The day before another member of Putin's inner circle, Vyasheslav Volodin, made similar remarks, telling foreign journalists "an attack on Putin is an attack on Russia."I came to a similar conclusion about at orchestrated attempt at regime change some time ago. It's either abysmal reporting or an organized campaign or some of both. I suspect some of both, with the planted messaging being picked up by the echo chamber without verifying facts or presenting other views, creating an impression of monolithic truth. What made me particularly suspicious was the obvious attempt to front-run the news and capture the news cycle. This likely explains Putin's strong choice of words in his address at the Valdai discussions.
The logic, they argue, is that by defaming the leader of a country, you weaken his power domestically by undermining popular support for him, and internationally, by rallying popular opinion to support policies against that country. The ultimate goal, they argue, is to weaken the country itself. They also talk about regime change.
They argue that if one looks at the facts, that there is evidence of ongoing character assassination which cannot be explained by a vague popular zeitgeist in the West, but is more likely the result of a dedicated effort to introduce this defamation into the news flow.…
The issue of manipulation of news by intelligence services has been in the news recently with revelations that the CIA and German Secret Service (GSS) have long-running programs to influence how media executives and top journalists convey and interpret the news, including direct cash payments.
The Vineyard of the Saker
Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin?
From the comments there:
VINEYARDSAKER: said...
@Where-Wolf:So long as Putin and You believe Russia can help save the world from fascism I have reason to hope.
I don't think that Russia can save the world, at best Russia can save Russia, but by saving Russia Russia can indeed help others, such as the Ukraine and, frankly, even the USA. At the core, this is not about nations, nationalities or ethnicities, it is about politics: on one side - imperialism, violence, wars, aggression, lies, exploitation, deception, social degeneration, an ideology of profit and greed above all else, injustice, discrimination and hatred, hatred and more hatred. On the other, I see a very diverse constellation of different forces of resistance who in many ways are very different from each other, but who *accept* that diversity and refuse to turn the planet in a mix of a McDonald's and the Gulag in Gitmo. By refusing to be incorporated into the AngloZionist "Borg" Russia can, and does, lead the rest of the countries who dare defy our planetary overlords. And, to be honest, I am absolutely sure that we all will prevail. The question for me is at what costs. That is what keeps me awake at night and fearful for the future of my kids.
Kindest regards,
The Saker
9 comments:
Russia helping and saving the USA? This is truly laughable. As bad as the USA is and taking into account that it inches toward kleptocracy/oligarchy, Russia is already there and if it can "help" it is only by being a bad example of what can happen to a country.
The United States cannot rule the world. Getting the maniacs in Washington to accept this would be helpful.
PeterP, Have you ever lived for any length of time outside the US? It appears from your comments that you have not. When one has led a sheltered parochial life, attitudes of superiority over "outsiders" develop. These attitudes are generally taken advantage of by demagogues by utilizing FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) to get countries into war. There are many who benefit from war. However, most will suffer - on both sides of the divide.
It is very easy to throw stones at others who you do not think are close to you.
Clonal,
Yes I have. Is 28 years enough for you? I lived very close to Russia, behind the iron curtain. I visited probably 20 countries on 4 continents too. As much as I am disillusioned with western "democracy" it is worlds apart from the soviet system and mentality that is reflected in what Putin does and how Rusdians think.
I think that what Saker means by "saving the world from fascism" is throwing a spanner into the works of neoliberal globalization, which if it were to be achieved would be another iteration of totalitarianism, and with a yoke that would near impossible to break.
I don't think that any of the people at Saker's place, or at Russia Insider, think that Russia has a more ideal system than the US or the West in general.
They see Russia and China as barriers to an otherwise seemingly inevitable neoliberal globalization on the terms of the Western multinationals — a homogenous global corporate order backed up by national and international law military might, and the creation of a global surveillance and security apparatus fixing the order permanently as a totalitarian system.
The concern is twofold. First, neoliberal globalization run amok, and secondly, the irresponsibility involved in trying to stuff a world order down the throat of a country like Russia that has nuclear weapons and comparable technology and has stated it will use them if pushed into a corner.
I think that there is also a lot of concern about preemptive war aka the Bush Doctrine. That definitely has the Russian leadership and military on edge.
This is therefore creating a dangerous situation both in the short term and the long term, and there seems to be no solution in sight. In fact, the neocons are pushing forward harder all the time.
At this point it's just Russia and China that have the ability to confront this march, and Putin did just that in no uncertain terms in his address.
BTW, China has declared it will not join in on sanctions on Russia.
PeterP, Russia was in much worse shape 20 years ago.
Putin ain't no saint, but it could be worse, Russia could be like Ukraine or other banana ex-soviet republics in central Asia.
He is a ruthless bastard, but it's a strong man and Russians like strong men and he was a 'saviour' of the motherland when it was close to anarchy with the oligarchs wrecking havoc.
Yeah, they could be better, but they could be also worse (and Russians, a lot of them at least, think this way).
Ignacio,
I agree with you. Putin stopped the slide under Yeltsin, and put a stop to the idiotic neoliberal experiment, but he didn't root out oligarchs, they are now a given. And i disagree with Saker if he means what Tom says: Russia cannot stop the Western neoliberalism or fascism: it is still a banana republic with nukes. It can mess up neighboring countries and turn them into Russia's semi colonies, it won't modernize them or offer a better than western way of development, just like Russia itself is not on a path to any development: yes they get paid pensions on time (Ukrainians may envy that), but the civic society or democracy is nonexistent.
If you are worse than the West you can show the West the way.
Well, yes, oligarchs still are there but Putin managed to create a new status quo, it's basicaly: "I'll let you loot the people as long as you don't loot them too much". Is a similar deal with what we got going on in the West, just different magnitude (IMO a demonstration that we shouldn't think that anything is given, everything is possible including a regression along those lines) and methods.
But, I agree with your point, Russia can't show us any way because they are not better than our current leadership. However, Russia can help the West the same way the USSR helped, creating a multipolar world (same with China) that keeps western oligarchs in check not trying to get too far of democratic values and economy, but that's not what that commentary is arguing.
Although this could also may happen under more open and democratic regimes, it's arguably that it wouldn't (as conflict between open democracies has not happen before). We also don't know if those societies really want more open regimes, as we happen to find during the last decades, not everyone is so ready to adapt the western style (even developed nations like Japan have some deep differences with the West model, even within the West itself there are big differences like the continental Europe and the anglo-saxon model etc.).
Look at what is happening in the EZ with the eurocrats trying to force the Anglo-American (Reagan-Thatcher) neoliberal model on Europe. Nationalism, which often translates into parties at least flirting with neo-Nazis, are on the rise while social unrest ramps up due to the effects of "expansionary fiscal austerity" and "putting the house in order."
Hungary is already turning thumbs down on the Western model, and aligning more with Russia culturally. The US just send a delegate to warn them to conform. We'll see how that plays out.
We've already seen the rise of radical Islam in response to imposition of the Western model, which is not only economic but also cultural and institutional and conflicts with both traditional cultures and Islamic values.
As Putin said in essence, everything the US touches turns to shit. The Global South in general is waking up to it, BRICS are waking up to it, and many Europeans are waking up to it and even some Brits and Americans.
The only viable out is if enough countries ally against the Western neoliberal model for globalization to re-introduce a multi-polar world. The Western ruling elite is not going to change of their own accord by waking up to the results of their follies in the name of liberalization and spreading democracy.
This looks to be heading toward a bad ending socially, politically and economically since these are of one piece, which is way I am featuring news about it. It's what's happening now. Putin has been cast to play a major role in this global reality show, a part which he apparently relishes,
Post a Comment