I was talking to one of my friends and he mentioned staying home on July 4, citing how there are a lot of really ugly things going on in the US.
After thinking about this myself, I’m starting to feel the same way. Instead of being proud of the country, I’m feeling like I’m just another wallet that companies and the government are trying to suck all the money out of.
The cost of living is going up, the housing market is a nightmare, I don’t feel very confident in our government at all, the job market is a nightmare…
I think I’ll be staying home this year too… anyone else?
Nope, I’m from Russia.
But then again, where does that not have its place? Are people in Europe, say, universally welcoming to immigrants? Or maybe Asia is not full of xenophobia? Africa, at least?..
There are much better factors of unity than being on a certain plot of land.
Europe is quite accepting to immigration, but if you look for a country where no one dislikes foreigners, good luck!
What I wanted to say in the beginning is, you band together to form a government, for the people, by the people! The US one is kind of crap, the russian one is an authoritarian hell hole, likewise in china.
Here in Europe we complain all the time about “the government” but that is to make politicians change their policies, because we’ll vote them in if we like them (the policies) or vote them out if we dislike them. Works half-reasonable well (when the Kremlin doesn’t spew too much disinformation), better than any other system IMO.
You can’t do that in Russia, so I understand your frustration about “the government”.
Guess that’s why Europe has built defences against immigrants, and many European countries straight up rejected to accept them? And that’s why right-wingers with their anti-immigration policies win over more and more votes?
My point is, this is one of the consequences that comes with national identity. For some, it’s just unfair preference of “their” people and things, for others, it’s nationalism and xenophobia.
Blocking “disinformation” is also a slippery slope towards autocracy. Y’know, Russia did the same back in the day. I understand that it feels like a necessity amidst hybrid wars, but it’s bound to be problematic down the road.
Well it’s not all rosy, but today immigration has become a weaponized tool, the Kremlin pays immigrants to ship them over to the Baltic states, uses propaganda in all ways to sway people to vote on bad things etc.
I’m not saying the EU is some sort of haven, but it’s probably one of the better places.
I think you are spot on with nationalism etc. It’s a fucking plague. We have enough of everything but no no let’s not share it. Sigh.
About Russia though, they have always always been the bad ones (except 1991-2000? Maamybee), and we do a very very poor job of blocking their misinformation campaigns. It’s also way more powerful today with social media than it was just ten years ago.
So today we got what we got, we can’t just “remove” all governments in the EU for example, it would just lead to a disaster. Fighting for a better world? Yes, I’d love that.
Immigration being seen as a weapon has always bewildered me. If people come to your country, commonly running away from famine and war, and you see them as nothing but a weapon, something is seriously wrong. I am aware some countries like Finland are already fairly filled with immigrants, but Europe could use some more cooperation to solve this.
To my perspective, Russian government was not the bad one, it was a rival, as in yet another place being run by shitheads. Funnily enough, 1991-2000 was actually the time when liberties coming from Perestroika were tanked again, the country was destroyed against people’s will, and wild privatization combined with corruption has left millions in deep poverty and famine; crime arose. People had their homeland taken away from them before they could react, and they were intentionally kept clueless on what was going on. But it was also the time when Russia had better relations with Europe and the US, which is why this period is seen as “Russia being good”.
Removing all governments overnight is not feasible indeed. But we should admit the harms patriotic and, as a radical extension, nationalist models cause to society at large and our global cooperation, we should own up to what it means to hostility, warfare, and breeding idiots who make it worse for all of us. Every time someone tries to instill patriotic feelings within the population, they just want to make us more controllable and divided. We shouldn’t let them. And as an extension of that, we should advocate for direct democracy and gradual dissolution of government as a main controlling entity.
This doesn’t mean, however, that you can’t praise certain decisions made by your government. They can be objectively good!
Oh fuck my comment disappeared 😑
Edit:
I’m trying to recreate the long post:
Russia boats/ships/buss people from Africa to the Finnish border while simultaneously doing “immigrants Violent & bad” psyops is what I meant as using immigration as war.
After peristroika we was relieved not because you were friendly with the US/ Europe but 1) no more hot or cold war (you’d be surprised how we saw Russia from our side, an agressive dictatorship on our border basically) 2) A shot at democracy/freedon for the russian people (that they blew.)
Oh fuck my comment disappeared 😑
Edit:
I’m trying to recreate the long post:
Russia boats/ships/buss people from Africa to the Finnish border while simultaneously doing “immigrants Violent & bad” psyops is what I meant as using immigration as war.
After peristroika we was relieved not because you were friendly with the US/ Europe but 1) no more hot or cold war (you’d be surprised how we saw Russia from our side, an agressive dictatorship on our border basically) 2) A shot at democracy/freedon for the russian people (that they blew.)
For the rest I’m quite on board, with some caveats ofc. We need a government because everyone can’t know everything, we need trusted people to run our schools, hospitals, nuclear plants and so on. For the rest? Yeah bring that power down to the people!
Oh, I know that feeling! Sorry to know the long comment is gone, happened to me more than once.
Oh, so you attribute the rise of Finnish right-wing to Russia as well, as in Russian agencies artificially create a wave of anti-immigration and then send immigrants in? Honestly, with all the real damage Russia has done, I feel like it is used as a scapegoat here; among a few reasonably confirmed cases (mostly of Russia killing dissidents abroad etc.), there is a sea of practically baseless speculation. Last time I saw this was a few days ago, when German military vehicles burned and journalists attributed it to Russia because some random pro-Russia Telegram channel mentioned it (and did so with clear factual errors that are alone enough to dismiss it).
Cold war, we should remember, was a two-sided conflict. It was not good vs evil, it was capitalist world full of red scare and propaganda vs communist block full of authoritarianism and, again, propaganda. Both sides could do much more to maintain peace, it’s just that one side has eventually collapsed, leaving the other to rule the world and write history books. And as much as Europe was concerned about USSR being on their doorsteps, so was USSR concerned about militarization of Europe with the aid of the US. That’s what this entire showoff is based on; it’s not a one-sided show of intimidation, and, arguably, both sides would rather not have it. Moreover, it was started by the US swinging nuclear arms around, and then USSR jumped along.
I’m not sure what you consider to be a shot of democracy - perestroika itself or the dissolution of the Soviet Union? In first case, yes, it was a welcome change, but as some of the Soviet republics, particularly in the Baltics, were essentially held in by force and censorship, it was a catalyst for the future dissolution, which is likely why it wasn’t done sooner. Dissolution itself brought a lot of freedom to the former republics which were not super fond of being Soviet to begin with, but was a disaster for Russia, Belarus, and new states in the Middle East. In the latter, there was nothing to blow as there was nothing democratic about them to begin with - it was just a bunch of new dictators.
Speaking of Russia in particular, while trying to show a face of democratic change, Yeltsin has consolidated power by creating puppet parties (including a puppet Communist party), silencing opposition by not letting them into main federal TV channels that were the main information source at the time, and destroying existing democratic institutions, sometimes with actual military force (see the assault on Congress of People’s Deputies). By the time Putin (heavily endorsed by Yeltsin as the new leader of the country) got to rule Russia, it was already heavily in United Russia party’s grip. Make no mistake - this was a show of democracy designed to be blown. And, sure, it was an easy play, as Russians by then never really knew the times they, and not someone in the high cabinets, could vote someone in.
We should certainly have experts running and planning critical parts of the economy, but we should also make sure it’s as hard to corrupt as possible. Governments are prone of injecting propaganda in schools we both care about, cutting medical spending, and attacking nuclear plants during the wars. If we should have governments at all, they should either work through as much of direct democracy and self-organizing as opposed to representative power (which is quite close to anarchy), or through careful and open computerized planning with active input of the people. The global political goals in the meantime should shift towards cooperation and integration on all levels, so that one plot of land uniting against the other plot of land would look as absurd as it actually is.