This brings up the issue of worldview and interpretation of perception as information ("reality," "the facts"). Everyone's experience is shaped by subjective factors. One such factor is one's worldview, which is based on cultural and individual factors and circumstances.
Thus, it is possible to speak of particular national points of view, religious points of view, political points of view, class-based points of view, etc., and how these different categories intersect in particular individuals and groups.
The result is that those sharing similar points of view live in a shared "reality" shaped by many factors but foundationally by the commonality of worldview. This constitutes their universe of discourse. It is how they see things and construct "the facts" based on interpretation that is largely subjective. In terms of "the news," this interpretation or point of view constitutes "the narrative."
Those who do not share in this commonality are considered in relation to the common worldview. So, if there is fundamental disagreement, the outside group is thought to be lying about reality, is ignorant, or is even crazy. This applies to members of the outside group, too. This is now proliferating not only about leaders such as Putin and Xi, but also about the Russians and Chinese as peoples. It is immature, ignorant, and arrogant, and it is leading to dangerous xenophobia and demonization. It is especially dangerous since the parties are nuclear-armed.
For example, initially the American focus was on Putin. He is evil ("Putler"). He is "crazy." Along with this was the notion that the Russian people were basically good and sane and were just waiting for the opportunity to overthrow the dictator to free themselves from oppression. But then, after the invasion, polling showed that the Russian people were overwhelmingly supportive of the leadership. Then the American perception became that Russians are evil, subhuman, crazy, etc.
Rather, "reality" is shaped not only on perception, but reports of others perception, and also by subjective factors that are shared, like a worldview, and also individual idiosyncrasies. Each of us lives in a different reality of our own construction and we tend to agree with and associate with those similarly inclined.
So, are there "alternative facts"? Yes. How can they be assessed "objectively"? Humans have devised ways of dealing with with such issues. For example, science is based on a naturalistic assumption designed to reduce subjectivity, but "science" is not fool-prove either. In the final analysis, absolute objectivity in anything other than the trivial lies beyond human grasp. This is part of "the human condition."
Vladimir Putin is Crazy?
Larry C. Johnson | CEO and co-founder of BERG Associates, LLC, an international business-consulting firm with expertise combating terrorism and investigating money laundering, formerly Deputy Director in the U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism (1989-1993, and CIA operations (1984-1989)
https://sonar21.com/vladimir-putin-is-crazy/
Larry C. Johnson | CEO and co-founder of BERG Associates, LLC, an international business-consulting firm with expertise combating terrorism and investigating money laundering, formerly Deputy Director in the U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism (1989-1993, and CIA operations (1984-1989)
https://sonar21.com/vladimir-putin-is-crazy/
Related
This following post illustrates the point. Andrew Goodman's take on Vladimir Putin is well-informed, presents the facts as he saw them from his point of view, and provides his assessment of Putin and what he is likely to do with respect to Ukraine. The account is from the American point of view and is illustrates how a worldview shapes one's perception of reality and "the facts." Since Goodman is long-serving veteran of the US diplomatic corps, it is reasonable to conclude that this at least close to the lines along which current thinking in the State Department runs.
How accurate a picture is this "objectively"? The problem in answering this is that no one is able to stand completely outside one's worldview, which is shaped by one's native language and culture, education, life experience in accord with one's constitutional disposition and character (and one's karmic baggage from the Eastern and Western esoteric points of view).
The interpretation says as much about how Goodman thinks as about Vladimir Putin. If one reads around, one can find a range of opinion on this, presenting very different pictures of the man based on different points of view that have been shaped by many factors and which is necessarily embedded in a worldview.
War on the Rocks
Putin the Planner
Andrew Goodman, retired from the Senior Foreign Service in 2009 after over 30 years mostly devoted to dealing with the USSR and Russia. He has taught courses on Russian foreign policy at Columbia University, the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and Mary Washington University.
War on the Rocks
Putin the Planner
Andrew Goodman, retired from the Senior Foreign Service in 2009 after over 30 years mostly devoted to dealing with the USSR and Russia. He has taught courses on Russian foreign policy at Columbia University, the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and Mary Washington University.
http://warontherocks.com/2022/04/putin-the-planner/
12 comments:
Well, the invasion was crazy. So when you do crazy acts, yeah, you're crazy.
That resolved, he's also a fascist of the Hitler kind: theft of land and resources, ethnic cleansing and genocide. I certainly won't call him a Nazi though. That is only reserved for Hitler's Germans. You see, the Germans were committing acts of genocide (Southwest Africa and Asia Minor) long before Hitler ever came to power or was even known.
I didn't receive a memo stating that Grandmaster Putin is crazy.
No memo, no buy in.
Looks like the Russian military has evolved very little, if at all, since WW2. Small wins come at massive cost. Yes, they grind on, but the sacrifice is huge. Unbelievable. And they let the command structure (Zelensky) sit there to conduct his global p.r. campaign. Incredible.
This video by Honest government Ad
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1efOs0BsE0g
Sums it up.
I love the videos by this group they are hilarious...
Love this one as well.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Vb5OKrYzZp8
Finance, markets, economics etc…
https://the-blindspot.com/in-the-blind-spot-hortages-roubini-mass-hysteria/
The US dollar has hit its strongest level in 2 years ( with inflation the highest for decades)
At least someone is talking about it and not ignoring it.....
" There’s a spate of commentary out there suggesting that the dollar’s recent strengthening indicates that its reserve currency status is not under threat.
The strengthening is not good news at all. It indicates there is a dollar shortage in the international currency market which will soon impact the serviceability of offshore dollar-denominated debt because dollars will no longer be able to be recycled into other revenue streams. This is all the result of a reduction of commodity dollars in the system due to Russian sanctions. The situation is severe and could have the makings of a dollar-system shock akin to the one last seen in 2008.
This time, however, central bank swaps may not be enough to save the system because the problem is not a liquidity issue as much as a flow issue. The only way out for those parties who have lost access to dollar flows is to have their governments formally redenominate their debt into currencies that are still forthcoming. Alternatively, for governments to take over the FX risk. This could open the door to some very interesting international negotiations in the months to come. "
"
From the link
" A good way to think about what is going on here is this: Dollar super strength => mass eurodollar defaults => inter-state restructuring negotiations => mass “negotiated” redenomination/acquisition of a lot of dollar-denominated debt (most likely into CNY, RUB or crypto).
Once legacy US-dollar denominated debt is dealt with, US authorities will be tempted to engage in competitive devaluation to help encourage US exports and the reshoring of core industry from China and emerging markets to the West. This, at least, is how I see things evolving unless the Russia crisis resolves itself (Unlikely.) "
Sacrificing Russian soldiers' lives to go easier on Ukrainians... will it be appreciated?
lastgreek,
This is a repeat of the Cuban Missile Crisis. The US was in the wrong then, as it is now.
The Real Cuban Missile Crisis
Everything you think you know about those 13 days is wrong.
The Jupiter missiles were an exceptionally vexing component of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Because they sat aboveground, were immobile, and required a long time to prepare for launch, they were extremely vulnerable. Of no value as a deterrent, they appeared to be weapons meant for a disarming first strike—and thus greatly undermined deterrence, because they encouraged a preemptive Soviet strike against them. The Jupiters’ destabilizing effect was widely recognized among defense experts within and outside the U.S. government and even by congressional leaders. For instance, Senator Albert Gore Sr., an ally of the administration, told Secretary of State Dean Rusk that they were a “provocation” in a closed session of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in February 1961 (more than a year and a half before the missile crisis), adding, “I wonder what our attitude would be” if the Soviets deployed nuclear-armed missiles to Cuba. Senator Claiborne Pell raised an identical argument in a memo passed on to Kennedy in May 1961.
Given America’s powerful nuclear superiority, as well as the deployment of the Jupiter missiles, Moscow suspected that Washington viewed a nuclear first strike as an attractive option. They were right to be suspicious. The archives reveal that in fact the Kennedy administration had strongly considered this option during the Berlin crisis in 1961.
The difference now is that it's Ukraine and hypersonic missiles.
Putin said that the deployment of NATO troops or advanced missile systems on Ukrainian soil that could strike Moscow within minutes would be a step too far for Russia. NATO has not taken any steps along these lines.
"If some kind of strike systems appear on the territory of Ukraine, the flight time to Moscow will be seven to 10 minutes, and five minutes in the case of a hypersonic weapon being deployed. Just imagine," Putin said.
Strong dollar is anti “inflation”….
"Reality" is shooting a Russian soldier in the legs and watching him bleed to death in agony.
Perspective is how you perceive that incident. Is it a tragedy? A source of amusement? An injustice? A thing of beauty?
"Vladimir Putin is crazy" is not a worldview, nor does it being up the issue of worldviews.
"Joe Biden is crazy" does bring up the issue of elder abuse.
/Caitlin Johnstone rumination mode
How accurate a picture is this "objectively"? The problem in answering this is that no one is able to stand completely outside one's worldview, which is shaped by one's native language and culture, education, life experience in accord with one's constitutional disposition and character (and one's karmic baggage from the Eastern and Western esoteric points of view).
It is an accurate account of how this person rationalizes their opinions. It is utterly useless to anyone other than the individual who made them. Rationalization is a downside of sentience.
The interpretation says as much about how Goodman thinks as about Vladimir Putin. If one reads around, one can find a range of opinion on this, presenting very different pictures of the man based on different points of view that have been shaped by many factors and which is necessarily embedded in a worldview.
People think of several things, say one thing, and do another. I make a distinction between opinions and worldviews. Opinions on topics that have no relevance to your own life, are unlikely to influence your conduct. Worldviews may influence what you do, while adherence to principles are said to be the real motivators (and governors) of action.
But that is just another rationalization, intended to make us believe that 'what we do' has any relationship to what we think. Most of our actions are governed by behavior and instinct, whose roots are millions of years in the making. The application of an intellectual veneer shouldn't obscure causes that are psychological in nature, and physically present within the structure of our brains.
I don't have a worldview regarding the actions of Ukraine and Russia per se. I have opinions on it. I don't view Russians as subhuman; I view both sides as animals, exhibiting animal behavior for all the world to see. In the future, it will be our turn to behave like animals, as soon as conflict comes to our neighbourhood.
I view all humans as animals. We may fancy ourselves as rational beings - and that may be how we think - but it is not how we act. Collectively we are locusts, who will not stop until the cycle of boom & bust is complete. Then, as always, the survivors will carry on.
The main thing I have to rationalize, is what I observe around me. Most of what I see fits into a behaviorist box. When times are good, when there is peace, people have the luxury of professing their adherence to certain principles. They claim to be virtuous. When times get bad, those claims go out the window. Human intellectual discourse is revealed as a sham, as an exercise in self-justification. We keep telling ourselves we are distinct from 'lower' animals, while sweeping the ugly side of our behavior under the carpet.
To deny we are animals is to guarantee the human condition. Having built civilization, at a heavy cost to the planet, we dwell in the wilderness, in terms of our mentality.
Post a Comment