may well trigger a change in the Russian public's opinion of Putin.
Right now, my Russian friends tell me that state propaganda is so strong that a significant proportion of the Russian population believe the Ukranian deaths are due to Ukranians just killing themselves.
Surely at some point they'll see that what they're being told doesn't make sense. Especially if they also start to see a deterioration in their quality of life...
After seeing what about half of America was able to believe for over six years I have no confidence that people will realize things don’t make sense
You aren't wrong but it's important to note that you can't quite separate the two parts of this analogy. They are on a continuum.
Just as with some of the worst lies of Brexit or anti-EU sentiment in mainland Europe, the worst of the lies people believed in the USA were helped by Putin's "outreach" work, both in terms of dark money and via the disinformation teams operated out of the Kremlin like the GRU, and by hacking/activist groups who were possibly unwittingly controlled.
In a climate of disinformation, it's Putin's world, in many ways, and we just live in it. Putin's regime is the primary exporter of state-sponsored misinformation and disinformation globally.
And as to people struggling with things not making sense: that's literally the point.
Both in and outside Russia, Putin's aim is not to have a consistent projected worldview or propaganda; his aim, and his success, is in undermining everyone else's. He was taught to do this by people like Vladislav Surkov, and he is very good at it.
He wants you not to trust anything to be true; just trust that his power is true.
Firstly it’s not half of America since not everyone votes. Secondly I doubt every Trump voter believes or believed every single lie he spewed. There are tons of reasons why someone might have voted for him without really agreeing with all of his rubbish. IMHO it would help to stop painting this other section of voters as dumb and easily duped.
There may be reasons other than believing his horseshit but those are generally even more egregious than simply being stupid.
Whether or not it's half, whether or not they really believed every word.. a majority still supported Trump such that he was elected president of the United States. How much his supporters actually believe is irrelevant at that point
> Surely at some point they'll see that what they're being told doesn't make sense
The crackdown on non-state media, especially if it is not exactly in line with the state propaganda message, makes it harder to do that.
> Especially if they also start to see a deterioration in their quality of life...
A narrative that explains and places blame elsewhere for that is fairly easy with complete control of information, especially since it being due to economic warfare by the West is true (and how even some Western leaders have described it.)
Yup, I add to your second point from my experience.
I live in Turkey and we have a similar state propaganda (though fortunately not war). The government successfully collapsed the economy but they control the mainstream media and their supporters still blame (and truly believe in what they say) the opposition for everything bad that the government does.
Controlling people's mindset is apparently easier than it seems when you control media.
> I live in Turkey and we have a similar state propaganda (though fortunately not war).
So what about Syria? Kurds are another topic you might want to look into (both inside and outside the Turkey). Azerbaijan-Armenia proxy war? It's not as easy as you think.
We don't have war here.
Syria and refugees are part of a bigger plan. It's not like the government suddenly became philantrophic and wanted to help people running from war.
For decades Kurds and Turks lived happily together. Again, government's agenda is to divide and conquer so they made Kurds "enemy" to some (gullible) part of the population.
Surely it's not "easy" though my point stands: when you control mainstream media you can easily manipulate enough people. Current authoratorian government does this in Turkey, and even if there is also many enlightened people, we are just relatively minority.
>For decades Kurds and Turks lived happily together
Which decades were those?
Ever since Turkey existed.
Sure there are sometimes conflicts but most of them are government propaganda trying to divide otherwise perfectly happy people.
Your country is at war with Syria. So yes, you do live in war. It's not so noticeable however, I agree.
I was implying that there is no war where I live, to contrast with the situation in Ukraine.
It's not even comparable to what's happening in Ukraine.
I believe the comparison was between Turkey and Russia, not Turkey and Ukraine.
The comparison was indeed about propaganda of Russian and Turkish authorities. Then my reply was to the comment about the cities being in war, which implies Ukraine (as being actively physically bombarded), where I explained that where I live has nothing to do with war as in guns and explosions.
"Living in war", at least for me, implies being physically present in an active war zone that has been bombarded with military and explosions, not some conflict at the other end of the country which is mainly affecting another country.
(Just for clarity: I personally do NOT support war in any way, either the one affecting Ukraine nor Syria, regardless of the initiator)
Ah, in that case I think we agree mostly. However I'd say that paying taxes that go towards armed conflict we are, to some degree, doing war.
Yeah, I'm trying to (legally) evade as much as possible. I'd never do it in a proper country as the government would actually care about citizens, but in my case, I know where money goes on taxes which makes me very uncomfortable.
Thank you.
The absence of all the former sources of non-state media should be an obvious sign to anyone with any sense at all that state media is lying.
Yandex is part of the state media. It should be sanctioned and sunk.
>a significant proportion of the Russian population believe the Ukranian deaths are due to Ukranians just killing themselves.
This sounds like Western meta-propaganda. Russia isn't some mysterious other-world filled with low IQ people. Are we really to believe that swaths of their population believes the Ukranians are merely offing themselves during an invasion? Is there anything we can read that points to this, even Fox News-type article making the claim? Colour me skpetical.
I have a family member who ended a 60 year friendship yesterday because the other party, who lives in moscow, wholly embraces the russian propaganda line; up to and including telling my family member that it's impossible that the city they both grew up in has been being shelled for the last week, and it was just the west's lies.
How dreadful :-(
Yet again this week: this needs upvoting for visibility and downvoting for their experience.
Many in the UK and the USA in particular (but in Europe as well) can relate to this kind of experience of talking to someone who exists in an irrational belief bubble concerning one or two other topics.
But in most cases it doesn't have anywhere near the stark awfulness of this.
'My city's being shelled, but mum won’t believe me' (bbc.co.uk)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60600487 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30555692
--
The 25-year-old has been speaking regularly to her mother, who lives in Moscow. But in these conversations, and even after sending videos from her heavily bombarded hometown, Oleksandra is unable to convince her mother about the danger she is in.
"I didn't want to scare my parents, but I started telling them directly that civilians and children are dying," she says.
"But even though they worry about me, they still say it probably happens only by accident, that the Russian army would never target civilians. That it's Ukrainians who're killing their own people."
--
He was surprised not to have heard from his father, who works at a monastery near Nizhny Novgorod in Russia. He called his father and described what was happening. His father replied that this wasn't true; there was no war and - in fact - Russians were saving Ukraine from Nazis.
Mykhailo said he felt he knew the power of Russian propaganda, but when he heard it from his father, he was devastated.
"My own father does not believe me, knowing that I'm here and see everything with my own eyes. And my mum, his ex-wife, is going through this too," he says.
"She is hiding with my grandmother in the bathroom, because of the bombardment."
--
"I called my mum again. I told her I was scared. 'Don't worry', she said, reassuringly. 'They [Russia] will never bomb Kyiv'."
But they are already doing it, Anastasiya replied.
"I told her there were casualties among civilians. 'But that's what we had too when Ukraine attacked Donbas!', she said, laughing. For a moment I couldn't breathe. Hearing my mum say this with such cruelty just broke my heart."
Anastasiya believes the image Russian media has created is one of the "glorified Russian army" ridding Ukraine from Nazis. For years she avoided political arguments with her parents, but this time she slammed the phone down on her mum.
We spoke to Anastasiya when she was travelling away from Kyiv after four nights in a bomb shelter. Her mind was on an uncertain future.
A significant proportion of Americans believe the 2020 election was fraudulently stolen. And that’s with free press in America.
Not at all hard to believe that a significant proportion of Russian people believe this lie.
>A significant proportion of Americans believe the 2020 election was fraudulently stolen.
Are you actually claiming that the scale of absurdity between believing election fraud (something members of both parties claim, every losing election, going back decades[1]) and that Ukrainians are killing themselves, en masse, are remotely the same?
1. Here's Hilary Clinton continuing to make claims about 2016 in mainstream media: https://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-maintains-2016-electi...
Someone believing either the 2016 or 2020 US elections were “stolen” in any meaningful sense of the word would be under a similar level of propaganda to someone thinking that the Russian invasion is to stop Ukrainians killing each other, yes.
Come on man. His is an example of real life “if gold rusts, what then of iron?”
If people with a free press believe propaganda and lies, what do you expect of people who only have a state-run propaganda machine?
>what do you expect of people who only have a state-run propaganda machine?
This is your error. They don't "only" have state-run propaganda, and these aren't a backwards, brainwashed, uneducated people.
Independent news sources are rare in Russia, especially with the recent law making "misinformation" a jailable offense with up to 15 years jail time. I'm not saying there isn't any other news sources, but it legitimately seems like you have to go well out of your way to find them. How many Americans are digging into different news sources to see if the narrative on Ukraine is true or if it's all a western farce? Just the same many Russians aren't double checking the narrative they're being fed
Your last point I agree with: not many.
I'm not in Russia, obviously, but from what I can gather from social media, although outside media is "banned", it's still easy enough to find. Similarly to how easy I can still find RT (or worse).
Straw man. I said no such thing. Please respond to the text I actually wrote.
I literally quoted you, and responded to it. Here it is again:
"A significant proportion of Americans believe the 2020 election was fraudulently stolen. And that’s with free press in America. Not at all hard to believe that a significant proportion of Russian people believe this lie."
Believing in election fraud and believing that a population are coincidentally killing themselves during a military incursion are not remotely analogous.
Again, that’s not an argument I’ve made. Please respond to what I’ve written, not an imaginary argument you’ve decided to defeat.
Hey, here's an idea: how about you actually clarify your point then, instead of repeating "that's not my argument".
But for fun, once again, your statement appears to be: "if Americans can believe the 2020 election was stolen (the first sentence), then it's not a stretch to think Russians will believe the Ukrainians are killing themselves (the third sentence)."
It's right there for everyone to read. So what are you actually arguing?
Yes, they can be pretty much the same. There have been suicidal warriors in the past, it's not really that absurd. Propaganda could say they are killing themselves to make Russia look bad.
I remember a very suspicious suicide in Argentina, and how some media were theorizing that he killed himself to make the government look bad.
>There have been suicidal warriors in the past, it's not really that absurd.
You believe that the Russians believe this about the Ukrainians? A people with whom they share much culture?
>Propaganda could say they are killing themselves to make Russia look bad.
Yeah, it could say anything. How about demonstrating it does say?
> And that’s with free press in America.
Part of the issue is it isn’t free. So many people were banned. News stories banned. Companies banned and dropped.
When you get that level of censorship it creates a massive level of distrust. Further, what’s “truth” when the facts can’t be debated...
Segue here. I think it is time to rethink the term “free press”. In much the same way we had to wrestle with “free software.” Was it free as in beer? Or free as in speech?
The internet press is more “free as in beer” than ever. It costs nothing. It is probably about as “free as in speech” as it ever was, the variety is a testament to that. But it is not free from influence. It is tied to a profit feedback motive more than it ever has been. Put words on a screen, optimize for profit yield. Until the “press” regains its freedom from this, it will not be free. It will be profit constrained.
In a similar vein, I think it is silly we have social media. It’s profit media more than it is social.
I read something similar. I believe it was a BBC article but could be wrong. IIRC it was fairly common in Russians who did not speak a second language and not common in English speaking Russians.
I think you misinterpreted what the parent poster meant about Ukrainian s killing themselves. It probably meant Ukrainians killing other Ukrainians in false flag operations and not suicides.
> Are we really to believe that swaths of their population believes the Ukranians are merely offing themselves during an invasion?
This is exactly what they believe. More then that , they are told that some of Ukrainians are “nazis” who kill ‘normal’ Ukrainians. They’ve been told that all horrible bombing scenes the world is witnessing are done not by rus. invader but by by those “nazis” Ukrainians. They are truly believe that and they are happy that rus. army is saving “normal” Ukrainians.
Talk to me about their IQ but it is impossible to convince them otherwise, and trust me I’ve tried and others tried they are complete zombies and would not trust even relatives. They would say that you are brain washed by western propaganda and only them are proud russians who know the truth. No logic can convince them because the source of their believes is not logically based but emotionally based.
Yes it’s that bad! And people in the west who do not understand that are too naive and have no idea with what they are dealing and how enormously dangerous it is. For many people this war came as big surprise. They still think that if russians only knew they would stop. Only force cam stop them now. Sanctions are too little too late and too slow and people in Ukraine are dying also due to the stupidity and naivety of those who can stop it.
If you think I am exaggerating, try to convince at least one russian, and share your experience here !!!
Unfortunately, Russian propaganda is based of facts which are hard to dispute: * Right Sector - Ukrainian nationalist neo-nazi political party in Ukrainian parliamentary * Azov Detachment - neo-Nazi unit of the National Guard of Ukraine, who participated in wars in Donbass * Lots of streets are named after Stepan Bandera, for example Stepan Bandera Avenue in Kyiv, who was a leader of Ukrainian ultranationalists and cooperated with Nazi Germany in 1941 against USSR
Such arguments seem to be rather strange. How would you react to similar propaganda about temporary Americans based on the number of monuments of South generals and politicians from the Civil War period? They still weren't removed everywhere in the USA.
Does it give credibility to the allegation that there's still slavery in America?
That's true. However, to be fair, the monuments of South generals were erected a long time ago, but the avenue was renamed in 2016.
Very convenient facts. Eastern Europe is full of far-right, even Russia itself. This invasion would have happened regardless of any Nazi presence in Ukraine
Yeah, I know. I've just listed the facts what Russian television transmits everyday...
Unless you're suggesting the poster is part of the meta propaganda I'm unclear on this. These are direct firsthand accounts from friends.
Maybe it's just me, but when I read "I've a friend that..." on the internet, it doesn't much sway my opinion. Besides, there's nothing wrong with questioning the claim, is there? I truly am skeptical that "significant" portions of the Russian population believes the Ukrainians are killing themselves. That doesn't mean it's not true.
The only thing I’m confident about when it comes to this war is that both sides are lying their asses off.
Propaganda has been similarly effective in North Korea, China, and USSR. Were those places full of low-IQ people? Or is it possible that propaganda affects even average and high-IQ people?
> Russia isn't some mysterious other-world filled with low IQ people.
Neither is the US. But you and me have seen during this pandemic, to people able to reason that pneumonia can kill, and covid can cause pneumonia, but unable to reason that covid can kill. Propaganda is like that.
You only have to take a look at what sects do to people to see the kind of gymnastics people can do in their reasoning because propaganda.
> You only have to take a look at what sects do to people to see the kind of gymnastics people can do in their reasoning because propaganda.
Or on the individual level -- I labour this point because I sadly see it in people I know -- at the kind of mental gymnastics an abused partner inevitably uses to explain away their situation and avoid challenging it.
The thing is, analysis paralysis happens even in situations without a malign actor.
Many malign actors have an instinctive, almost unknowing ability to exploit it.
I have never met anyone who doesn’t believe Covid can kill.
Usually, it’s a strawman. People in favor of lockdowns, masks, and similar interventions ridicule those who aren’t by falsely claiming they “don’t believe in Covid”.
Whether it’s worth accepting X amount of suffering to increase average life expectancy by Y years depends on the values of X and Y. If someone argues it’s not worth it in a particular case, that doesn’t necessarily mean they think Y is zero.
Well, that's you and you circle of people. I can count at least five persons in my circle of friend who think people are not dying of covid. Some acknowledge more people are dying, but they think the reason is different, other people think statistics are being manipulated.
But there are people who literally think the world is 4000 years old. There are people who believe evolution doesn't happen. There are even people who believe the earth is flat. And you find a strawman that there are people who think that nobody is dying of covid?
It's not like this is something new. Majority Chinese people are supportive of CCP no matter what it does. Even if there's opposition among mass people, there's no way to know.
The interesting part is how Chinese government was able to prove itself that it can lift up people from poverty over the years, so confidence and trust of the citizens hasn’t been on a free-fall. I’m not sure of the same would apply to Russian government. There’s a weird combination of trust and fear within Chinese population, but mostly fear within Russians that I have interacted with in the past.
if you speak Russian you can go on vk.com and check some of the exchanges on public groups. There are also few "interviewing regular Russians on the streets" videos circulating around.
To clarify the belief that was cultivated through propaganda is that there are reckless Nazi groups in Ukraine who stop at nothing to hurt russians. They were striking at ethnically russian regions of Ukraine for last 8 years. When Russia invaded to fight these groups they positioned their forces in the hospitals and schools. As they strike back they are hitting their own schools and hospitals mostly from being sloppy, because that's what they are and the equipment is old. And in some cases maliciously, because they need gruesome content for the west. Russian forces are doing precision strikes and hurt no civilians.
I think you underestimate how massive and elaborate Russian propaganda is. These stories are fed in pieces over weeks, sometimes years. For example it took multiple years to establish and cement the idea of Nazi groups in Ukraine. Now if you start at this belief it's not that far fetched to believe these groups have no regard for human life whether it is their foreign or their own.
>For example it took multiple years to establish and cement the idea of Nazi groups in Ukraine.
There are Nazi groups in the Ukraine, and they have a long history. Is this in dispute?
My wife’s grandmother is an intelligent woman - an engineer, designed industrial machinery in the Soviet Union.
She’s a latvian citizen - but Russian speaking - so she consumes Russian TV and radio.
My wife had a tearful falling out with her a few days ago on the phone, as she’s absolutely drunk the Kool-aid - Ukrainians are all Nazis, we’re rescuing Russian prisoners, Biden is planning a nuclear first strike on St Petersburg, etc. etc.
A large swathe of the population grew up in a world where the state is the world, and everything external to the state is the enemy.
I can confirm it does happen, usually older folks and housewives, but still it is real.
If history has taught us anything is that sanctions only reinforce authoritarian figures. The common people are the ones who suffer the most from them, not the elites, and the common people then blame their suffering on outside forces.
Except for apartheid South Africa?
Honestly .. we didn't have international bands touring .. that's about the worst I noticed growing up ..
You may not have noticed it growing up, but it had a devastating effect on the economy of South Africa - despite natural resources SA is rich in (such as gold) reaching high prices at the same time.
You're wrong. People getting angry at West and talking about war. Including nuclear.
That is the only opinion that's safe to say in the public though, isn't it? So even if that's the only thing heard, it's not clear what the share of the public agreeing with this sentiment is. To my understanding even in Soviet days the people who never had had free media available to them still had a pretty good idea about the dependability of the information provided.
Exactly this. I'd be much more interested in what people say anonymously. Same story anytime you see a North Korean being interviewed with their face visible.
Such a reaction is within expectations — of course there will be resentment, because the tangible consequences of economic hardship on this scale are devastating.
I'd expect such sentiments to continue and amplify over time — but hopefully support for the war will also be driven down in parallel. Even if it's considered a tactical blunder ("we can't afford to keep up this special operation") rather than a moral one.
It seems it depends which generation we're talking about. Younger Russians seems to be the ones most connected and thus aware of what's going on abroad, while middle aged Russians are playing the ostrich and burying their head in the sand. I saw an interview yesterday of a journalist wanting to show 50-something Russian people what's going on in Ukraine, and most of them were like "I don't want to see, get that thing away from me. It's bullshit, that's not what the news has been saying at all. I stand with Putin."
I saw that as well and it was interesting, but unfortunately that style of video (man on the street aka vox populi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vox_populi) is notorious for "seeming" like its an accurate and balanced survey / measure of public sentiment to a viewer while its still just as editable/influenced by the journalists subconscious or conscious editorial bias as any other form of journalism or propaganda.
Which is unsurprising given what Russian police could do to folks recorded in this manner
I, possibly, saw the same thing. I thought it was fascinating. The 50-somethings mostly following the party line. The 20-something was pretty clearly anti-war and anti-Putin. The 30-something said with a wry smile, "I don't want to talk about it because that is dangerous, here, you know." And my favourite, the 70-something saying, "It is awful. We have lost 500 already [the officially admitted death toll], and for what? We don't know!"
They gonna send nukes because IKEA stopped sending Billy?
I'm not sure Billy will come back that way.
Let's face it: Russia is illegaly invading a foreign country that is fighting back hard. The only way I see out for Russia to save itself is by sending Putin into exile and blame it all on him.
Putin hoped for weakness in the west re sanctions and weapons. They play hardball and now Putin is failing.
edit: I also believe nuclear is the only war Russia could even think about against the west. The army isn't that strong obviously... It is really a bad situation because NOBODY in the west has thought about attacking Russia at all. It is all in their heads. It's just plain stupid.
>The army isn't that strong obviously...
I agree with some of your points, but what do you mean by "strong"? Ukraine is not a cake walk, and the most powerful armies in the world could barely contain poor Afghani warlords. This is not easy.
Consider that much of the news of Russian failure is an information op. The Ukrainians are putting up a valiant fight, but the Russians will run them over without support, no doubt about it.
Russia is supposedly a superpower with modern equipment. But their material leaks oil, tyres are in terrible condition food is missing, their logistics don't work out, they have no air superiority, they don't even have secure communication. At this point I'd be surprised if that huge convoy will reach Kiyv within the next week or at all...
It shows that you cannot support a huge army in such a poor country (GDP/capita). There was a myth to the russian army, but they barely manage to capture cities in which (according to propaganda) most inhabitans support them.
They wanted a Blitzkrieg and it didn't work out at all. Of course they can keep throwing material and bombs at the cities. They have much more material. But how quickly can they do that? Can they cut off supplies from western countries? Can they keep fighting against Javelins and ambushes?
What's the end game at this point? They will be hated by the population they supposedly wanted to free, the cities will be destroyed and they became an international pariah. Their economy will be in shambles.
Russia did think it would be easy ("will be greeted with flowers and bread")!
>Russia is supposedly a superpower with modern equipment. But their material leaks oil, tyres are in terrible condition food is missing, their logistics don't work out, they have no air superiority, they don't even have secure communication.
I'm having trouble reconciling the above sentences. The equipment they have is the equipment they have, it wasn't a mystery to military analysts or the intelligence community, by any means. That doesn't make their military "weak" any more than it makes the American military "weak" for their results in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Reading through the comments in this thread, I wonder how many people think we're getting unbiased analysis of what's happening over there. Do people really think the Russians are completely flailing here? I have a hard time believing it, myself, but I'm no expert.
No doubt about it? That's just as much an "information op" as the other side you claim. This war is far from decided and making such baseless claims as Russia steamrolling Ukraine because you've heard somewhere of Russia's fearsome military is irresponsible at best.
>No doubt about it? That's just as much an "information op" as the other side you claim.
I guess we'll see, and revisit this comment in the future. Personally, I find it funny that people like yourself don't believe the Russian military is superior to that of the Ukraine after watching a week of YouTube videos.
>heard somewhere of Russia's fearsome military is irresponsible at best.
Irresponsible? Lol get a hold of yourself.
Russia doesn't need to save itself, it's not under any existential threat. Sanctions will hurt, but they'll live. The ordinary people will suffer worst, and the elite will have to make do without holidays in France and Italian marble counter tops, but their positions depend on maintaining the oppressive state system.
That sounds reasonable, but I wonder what the real elite-government interaction will be like soon. Oligarchs prop up what the government was doing in exchange for government not bothering them. If there's enough economic impact that they can't be the sponsors of Putin... that agreement may fail.
I wonder how the Russian population would feel about Putin using a nuclear weapon in Ukraine if it looks like Russia is losing. Are they that far gone, that inhuman? If they are, what do you do about a country like that, who feels that nuking neighbors after your attempt to conquer them fails is justified? I don't believe the Russian people are that far gone.
I don't think dropping nukes on Ukraine is something Russia would even consider. It makes absolutely no sense from their perspective.
What I fear is a Cuba crisis style standoff where Russia sets an ultimatum demanding the West stop all arms deliveries to Ukrainian forces, threatening any transit countries (such as Poland) with nukes.
>threatening any transit countries (such as Poland) with nukes
They can threat all they want, but Poland is a NATO member. An attack on Poland will trigger a retaliation from NATO. Not sure Russia wishes to go to war with all of NATO.
Exactly. That's why I called it a Cuba crisis style stand-off.
It's not a popular take, but the USSR spawned lots of nationalism in its republics. Soviet ideology held that nationalism is good, and that it would flourish under socialism for the benefit of its "peoples". The reality is that nationalism ended up eating the USSR itself. Nationalism is never good, we are only one humanity, not many
I don't think you understand Russian mentality. They largely gave up on democracy, freedom and lawful state long time ago. Those that really objected and were smart enough mostly went away and don't look back, since you can't fight that and survive, only join them or live in bitter poverty.
There are things that might work - big celebrities like top hockey players and other sportsmen could stand up and criticize Putin directly, not just issue some blank statements of wanting peace and not even mentioning what they actually mean by that (Ovechkin is a prime example).
Microsoft could ban any access to license servers, updates, office stuff etc (that might be a massive hit, I recall some UK submarines was running completely on Windows XP few years, I am sure half the state would stop working immediately).
Apple and Google could block any access to their stores, updates, apps etc... Ideally with some message explaining why, shown to every user. But that's a bold move, I don't think they have balls for that yet. Things will get much worse in Ukraine at this rate though, so this may change.
Yes, nation-wide block of YouTube could work
Right now the only change is that google disabled YouTube ads for russian users. Which would make me more eager to sit home and numb my mind with videos
Blocking Youtube is an awful idea. It is one of the sources where Russians can get information not from propaganda. If you block Youtube, they will have to turn to government-controlled sites like Vk or RuTube.
I believe Russian authorities have blocked Facebook, Twitter, Youtube
Only Facebook and Twitter for now.
I wouldn’t be so optimistic, the country is run by people with the exact skills needed to keep the population in an alternate reality: psyops and a brutal secret police.
Add a cultivated desire to be “great again” plus economic hardship imposed from outside and Putin can hold a tight leach as he’s been doing. That’s the first time he’s probably gambling his life, but he’s far from being defeated.
In 1930s and following world war 1… did the measure to punish Germany not result in world war 2? Don’t get me wrong, I’m very pro we should do more to help Ukraine … I feel good when I hear oligarchs are losing their super yachts… and I do not see away for the world to do business with Russia now we should be cutting oil purchases too… but really what does this do ? Does it not just further cement a people under the control of a crazy person with more nukes then required to end the world? I feel like maybe we should have sent in air power and troops and been like “bring it”. When things cool down again after Putin - I sure hope the world can come together and finally remove the nukes
The difference is FOLLOWING the war. You have to defeat the aggressor before you can help rebuild it.
Did the measures to stop Germany and Japan after WW2 not bring us 60 years of the most peaceful days in modern history?
Yes which was very different from what we did after ww1
> not bring us 60 years of the most peaceful days in modern history?
This is a very strange historic rewriting that's popped up everywhere in the last weeks. Did the Cold War not exist? There have been wars, genocides, coups, and regime changes practically continuously, and international media has consistently reported on them. Western media just didn't highlight them because: {they didn't involve major US security interests / involved "non-white" countries that "we wouldn't expect to be peaceful anyway"}.
Ukraine is a local conflict, just like Syria was. It involved proxy wars with the same major players. But it "feels" more significant, because now it's on "our" border. It all seems so artificial.
This conflict isn't a "turning point" in history, it isn't "war returning after 70 years of peace". It's a local conflict of which there have been dozens in recent decades. World War 3 will happen much later, and won't involve these countries[0]. There is no principled or logical reason for people to care about Ukraine and not Yemen, Ethiopia, and Myanmar, expect for people caring about what the TV tells them to care about.
[0] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/george-friedman-on-wo...
It became more regional. Conflict around most of the world continued, but at a steadily reducing rate, and the lack of major conflicts in the developed world meant that from the 1940s global deaths in conflicts never peaked as high as they had previously. These are the stats per population:
https://www.vox.com/2015/6/23/8832311/war-casualties-600-yea...
Conflict deaths really fall off a Cliff after the collapse of the Soviet Union. So you're right the cold war was only cold in certain regions, but peace in 'the west' did make a difference.
“ This is a very strange historic rewriting that's popped up everywhere in the last weeks. Did the Cold War not exist?”
It’s simply pointing to the per-world-capita death rate due to war after ww2 where it dropped precipitously.
War casualties follow power laws, not normal distributions. It's a nonsensical "analysis".
It doesn’t matter what law they follow, one just needs to tabulate them in a histogram…
It's not a recent concept, Pax Americana has been talked about for a long time. The Cold War happened, but it's exactly that incredible achievement of peace during the latter half of the 20th century is astounding given the few hundred years that preceded it.
Just like North Koreans see through the propaganda? Unfortunately I just think that's wishful thinking.
Surely at some point they'll see that what they're being told doesn't make sens
In the US as significant part of the population will believe that the political party in power is the source of everything bad, counter to any evidence. Paradoxically, evidence against that point of view is almost taken as proof: "that's what they want you to believe!".
Try talking to an ardent Trump opponent or supporter that he did even the least little thing right or wrong. It's maddening the contortions of reasoning and deflection. He's so very polarizing so the phenomena is more extreme with him but the same goes for any president in my lifetime.
Now imagine there's only one real political party, more controls on information, and a general human desire to not see themselves or their "tribe" as the villains in any situation...
The type of sentiment change you're hoping for can occur, but my own observation is that it only happens very gradually over many years or very suddenly when sparked by something cataclysmic, and that second method has as much chance of hardening the mindset with more rationalizing as it does changing it.
Surely at some point they'll see that what they're being told doesn't make sense.
I remember thinking that way, too, back in 2016.
That's not an apt comparison. It could be if Trump (or anyone else) won or "won" the second election, then modified the constitution to allow himself to run again, and was still in office.
A lot of people accepted the corruption because life became significantly better. And was noticeably freer in some ways, like the allowance of non-state media and the freedom to leave, compared to the Communist era.
I’ve been lurking on r/AskARussian lately and people there are pissed at the west for sanctions—they don’t understand why the west can’t just sanction Putin and cronies, and a good chunk of them also seem to think the west is hellbent on invading Russia and Putin’s war is necessary to stop the West from acquiring Ukraine (presumably a platform from which to invade Russia). And note that this sub is much less insane than r/russia whose mods are straight Russian state censors.
In other words, even the least-propagandized Russians seem to be heavily influenced.
Are you sure? Could simply be put as economic war by the west against russian competitors.
Are the Chinese seeing past the propaganda? It will be the same with Russians. Putin wanted this. Now his hands are not dirty and who is going to protest the closing of internet, lack of foreign investors, lack of foreign companies when they are done by the west themselves. New companies will come from within Russia, new investment will flow eventually from either China or from within. Mission accomplished and he has cemented his power till he dies.
Important difference: the average Chinese, both median and arithmetic, receives a considerable prosperity dividend from the stability bought with the oppression. The impression I get from Russia is different.
I think that's optimistic. This is easy to spin as "the west are Nazis and hate that we've tried to liberate Ukraine and this is all their fault".
I hope you're right — that's certainly one of the conceptual rationales for sanctions.
Unfortunately, it will probably take a lot of catastrophic economic damage before Putin loses support — as in whole companies going down, life savings destroyed, bankruptcies, loss of homes, hunger, desperation. Think of how difficult it is to overcome your own biases — have you ever changed your mind about something your country did?
Sanctions are horrible especially on this scale, and even those of us who believe they are appropriate have to stay clear-eyed about what happens.
> I believe the sanctions may well trigger a change in the Russian public's opinion of Putin.
Doesn't really matter in a dictatorship. Putin is likely to suspend the "right to vote" next and turn Russia into North Korea, officially.
And Ukrainans believe there's a "ghost plane" in the sky that destroyed half russian air force.
> And Ukrainans believe there's a "ghost plane" in the sky that destroyed half russian air force.
No, not a ghost plane. Just a nickname given to a pilot (though it could be multiple pilots) who allegedly shot down a handful of Russian planes in the first days of the war. "Ghost of Kyiv." There's uncertainty and a lot of speculation going on about this pilot's accomplishments (and identity), but that doesn't mean the Ukrainians are being told lies.
It doesn't have to be myth or lies and propaganda to be given a nickname. See also The White Death.
>>>that doesn't mean the Ukrainians are being told lies
https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/ukraine-s-snake-island-h...
^Another example of a Ukrainian "myth" being a straight up lie. I haven't seen good data confirming Ghost of Kiev's kills....much like the "Russian Airborne lost 2x Il-76 transports full of paratroopers". I haven't seen pics of Il-76 crash sites. Seems odd, considering the huge amount of photos/video of coming out of the war, including plenty of other downed aircraft.
Can you say what exactly here is a straight up lie? That the Snake Island defenders were thought dead after contact with them was lost following the attack? That Ukraine claims there were 13 defenders while Russia claims there were 82?
There's a ton of things we don't have good video coverage of, including the Snake Island events, so it's very hard to verify any claims. This lack of certainty affects the belligerents too so -- unless you have conclusive evidence to show that deliberately false statements have been made -- I think it's quite arrogant to say "straight up lies" concerning statements that may have been made in confusion and without a full picture of the situation.
>>>Can you say what exactly here is a straight up lie?
Sure, right here: “Defending the Zmiinyi Island, all our border guards died a heroic death,” Zelensky said. and: The guards will posthumously receive the "Hero of Ukraine," the highest honor Ukraine can bestow, Zelenskyy said. from ( https://www.foxnews.com/world/snake-island-soldiers-russian-... )
His comments left no room for ambiguity. How do you award medals posthumously without CONFIRMATION of death?
Now compare that to the military's actual statement: Ukraine’s State Border Guard Service took to Facebook to announce Snake Island had been captured and its infrastructure destroyed by shelling from a Russian ship on Thursday, adding communication with the guards had been lost.
THAT is the correct way to release a SITREP or pass message traffic: communicate only what you can verify to be true. The Border Guards are closer to the Ground Truth (tm) than the Head of State, so that's the message that should have been propagated, accurately, at all levels. But that's not a good enough morale booster, so some embellishment worked its way in as the story floated up the chain of command. And the consequence is now the Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief has egg on his face. That should NEVER happen.
I've spent years working with a Corps-level Operations Center, including months serving as the Senior Watch Officer. I've seen a LOT of sloppy messaging, confusion, and friction. We have battle drills that we rehearse for casualty reporting, CSAR (Combat Search & Rescue), and TRAP (Tactical Recovery of Aircraft Personnel). Clarity of information is paramount, and any decent Battle Captain (what the Army calls a Watch Officer) should know to ask "Who did this report come from?" and "How do we know that's true?" "Can we VERIFY that?" Or, for a bit of levity: https://youtu.be/oqrO1RtN4gA Did you see...the body? You don't make assumptions, and you don't put your personnel spin on reporting.
The story went from "they lost comms" to "they were Killed in Action and we must award them the highest honors" in the blink of an eye. For them to be lying, is the more charitable assessment of events: the alternative, widespread incompetence from their Operations officers to their Public Affairs/Communications Strategy staff, would be far far worse.
It’s normal, in a war you need myths. Don’t confuse them with government propaganda.
It is propaganda. I am not sure where this notion that "in a war you need myths" comes from.
Myth feeds the mental energy required to fight for your life.
E.g. Russian soldiers are fighting for the myth that they are protecting some great country.
It comes from the desperation of the mind when it’s in a very bad place. It grows bottom up.
Unlike long running state propaganda that runs top down.
At some point Ukrainian propaganda will start to cost them and they’ll need to hit the brakes. I hope they’ll be in a position where that’s a priority.
From the fact that nations that fight to the end and survive in myth live on to manifest again while those that give up the fight and surrender save lives but rarely become sovereign again.
Also in the idea of elite troops who it is hopeless to fight against. Myth is incredibly powerful in war and for the long term survival of a nation or state.
It's not propaganda in the same way as in Russia because the state did not make it. The notion comes from being in a war - it's absulutely terrible, disgusting experience, so people start making myths to feel some hope, and perpetuate them.
Seems like two words for the same thing
Some of Ukrainian propaganda are myths designed to bolster morale of the local population, some (such as claiming that >10k Russian soldiers are dead, fake videos of Russian POWs, spreading rumors that martial law will be declared on Friday in Russia) is offensive disinformation clearly aimed at Russians.
Wars have been fought with this at least since the beginning of the 20th century..
Speaking of myths, here’s one: there’s more fake news and conspiracies today than in the past.
I doubt they do.
Yes, the parent is inexplicably confusing myths being spread in English language western social media like Reddit with the belief of the Ukrainian people, and in turn confusing the belief of the Ukrainian people with government propaganda. It is unclear why anyone would distract from the underlying conversation about brutal and total censorship of the press in Russia to talk about how some gullible rubes retweeted footage from a video game once.
Some of them definitely do. I've watched a few broadcasts from a Ukrainian twitch streamer who remains in Kiev and people are excitedly discussing latest exploits of the ghost of Kiev in chat.
How's this comparable? It's a lie that doesn't hurt anyone, instead boosts morale in a country that's under siege.
What's to stop Putin from nationalizing Yandex? They don't really have a choice but to move back to a centrally planned economy, why not just yoink it?