As regular readers know, I have received and posted several comments complaining that I don’t write posts showing “both sides” or “different sides” on Ukraine. They disapprove of my support for Ukraine and my criticism of Putin.
In some cases, the commenters have included links to articles or videos claiming that Putin had no choice but to invade Ukraine because…he felt encircled by NATO, or he needed to protect Russians in Ukraine, or Ukraine is overrun by Nazis, or some policy analyst warned that NATO’s expansion would provoke Putin. Other commenters claim that I should not post anything sympathetic to Ukraine unless I post equally sympathetic commentaries about places where the U.S. brutalized the local population or where other nations are suffering.
Let me explain. This is my blog. It is not CNN, FOX, MSNBC, or a network station. The articles I post are my choice.
My choice is to demand that Putin stop the war that he launched against Ukraine. Stop the killing of Ukrainians and Russians. Stop the targeting of civilians. Stop the bombing of civilian shelters and hospitals and evacuation routes.
I oppose this unprovoked war. Those who excuse and rationalize it are, wittingly or unwittingly, supporting the war. And they are supporting Putin. One comment, which I chose not to publish, claimed that the war was “provoked” by Ukraine. Rubbish. Another said that Ukraine is run by Nazis. Rubbish. Another said the war was created by Russophobes. More rubbish. NATO accepted ex-Soviet satellite nations because they asked to be admitted. NATO didn’t pressure them to apply. They wanted protection from Russia. Ukraine requested membership in NATO but the request was tabled, probably to avoid antagonizing Putin.
The nations of the world should have the right to choose their own government and not to be ruled by a puppet regime. Russia took a sharp turn away from democracy when Boris Yeltsin chose Putin as his successor. He has a long history of killing or imprisoning his critics and competitors. Now he has none, and he engineered passage of a law that keeps him in power until 2036. That’s almost half a century of one man rule. The usual words for such regimes are “dictatorship,” “authoritarian,” “totalitarian.”
For thirty years, the West has encouraged ties with Russia. The goal of the West was to integrate Russia into the global economy and promote healthy relations between Russia and the West. By his invasion of Ukraine, Putin severed the past thirty years of steady efforts to build ties with the West and to turn Russia into a normal nation that does not threaten its neighbors or threaten the world with nuclear war.
I will not post defenses of Putin. If you want to defend his actions, write a letter to the New York Times or the Washington Post. Or follow the tweets of Marjorie Taylor Greene, Madison Cawthorne, and the other members of the GOP’s Putin caucus.
One man surrounded the borders of Ukraine with nearly 200,000 troops. One man lied and said he had “no intention” of invading Ukraine. One man ordered the troops and jets and warships to attack Ukraine. One man gave the order to reduce Ukrainian cities to rubble and trap civilians who had no water, no heat, no food.
Putin.
In my view, he is a megalomaniac, an imperialist, a man without a heart or a soul. He is Stalin reborn.
I will no longer post comments defending Putin’s cruel and unprovoked war. I will no longer give space to those who say he was afraid of being “encircled” by NATO. This gives him permission to invade Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia, even Poland and Hungary.
I have no obligation to post “both sides.” I don’t post both sides of the campaign to privatize public schools. I don’t post both sides on issues of racism or book banning or other issues that, in my view, are clear cut.
We can debate lots of issues. But I will no longer tolerate defenses of Putin and his war of choice. Please don’t waste your time or mine by posting comments justifying Putin’s war. I will delete them, and you will go into moderation where I can delete them before they appear.
Agree with you 100% on all you say here, Diane.
AMEN, sister!
Thank you, thank you, thank you! For your clarity, courage, compassion! As always, I’m so grateful that you are blogging. Please stay well and keep defending truth.
I support decision as well clearly because of the war crimes. If Putin was fighting an honest war in might be different but he has definitely gone overboard
AMEN!
Don’t Be Fooled: The GOP Love Affair With Putin Is Worse Than It Looks:
https://www.rsn.org/001/dont-be-fooled-the-gop-love-affair-with-putin-is-worse-than-it-looks.html
To Overboard, whatis an honest war? If anything at all, it is a response to an unjust war. All wars are unjust by the attacker. While I do not agree with the way a lot of nations treat thrir citizens, killing people to save lives is stupid. If, once a war is started, someone responds to stop the carnage, that is one thing. (And it is so wrong that no one is responding to stop the carnage in Ukraine! ) But an honest war? A total contradiction in terms.
Rawgod,
That is an excellent definition. “All wars are unjust by the attacker….killing people to save lives is stupid. If, once a war is started, someone responds to stop the carnage, that is one thing. (And it is so wrong that no one is responding to stop the carnage in Ukraine!) But an honest war? A total contradiction in terms.”
Thank you. It is how I see war, stupid!
This is the best essay regarding the preposterous notion that there are two sides to this war.
agreed!
THANK YOU, Diane.
THANK YOU, Diane. AGREE 100%.
The trolls are TROLLING and spreading DISinformation.
Putin and that dumpster are peas in a pod:
Thank you, Diane. Putin’s war against Ukraine is criminal, unwarranted and merciless. His war is against the civilian population, men, women, babies, children, the old, the disabled and bed-ridden. People confined to wheel chairs are fleeing Ukraine, families are being ripped apart because the men are staying behind to fight the Russians, it’s a nightmare. Putin is heartless and soulless, he is pushing us closer to a possible nuclear war.
The right always seeks to equate the two sides of an issue as does the mainstream media in many cases. There is no argument that can justify Putin murderous rampage on a sovereign nation.
Bravo, Diane!
Thank you for your moral clarity, intelligence and inspirational humanism.
Diane: A good example of a false equivalence: Other commenters claim that I should not post anything sympathetic to Ukraine unless I post equally sympathetic commentaries about places where the U.S. brutalized the local population or where other nations are suffering.
What political ground do these people (who expect such sympathies) think they are standing on: AIR? Do they think we got to even HAVING a democracy by entertaining such air-headed thinking? I only hope they are trolls, because if they are real people, they entirely missed out on getting a political education. (I know many Trump followers, even in Congress, still, who have NO IDEA about their own political history, e.g., Marjorie Taylor Green.)
I suppose that, since Churchill and Roosevelt were not perfect, their actions were equivalent to Hitler’s. After all, Hitler did like dogs and sunshine. CBK
where and when did the US brutalize a local population?
Well, while I agree 100% that Putin’s war is best seen as in the tradition of Genghis Kahn and wars of the Dark Ages, I have some Native American friends that would like a word or two on the subject of brutalizing the local population.
My Lai, Vietnam, 1968: 300-500 Vietnamese women, men, children and infants murdered by American soldiers, though 3 tried to stop the massacre. Some women were gang-raped, including girls as young as 12, according to Wikipedia.
No Gun Ri, Korea 1950: 160+ Korean villagers murdered; a US military document containing orders from commanding officers to fire on refugee groups because they were likely to be infiltrated by North Korean soldiers was later discovered; also Wikipedia.
Ebenezer Creek, State of Georgia, December 1864; Hundreds of freed slaves following the Union Army drowned trying to swim the flooded creek after US General Jeff. C. Davis ordered the pontoon bridge to be taken down immediately after the army crossed, without allowing the slaves to follow; also Wikipedia, also recreated in Tonya Bolden’s book “Crossing Ebenezer Creek.”
Etc. etc….read your history.
P.S.: I agree with the assessment of pig putin’s war by Eric Root and many others here.
Read the book Flyboys about what the US did in the Philippines.
Well done! The pictures on news reports are horrendous. Criminal and cruel
Eric Root: In another context, yes. But not in this one, and not as a provocation from a troll.
You wrote: “Well, while I agree 100% that Putin’s war is best seen as in the tradition of Genghis Kahn and wars of the Dark Ages, I have some Native American friends that would like a word or two on the subject of brutalizing the local population.”
The first thing I thought of was the bombing of that family as we were trying to get out of the war in Iraq. If there are those who really don’t understand the difference, however, (besides trolls):
First, then is then and now is now. Second, our collective freedoms are what enable us to change for the better from then to now. Third, Are we there yet? No. Do the collective WE remain headed that way? Yes. Is one-man Putin headed that way? NO. If you need an explanation, that’s why there is:
NO EQUIVALENCE CBK
Thank you, again, for not retreating from the moral high ground. I am constantly surprised to witness the erosion of common sense and traditional values with which I was raised. I’m disgusted by the ugly misappropriation of the word, “patriot”. Signed, outraged Vietnam Vet.
Well observed!!!
I absolutely agree, there are not two sides to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Putin is a monster who only wants to create havoc and kill innocent people. He should be tried for war crimes and imprisoned for life.
exactly
The little Chekist creep thought he could continue getting away with it after a lifetime of cold-blooded murder in service to his own vainglory and power and in furtherance of his looting of the wealth of his country. Ukraine looked to him like a prize he could add to his collections. Big mistake.
He will not win in Ukraine. In fact, he will lose everything because of this. Everything.
May he be the last in the long, sordid list of amoral strongmen. Putin is a relic. He doesn’t belong in the modern era, and he doesn’t belong in the civil company of decent men and women.
He belongs in prison. Or, turn him over to the mothers and fathers of the murdered children of Ukraine or of the hapless Russian conscripts sent to senseless deaths, young men whose bodies, by the thousands, now litter the Ukrainian landscape. Because of one vile creature. Because of Putin.
Totally agree, Diane. Thanks for speaking out against Putin’s barbaric acts of war criminality.
When Hitler began his rise to power, some people had sympathy for him due to the horrendous Versailles Treaty. They were right. The treaty was a horrible way to end a horrible war that led directly to the likes of Hitler. But there is a difference between a cause of history and the immediate moral judgement we all have to make about an action.
Whether American policy toward Russia in the wake of the collapse of Communist there was good or bad, we have now to live with the fact of a Russian invasion of a sovereign nation. Whether American policy in world affairs toward related issues was right of wrong, we are obliged to confront the immediate problem of a gross violation of human rights and the international principle of sovereignty.
I happen to think that there are several mistakes on the part of the West on the road to the Ukrainian invasion. But that does not justify the invasion. To explain is not to justify. Putin must be arrested from his hideous adventure. How to do this in the face of Russian Nuclear capability is a complex and daunting problem. I can but pray for our leadership and work to support solutions that I feel might work.
Most families cannot afford to flee. Ukrainians will continue to suffer until someone takes Putin out or he agrees to stop. The Ukrainian people have been suffering for more than a decade from untold proxy ‘wars’.
Historical provocation in context..
https://multipolarista.com/2022/03/14/ukrainian-leftist-war-russia-us/?fbclid=IwAR00GkEUF7_s4AgK93R2tIfyzbtykOJiLsaUoqVU-dl7tyiTBI9LRAud-jY
3.5 Ukrainian refugees, 6.5 internally displaced, according to the UN yesterday.
Putin is reptilian . He has and is committing international crimes in this brutal invasion, including the Crime of Aggression, numerous Crimes against Humanity, and War Crimes as outlined in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The ICC needs to indict him ASAP. Then, if he ever steps foot out of Russia again, he should be arrested and remanded to the ICC for trial. He is precisely what President Biden called, a war criminal.
And children are dying in Ukraine as I write this, because of them.
Totally with you, Diane, in your decision to cut off the Putin defenders. These people are shameless and ignorant. I see no difference between them and the Holocaust deniers.
I’m sad to say that Dienne followed my post with several articles claiming that Ukraine is infested with Nazis. Ukraine’s immediate neighbors don’t seem to think so. My ban on echoing Putin propaganda is absolute.
Dienne is a gullible idiot blinded by her hatred for the United States. Actual Ukrainians respond to this piece of Putinist propaganda and disinformation with utter incredulity. Are there some extreme right-wing nationalists in Ukraine? Yes. Are there some extreme right-wing nationalists in the United States? Yes. Those people are, in both countries, contemptible and on the fringe.
Well said. I cannot understand people who can justify the carnage going on.
Those few who do are complicit in the carnage, utterly shameless, and breathtakingly deluded, or they live in fear of little Tsar Putin of the Long Table, or they are slimy, well-remunerated toadies of the man (I use the term loosely) who is bringing dishonor on his country and ruin upon both Ukraine and Russia.
Charles Koch continues his business interests in Russia.
Have any of the 150 Koch “partners” (universities as described at the Charles Koch Foundation site) spoken out against their “partner”?
NYU is one of the top 5 takers of Koch cash.
Bravo, Diane!
Slava Ukraini!
Thank you, Diane, for this principled stand for decency, for your clear moral reasoning, and for your powerful voice!!!!
❤
Reblogging this.
Thank you, D, for saying “enough is enough” and drawing the boundary line in the sand 😀
Brilliant post. So well said and well argued. Thank you! Democracy needs this perspective desperately, and people like Diane Ravitch to speak truth to power and truth to trolls whose view promotes those who only value power.
For those idiots that buy the BS that Russia is being circled and surrounded by NATO, here are a few facts for those mindless fools.
Russia’s border is the world’s longest at 57,792 kilometers (35,910 mi).
The borders that Russia shares with NATO and/or the EU countires is one tenth of its own border or a bit more than 2,250 kilometers.
Then there is this fact:
As of 2022, the Federation of American Scientists estimates that Russia possesses 5,977 nuclear weapons, while the United States has 5,428; Russia and the U.S. each have about 1,600 active deployed strategic nuclear warheads.
Because of those nuclear weapons, no other country is every going to attack Russia even with conventional weapons unless Putin or some other power hungry tyrant leaves other countries no choice.
That is the only reason the NATO DEFENSIVE alliance hasn’t joined its military’s might with Ukraine to stop Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine.
NATO’s alliance is a DEFENSIVE one that only says if one country is attacked all of NATO’s countries are attacked. The NATO alliance does not say if one country in the NATO alliance starts a war, all of NATO’s countries have to join in and fight that war.
NATO is a DEFENSIVE alliance designed to stop MONSTERS like PUTIN from building an empire by attacking smaller weaker countries.
Last, Russia’s activin duty military numbers more than one million active duty troops with two million in the reserves.
When Putin’s barbarian army brutally invaded Ukraine to wage war against unarmed senior citizens in retirement homes and hospitals, and women and children of all ages, Ukraine’s active military numbered 245,000 (2022) It’s reserve personnel 220,000.
Perfect reply and the only moral stance possible. Thank you.
“Or follow the tweets of Marjorie Taylor Green, Madison Cawthorne, and the other members of the GOP’s Putin caucus.” Well said, Diane. Tweeted and posted on FB.
Thank you Diane
Good deal, Diane Ravitch!
Among his other disgusting character traits, Vladimir Putin is an intentional slaughter of children; an uncivilized, deranged, power-hungry, brutal, ruthless murder of children; one who is inherently incapable to “recognize that every child has the inherent right to life;” one who cares absolutely nothing for “the survival and development of the child;” one who global humanity must deem a viciously narcissistic, hardened, irredeemable killer (not “war criminal”—that’s too kind) and deal with accordingly.
Any rationalizations to the contrary can come only from those existing outside of global humanity, opportunistically coveting Putin’s character traits, if not being of Putin’s character traits.
I condemn without reservation the Russian invasion of Ukraine: completely unprovoked, in no way justified, the deliberate targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure being an utter evil. I am pleasantly surprised to see such strong support for NATO on this blog, despite almost all of the commenters (and presumably the overall readership) being far left-of-center on the American political spectrum. That NATO can hold its ground against Putin’s further aggression eastward is overwhelmingly the result of the strong American military presence in Europe, along with the U.S. Navy operating worldwide and America’s strategic nuclear forces. A NATO without the U.S. would hesitate to stand up to Putin. Keep that in mind whenever the thought crosses your mind to significantly reduce American military and intelligence capabilities – which cost a lot of money. To show their sincere support for continuing and possibly expanding these capabilities, conservatives should abandon their ideological support for more tax cuts and propose tax increases to shore up America’s public finances.
Correction: further aggression westward
Thank you, Jack. I am on the left side of the political spectrum, but I STRONGLY support NATO, which is a bulwark against tyranny. In a world inhabited by the likes of Putin, walk softly and carry a big freaking stick.
NATO is our bulwark against tyranny in Europe. And that will be true after Putin is gone. Anyone who doesn’t understand this is naive, ignorant, stupid.
It’s useful to know why NATO was formed in 1949 and who supported it then – and now. NATO was established as a counterweight to the Stalin-ruled Soviet Union, which had put most of eastern Europe under Soviet tyranny after World War II. Western European democracies were economically and militarily on their backs because of the immense damage wreaked by Hitler’s forces. The U.S. – with overwhelming bipartisan agreement – protected western Europe from Stalin and also rescued their economies via the Marshall Plan: one of the greatest acts ever of American statesmanship.
NATO was brought into being with the help of the British Labour party, which was even more hawkish toward the Soviet Union than was Winston Churchill. British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin was a democratic socialist former trade unions leader who hated totalitarianism Communism, probably even more than the right-wing Republicans of that era did. The current Labour party leader publicly and emphatically reaffirmed British support for NATO just before the Russians invaded Ukraine (see link below). I’m gratified at the overwhelming support for Ukraine among the American public: Right, Left, and Center.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/10/labour-nato-british-left-ukraine-keir-starmer
Thank you, Jack. Entirely agreed. Anyone who has lingering admiration for the Soviet Union is profoundly ignorant and deeply confused.
An important addition to Jack’s history lesson.
“The Social Gospel movement explicitly inspired FDR’s foreign policy approach.” (Wikipedia has additional info.)
Daily Beast posted an article recently describing the Christian Russian Orthodox Priest Kirill as the person who had Putin’s ear and proposed the war against Ukraine.
Ignoring right wing religion’s impact in the election of Trump and, its influence on Putin (has never taken off the cross his mother gave him as a child), has no excuse.
America’s heart (e.g. the Marshal plan) leading up to and following WWII was the legacy of adherents to the Social Gospel.
The torture memos of the recent past are America’s shame and they, are in part a result of influencers who promote conservative Christianity as a method of control and reject liberal Christianity.
Charles Koch funded Paul Weyrich who was a co-founder of the religious right and the anti-tax Heritage Foundation. Media report “Popular Information revealed a network of pundits and groups funded by Koch have been publicly advocating against imposing economic sanctions on Russia.”
Jefferson warned the nation about the symbiosis of religious leaders and despots.
If Jack is intelligent and, if he was a woman or a non-white or LGBTQ,
he wouldn’t vote for a party that works to deny rights to the demographic groups to which he belongs. We can all likely agree to that statement, including Jack.
I long for an America where the Jacks and the Lindas and the Bobs can sit down together under a leader as wise and decent as Diane Ravitch and Volodomyr Zelenskyy are and work out democratic compromises.
Absolutely, yes. A world led by Diane and Zelensky is the world I want for my grandson.
Linda “A world led by Diane and Zelensky is the world I want for my grandson.”
Well, I wouldn’t go that far with Zelensky. Yeah, we are with him in this war, but I wouldn’t call him an exemplary leader, who did everything right before the war.
“walk softly and carry a big freaking stick”
Yeah, being nice and good by itself is not effective. Need to be strong to do good.
Jack, when Trump pulled American troop out of Germany, many, many posters here (I was one of these) protested fiercely. he was serving his master Putin.
cx: Jack, when Trump reduced the American troop presence in Germany, many, many posters here (I was one of these) protested fiercely. he was serving his master Putin.
“Jack, when Trump pulled American troop out of Germany”
Well, American troops do need to be pulled from other countries, big countries need to be broken up into smaller ones so that they won’t boss other countries around, but all these things need to be done very carefully and slowly, not on a whim.
Likewise when Trump announced his intention to withdraw all American troops from Syria. Or when he went on his frequent attacks on our NATO allies.
Why are any U.S. troops in Syria? (Their uninvited presence is a violation of international law.)
Lemme reformulate what you said “Yeah, yeah, Putin…. But whatabout US troops in Syria?”
Jack: It is not a bit surprising that those on the political left would support NATO. It is the political right that has been complaining about NATO for years. After all, it was people on the left who opposed Hitler in Spain, Stalin in post-WWII Europe, and any number of despotic attempts throughout the Twentieth Century right up to our present day.
The great thing about this moment is seeing the political right begin to stand up to at least one kind of tyranny.
I’m trying to avoid partisanship here, but there is another side to the story about who has historically supported NATO. Through the 1960s American support for NATO was bipartisan with few exceptions. A big reason was that most of the American leaders of the post WW2 era were military veterans who knew how disastrous the policy of appeasement toward Hitler was in the 1930s – call Truman, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, and Nixon the generation of the 1938 Munich agreement, along with most members of Congress back then. Thinking changed with the controversy over the Vietnam war; the Democratic party developed a wing of legislators that was skeptical of to outright hostile to the U.S. military. That skepticism included the Senate Democratic leader Mike Mansfield, who for many years proposed reducing American forces in Europe by 50%. The fall of the Soviet Union in 1989 led to relaxed tensions between NATO and Russia, with large decreases in American forces in western Europe – the “peace dividend”. However, American frustration with European unwillingness to spend more on their own defenses continued up to the recent invasion of Ukraine, which has seen major about-faces from Germany and other potential targets of Putin about ramping up their military capabilities.
Current opposition to NATO in America comes from the isolationist Right and the anti-military Left (AOC and the like). Fortunately, that combined opposition is not even 20% of the voting population. I’m hoping that Trump’s raising the idea of withdrawing from NATO during his presidency will help to disqualify him from serious consideration for the GOP nomination in 2024 – Trump is an aberration from the longstanding Republican support for NATO.
Jack: Agreed with the left’s more lukewarm support of the military presence in Europe post Vietnam. I was, of course, speaking of a more distant left during the fascist period. In those days it tended to be the Republicans who were against internationalism
Jack
You couldn’t think of any, “isolationist right,” politicians as examples?
But, you were eager to write, “(AOC and the like)”, for the left?
Ukraine matters to humanity and domestic policy in the US also matters to humanity. In every political position, I’ll take an AOC over a Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz, Mitch McConnell, Matt Gaetz, Gosar, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Boebart, William Barr, J.D. Vance, Josh Mandel and, every candidate that Koch, Uihlein, and Thiel funds.
Given the US is the world’s greatest military power, it’s good that a Democratic President rescinded the infamous Torture Memos (critics allege the Memo’s author, Jay S. Bybee, was rewarded for the memo with a Republican nomination for federal judge- he is currently on the bench). Bybee was met by protestors after giving a closed door speech at a private, elite college. The speech was at the invitation of the conservative Federalist Society.
Jack, a large number of the right wing voted for Trump after he said he planned to destroy NATO e.g. 63% and 80% of the two major conservative religious sects. Some were influenced by Trump’s promise of lower taxes, but, not most of them.
Don’t military personnel tend to vote GOP? Are some of them voting GOP because they perceive it as the party of macho men?
The Taplin blog’s summary captures truth about the GOP- men over women, white over black, Christian over non-Christian, straight over gay.
I hope, Linda, that one bit of good will come out of the horror in Ukraine–that many here in the United States will recognize that while we disagree about many things, we are UNITED in our opposition to strongman rule by the likes of Putin, in our core commitment to democratic values of the kind suppressed in Russia today by Putin–freedom of assembly and PEACEFUL protest, freedom of the press, voting rights. And I hope that we will all understand the necessity of a strong defense in protection of these rights.
And, and–I cannot emphasize this enough–respect for international law.
Bob,
I sure as hell hope you are right.
A requirement for elected officials, those they appoint and all of those receiving government paychecks should be the primacy of adherence to man’s law not a deity’s law.
Jack, as a European-style Democratic Socialist and an American, I support steeply progressive taxation to fund public amenities like good schools, universal healthcare of the kind enjoyed by the citizens of every other democratic state at half the per capita cost we have here in the U.S., unimpeachably fair and accurate systems, AND a strong military that can protect us and our allies and keep those freedoms alive here and abroad. I think of this as ensuring that we have here something worth fighting for and preserving AND that we have the wherewithall to do that. I would strongly support adding to high-school curricula a survey course on Russian History, especially concentrating on the Soviet years. so that every young American can understand how sick that system was and the horrors that it plunged Russia into for 70 years. I also support competitive markets that avoid the horrors of national, socialist-in-name-only states like the former Soviet Union and other dictatorships “in the name of” the people–competitive, free markets that avoid the many evils attendant to those nationalized systems–the free rider problem; lack of individual incentives; centralized, oligarchical control; the substitution of the crude but nonetheless real wisdom of reasonably regulated markets (to prevent monopolies and private damage of public goods) for the idiocy of centralized planners. I don’t think I’m alone in this. There’s a middle way, and I hope we find it.
cx: the substitution of the uniformed, myopic idiocy of centralized planners for the crude but nonetheless real wisdom of reasonably regulated markets (to undo monopolies and prevent private damage of/to public goods like clean air and water and the public schools, controlled at the building level by local teachers and administrators, that built this country).
cx: unimpeachably fair and accurate voting systems
Well, after a hiatus to which I will return after this comment, here we go. I do read the posts once a day–which are as insightful and informative as ever–but have assiduously avoid clicking the comments. Much like my self-imposed abstinence on television news, it really has been nice. My blood pressure isn’t popping out the turkey thermometer anymore. Could not agree more with this decision, but I suggest there are a few more that need to be made. First and foremost, delete all posts that are “off-topic.” They hijack the intent of the post and invite people to go into frustrating rabbit holes of the poster’s(s’) choosing, not yours or the readers of this blog commenting at the fact or opinion before them. The living room needs a good spring cleaning. This was a good start.
Hey, buddy!
Hey cracker! You know who I am. How about showing some guts and getting in contact with me? I’d love to meet you in an alley in NY. Haven’t had a good fight since high school, but I would love to get acquainted with it again. C’mon coward, let’s do it.
Wow.
My Blood pressure has been through the roof for 5 years. Since my laptop key board went nuts last month the blood pressure went down. Sadly I just bought a new one . LOL
Amen Sister. A million percent with you. Well explained. That you had to is insane.
Thank You!!! There is NO other “side” to Putin’s unprovoked, unjustified act of aggression. This is Putin’s war against Ukraine. Anyone in this country who supports him is a fool, at best.
When I grow up, I want to write as clearly and forcefully and with as much reason and moral clarity as does Diane Ravitch. One can dream!
I heart Diane Ravitch. As always, thank you for cutting through the bs and being clear eyed. Putin is a murderous dictator. Ukraine is the just the latest and most devastating front in Putin’s imperialist wars. War fronts that include, by the way, the 2016 election and Trumpism in this country.
Diane, pointing out that Putin may reasonably (or unreasonably) fear overthrow by Western forces is NOT the same as supporting him. I am a veteran–but a Veteran For Peace–not anybody’s troll. I am also a history teacher and a student of Russian policy. I am opposed to his damn war, of course! (But I also opposed our invasion of Iraq and our interference in Venezuela, etc.). I also wonder why we had 30,000 NATO troops “exercising” in Norway near the Russian border–near where we invaded Russia in 1918. I am advocating a truce, not surrender to or coddling of Putin.
As I said previously, if Putin is as bad as we think he is, he may be bad enough to use his nukes rather than back down and lose face–facing a backlash at home and possible removal or assassination. With respect, in that case we may ALL be dead right, about him. As I called it in my poem, “Immediate global warming.”
This IS your blog. Most of us don’t have the wherewithal to have our own, and we have been drawn to the blog by your books and the blog itself, as well as its intelligent participants and leadership. I’m surprised by your decision to cut off one side–minority though it is–but thanks for what you’ve printed so far. I guess those of us trying to swim against the tide of more war will have to swim elsewhere. Thanks!
Jack Burgess – Teacher of American & Global Studies
Jack, Diane put up with this drivel from the Putinists for a long time. She has always been an advocate of free speech. See her wonderful book The Language Police, which attacks enemies of speech on the Left and the Right. But the fact is that there’s a war on, and children are being murdered by one side in this war. We’re all teachers here–or at least most of us are–and we give a ___ about children, and finally, when people are posting interminable apologetics for this wholesale murder of children, it’s just too sickening to allow it to continue.
Does Putin fear overthrow by Western forces? He had better. There are millions and millions and millions of us who want to see him go the way of Mussolini and other evil creeps. And those who didn’t know before this what he is, this thug, this criminal, this liar, this fascist, this homophobe and sexist, well, they just weren’t paying attention.
Bob: In one of those Frontline episodes, a person close to Putin said he (Putin) watched the apparently unedited murder of Sadaam Hussein over and over again. If he’s like Trump, however, he won’t see how he, Putin, brought this whole thing on himself. He’s just a little man behind the curtain, but with lots of real power. . . . . CBK
CBK, I think it was Masha Gessen discussing Putin’s watching, over and over again, the footage of the death of Muammar al-Gaddafi.
Bob Oops. Thanks for the correction . . . the point remains, however (thankfully) that the filming of another strongman being murdered by a mob got Putin’s attention in such a way, and gives us a view of how he sees things. I thought the cornered rat was an interesting metaphor also, though apparently it was a real experience for Putin. It makes me nostalgic for the way Hitler ended it. CBK
Yes! Yeah, the cornered rat story is truly frightening in its implications for his behavior going forward. As Jack Burgess pointed out above, this is a dangerous moment.
For a long, long time, Jack, there was an idiot who keep showing up on Diane’s blog making Nazi-style eugenics arguments about the genetic superiority of people of certain racial backgrounds. And others of us would point out to him his utter ignorance of modern genetics (and epigenetics). Diane, who is Jewish, tolerated this because she is a fervent believer in free speech. And doubtless she knew that those of us who aren’t as ignorant as that neo-Nazi was would get on and lay out, systematically, his simple-minded errors about matters of racial genetic characteristics and heritability of traits. But eventually, it just gets to be too much. You don’t provide a forum for hate speech, for racism, for sexism, for homophobia, for traitorousness, for lots of things that are simple beyond the pale.
Or for spouting, in the midst of a war, the transparently false propaganda of a cold-blooded murderer committing, right now, as we speak, war crimes. What do you think the parents of one of those dead Ukrainian children would think of allowing such people a voice? Justifiers of child murder. Sorry, but I’m with those parents.
“Reasonably”?
Putin has amassed what is probably BILLIONS and he has been ruling for some 20+ years without any threat to his reign from the west.
If your definition of “fears overthrow” is expanded to include “fears that his autocratic control of other countries so he can enrich himself even more” might be threatened, then what is the point?
The Israeli government has a far more rational reason to “fear overthrow” (many nations declaring war against them) than Putin. Saddam Hussein “feared overthrow”.
Every leader ever elected or by conquest can fear overthrow. Trump feared overthrow. The Republicans fear overthrow.
But sometimes it is just fearing that you won’t have your total power over anyone you choose anymore, which is not the same as “fearing overthrow”.
No one is censoring the fact that Putin “fears overthrow”, but the folks citing it as if it has anything to do with a murderous annihilation of another country seem to have an extreme double standard.
What murderous authoritarian leader doesn’t fear overthrow, and have just as legitimate a reason to fear that as Putin does?
Let me go about this a different way, Jack. The language philosopher Paul Grice pointed out that a fundamental principle of discourse–something it depends upon if it is to be possible at all–is that people strive to ensure that what they say is true. They are not operating in good faith if they say what they know not to be true (We have no intention of invading Ukraine; We have to do this because Ukraine is run by Nazis;the Ukrainians are bombing their own hospitals and theatres and schools, etc.) or say that for which there is zero evidence (the U.S. engineered the Euromaidan, and the CIA killed the Euromaidan protestors). But it was precisely this bad faith that those posters were showing. They were spreading lies and utter nonsense to justify atrocities. There is no point in trying to have “discussions” in chats with people operating in bad faith. It’s worse than pointless because it can influence the opinions of the not-so-bright.
Bob, that is so true!
Bad faith. The Republicans discuss issues in bad faith. And the vast majority of the Democrats (Manchin/Sinema notwithstanding) discuss them in good faith.
I can see where someone I agree with is arguing in bad faith and I can see where someone I disagree with is arguing in bad faith. I find both of those equally wrong.
But I enjoy have discussions with people whom I don’t necessarily agree with when they argue in good faith. I’ve had some interesting debates with people here because we believe in the same facts and truth, even if we will never agree on what we think is best policy given those facts. I value that.
I think it’s pretty obvious when someone is discussing in good or bad faith here.
And, Mr. Burgess, respectfully, an Act of Aggression like that Russia has committed against Ukraine is not war. It is a crime under international law. The acts perpetrated in an Act of Aggression do not fall under the justifications in international law for war against a neighboring state (e.g., defense against active hostilities, stopping an ongoing genocide). They are War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity. Putin is a criminal, and his war is criminal. The International Court of Justice has ruled on this and ordered him to withdraw his forces.
cxs: An Act of Aggression like that Russia committed against Ukraine is not justified but is, rather, a crime under international law. . . . His Act of Aggression is criminal.
I fear that I have not been clear here. There are principles in international law for justified warmaking–e.g., a proportional defensive response to end an act of aggression being carried out against one’s country. Putin’s brutal aggression against Ukraine does not meet these criteria. And that is why the International Court of Justice ruled a few days ago that Putin must withdraw his forces from Ukraine. He is committing crimes under international law.
I’m sorry, Mr. Burgess. I kinda piled it on.
“Diane, pointing out that Putin may reasonably (or unreasonably) fear overthrow by Western forces is NOT the same as supporting him.”
Well, doing so (and also talking about obvious truisms about wars initiated by the US and other countries in the past) is changing the subject from the war in Ukraine, and ends up postponing a peace deal, and hence, however indirectly, it is supporting the war.
Analysis of war and its causes can wait until its over. Doing it while it’s raging is as appropriate and useful as trying to understand the probably terrible childhood of a mass murderer who just entered your home.
Precisely, wisely, vividly argued.
Putin was congratulated two days after the Ukraine invasion by Patriarch Kirill, head of the Russian Orthodox Christian Church. WaPo’s article about the situation describes a fusion of religion, nationalism and (Old Testament culture).
“How Putin’s Invasion Became a Holy War for Russia”- 3-21-2022
It is not a proud moment (nor a winning strategy) for liberal Americans to ignore the alliance between the two major conservative religious sects in the U.S. who have weaponized religion to gain political power just as Patriarch Kirill has done in Russia.
In Ukraine, it is imposition of tyranny. In the US it is tyranny, prettified with the misnomer, “religious liberty.”
YUP. Patriarch Kirill said that Russia had to invade Ukraine because it holds Pride parades, and any country that does that is bringing about the end of civilization. A fundamentalist zealot and homophobe who is also a fervent supporter of Putinist imperialism and the creation of a greater Russia, allied with a greater Russian Orthodox Church, both ruled from Moscow.
Lest anyone think that I am exaggerating this, here are Putin’s pal, Patriarch Kirill’s own words:
“We have entered into a struggle that has not a physical, but a metaphysical significance, . . . Pride parades are designed to demonstrate that sin is one variation of human behaviour. That’s why in order to join the club of those countries, you have to have a gay pride parade . . . If humanity accepts that sin is not a violation of God’s law, if humanity accepts that sin is a variation of human behavior, the human civilisation will end there.”
He argued that Russia had to go into Ukraine to support the insurgents in Donbas because the opposition in Donbas wanted to have Pride parades.
Insane.
Rod Dreher (Wikipedia describes his religious path) was quoted in the NYT, “I adamantly oppose risking the lives of boys from Louisiana and Alabama to make Donbas safe for genderqueers and migrants.”
(NYT, 2-27-2022, “How the American Right stopped Worrying and Learned to Love Russia” ) Pat Buchanan is also quoted in the article.
For those who haven’t read the Ryan Girdusky interview posted at the Buchanan site, I recommend it. Girdusky founded the 1776 PAC to fund school board candidates who oppose CRT.
“Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has accused the Austin school district of breaking state law with Pride Week activities that he characterized as attempts to indoctrinate students with liberal attitudes on sexual orientation and gender identity.” https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2022/03/24/texas-ag-pride-week-lgbtq-austin/7154530001/
“Rubbish” is the word. Good choice, Diane.
Sadly there are two sides to most stories. The right side and the wrong side. Sometimes things can be more nuanced. This is not one of them. Those that choose to do so are total nihilists.
exactly
Diane: From your note: “In some cases, the commenters have included links to articles or videos claiming that Putin had no choice but to invade Ukraine because…he felt encircled by NATO, or he needed to protect Russians in Ukraine, or Ukraine is overrun by Nazis, or some policy analyst warned that NATO’s expansion would provoke Putin.”
First, the President of Ukraine is a Jew; second, Russians in a democracy, by definition, share the same rights as others–it’s their intent to take over the country that needs protecting; and third:
Putin IS “encircled” . . . not by NATO or a (fictitious) geography, as much as by the IDEA of democracy; and that idea from without his country, but also from WITHIN. It’s an idea he is afraid of. And you cannot build walls to stop ideas, or beat ideas out of people, once they’ve understood what’s at stake.
Also, the United States, et al, ARE a threat, and I’m sure Putin feels it deeply; but not to Russia or their people as such, but rather to authoritarianism and to one-man rule with no regard for other human beings and our freedoms. Those who think as the above quote suggests, are total political relativists . . . democracy to them is the same as fascism or communism where those systems, to them ironically, enjoy the same “rights” in the conversation as democracies . . . even though one basic difference is their policy of quashing of those same rights. The whole idea comparative treatment reeks of hypocrisy.
Finally, some biographies of Putin say he’s thinking in terms of some sort of messianic vision of himself (see the recent Frontline on PBS), which justifies his “purification” of other nations . . . of its people, even children, who (OMG!) carry the poisonous (to him) ideas of democracy and human rights–those ideas, again, pressing in on him . . . poor baby and his relativist armchair followers, who think wide but not very deep.
Need I say that a disfigured, self-serving, and historically clichéd idea of religion is but one extreme and worn-out version of pseudo-religious expression, regardless of the color of the robes of those who hawk it with him. Shame on the lot of them. CBK
Beautifully said, CBK!
Thank you for pulling together all of the thoughts I’ve had about there not really being “2 sides” to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I’ll probably be sharing your post with a few friends who have put forth false (equivalence) arguments. Putin did bring economic stability to Russia in his first ten years in office, but as a recent Frontline episode points out, he’s been a scary guy capable of horrible acts for a long time. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/putins-road-to-war/
It’s will worth watching the previous Frontline work on Putin as well, and the whole series of interviews for that series, called The Putin Files. I especially loved the ones by Julia Ioffe, Ekaterina Shulmann, Masha Gessen, and Strobe Talbot.
Thanks for printing my response. I’m mainly concerned about a nuclear war. As Einstein is reported to have said about nuclear energy, “That changes everything…” I’m concerned that a cornered Putin might decide to take “the world” down with him. I do have to say though, that however bad he may be as a person/leader, whatever, he probably has reason to fear NATO and us. If his brutal invasion of Ukraine is “not a war” as some said above, neither was our annihilation of Iraq & Hussein. Putin would not want to be chased into a hole in the ground like Hussein & turned over to his enemies for trial, etc. So he might resort to whatever. Hitler shot himself, but would he have done so if he could have nuked the West instead? Let’s don’t find out what a cornered Putin would do. Let’s negotiate a settlement and help the people of Ukraine. A widened war–nuclear or not–will have them at the center.
It’s not relevant to the question of Ukraine, but I agree about the Second, though not the First, Iraq War as a matter of international law. The Second Iraq War was, under any reasonable reading of international law, a Crime of Aggression made under false, cooked pretexts, in which Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes were committed.
Jack said, “Let’s negotiate a settlement and help the people of Ukraine.” How do you negotiate a settlement while the bombings, slaughters and acts of terror continue non-stop. How do you negotiate a settlement with someone who has you by the throat, so to speak. First there has to be a ceasefire and then negotiate. How do you negotiate with Putin who doesn’t even regard Ukraine as a legitimate nation/state? Zelenskyy has asked for talks with Putin but there’s been no response and the bombings continue unabated.
I don’t disagree with anything you say here, Diane. Like almost everyone else here, I’m horrified by what’s happening to Ukraine. You’re certainly correct that this is your blog and you have no obligation to allow equal time to any perspective you disagree with. And trolls can be annoying and can create a mess of clutter that disrupts more than it enlightens.
The only caveats I’d add are these.
First, I do like dissent, especially when popular opinion approaches unanimity. By its nature, that kind of dissent isn’t going to be popular. But I think it’s valuable.
Second, to the extent your post concerns Dienne specifically, I like Dienne on a personal level, because she has taken the care to be kind to me when I’ve been low. And so I don’t like to see droves of comments mocking her, calling her an idiot, accusing her of being a Russian plant or a right-wing troll. I understand the reaction, but the group dynamic smacks of bullying a bit.
Dienne could call out bullying in Ukraine at the hands of Putin.
I apologize for calling her an Idiot, Flerp. I let my emotions about the war get away with me. But apologizing for Putin is shameful given that right now, as we write from the comfort of our homes, as many as 10,000 Russian conscripts are dead, as many as 5-6 thousand Ukrainians dead, 3.5 million driven from their country as refugees, another 6.5 million internally displaced, and the rest living in terror and hunger and cold, and all for what? For one evil little man’s phantasmagoric paranoia and vainglory.
Bob, you’re a good guy and that’s obvious to all.
There is a huge difference between DISSENT and PROPAGANDA.
Real dissent looks nothing like what dienne77 posts.
It is insulting to the people who actually stood up for things when they were unpopular to equate them with people pushing the same paid propaganda that people with outsize and overpaid voices like Tucker Carlson and others are pushing. Truly insulting.
Barbara Lee is NOT Tucker Carlson and dienne77 is NOT Barbara Lee no matter how much some folks try to normalize Tucker Carlson and excuse his lies and insult Barbara Lee.
And I find it hilarious that anyone would think it is less insulting to dienne77 to post that you are positive dienne77 actually believes the nonsense she posts because she is that brainwashed or even worse, lacks basic, normal intelligence. You have such an incredibly low opinion of her.
It’s less insulting to believe that dienne77 is a troll who knows exactly what he/she is doing.
I am trying to imagine certain folks on here during WWII saying “I want to point out that those Nazis who support Hitler massacring Jews are just practicing “dissent” and I respect them because they were nice to me personally.”
^^And I’m trying to imagine Bob Shepherd ever apologizing for calling someone who was defending Hitler’s murderous rampage against Jews “an idiot”. “He’s just trying to weed out Communists” would be a atrocious justification for Hitler’s actions and anyone spewing it does not deserve an apology.
Substitute “the people of Ukraine” for Jews and I believe that all of us except those with no moral compass can say that Bob, you do not owe an apology to anyone making excuses for someone committing atrocities against the people of Ukraine.
Many of those people, ofc, were not “idiots,” were people like Josef Goebbels, who had a PhD in Romantic Literature. One of the great horrors of what happened in Germany from the late 1930s onward, is that a great many people of considerable intellect rallied behind the monster–Heidegger, for example. I feel the same about Jean-Paul Satre’s having continued to support Stalin when everyone else saw Stalin/Stalinism for what it was (and no, this was not a deviation from Leninism but a continuation of it). One lesson to be learned from the greatest horrors of our time–the Holodmor, the Holocaust–is that smart people can also be extraordinarily evil. I don’t think that the Putin apologists who showed up here are idiots in the sense that Trump is an idiot–severely toddler like, cognitively challenged, but I do think that they are deluded and blinded by their reflexively anti-American ideologies.
Bob,
Are Majorie Taylor Green and Tucker Carlson “deluded and blinded by their reflexively anti-American ideologies”?
Because that seems to normalize them as folks who are just “dissenting” and expressing a contrary view.
I think there is a reasonable dissent to be made about whether or not the US should be in NATO or if NATO should exist. And there could be people offering arguments based in truth as to why NATO is a good idea. (Don’t want to debate that, just saying there could be a reasonable debate using facts about that.)
But the “dissenters” here are posting lies, and intentionally ignoring all evidence that contradicts their lies. As you say, you can’t have a debate with people who aren’t arguing in good faith.
There was no good faith effort by the pro-Putin trolls on here to address what you and Diane Ravitch said to them. It was just more propaganda.
I am talking about the American Nazi Party which was certainly not arguing in good faith when they “dissented” by pushing lies about what Hitler was doing or lies that said that the people Hitler was annihilating were enemies who deserved it.
That isn’t admirable “dissent”. It is elevating lying propagandists as “dissenters”, and those folks have nothing in common with Barbara Lee and people who dissented and TOLD THE TRUTH.
You make good points here, NYCPSP.
Thank you for this principled statement and policy, Diane!!
I agree with you 100%! Putin is a dictator and a monster.
BRAVO!!!! Very well-said, Ms. Ravitch! I am of the same mind as you both on Putin, the war on Ukraine, and my right to present my opinion on my blog without being expected to present both sides equally. In most all cases, the two opposing sides are NOT equal and, as you say, I am not a journalist, but merely a blogger who has the right to speak my mind. Any who don’t like what I post can stop reading at any time!
I agree with you 100 percent. Thank you for speaking so clearly and accurately.
Strong and apt!
What’s China thinking? They have a vested interest in stopping Putin from blowing up or poisoning the entire world just as much as the west does. One would hope China has a sense of self preservation as well as the west.
A Yale historian opines that China wants a weakened Russia so that it becomes a vassal state of China.
BTW, for anyone interested, Servant of the People, starring Volodymyr Zylenskyy, is on Netflix.
Thank you for standing strong against Putin’s war of aggression!
Absolutely correct stance!!!!
“Those who excuse and rationalize it are, wittingly or unwittingly, supporting the war. ”
I think I read it somewhere here “A bad peace is still the choice to make over a good war”.
I have no idea what “A bad peace is still the choice to make over a good war” means.
If only those who kept excusing Putin’s warmongering and lies had told Putin that he should not wage war because a “bad peace” is better.
Instead, there were warmongering Putin apologists — including on here — who said a war to rid Ukraine of “Nazis” was a great idea!
Of course, then the question is: when an autocratic murderous leader continues to wage a bad war to annihilate a country, is it better to let that leader amass power forever, or is it ever justified to use force to stop him?
We had a “bad peace”, and Putin and his apologists on here said it was fine for Putin to wage a war because the war was justified.
There were certainly Hitler enablers during WWII who said letter Hitler wage a war to annihilate Jews was a good choice for the folks who didn’t care about the Jews and felt that Hitler would leave them alone if they just him kill all the Jews in Europe.
It used to be in schools that violent bullies could target weaker kids and if the weaker kid fought back, it would be the weaker kid who the school punished because it was his duty to keep the violent bully happy. Thankfully, that very warped view of right and wrong is no longer in vogue.
Should Ukraine lay down their weapons and let Putin’s army commit atrocities in the name of “a bad peace”?
Good for you! Moral is moral and many seem to have forgotten that invading another country and killing is wrong.
Bravo. Thanks for standing your ground and explaining to those who do not understand the difference between a blog and journalistic media. While Putin may dislike NATO at his door, which it isn’t (Ukraine isn’t a member) that does not give him the right to invade a peaceful, non threatening country. Totally unacceptable, and the surrounding countries need to step up and stop him with the help from the U.S
Thank you for clearly explaining and making this strong defense of Ukraine. This unprovoked war is a horror show.
Diane, is this acceptable behavior in your living room?
FLERP, I guess Greg doesn’t know that you are 6′ 7″ with bulging muscles and a karate expert. Seriously, I was shocked that Greg, who usually makes well informed intelligent comments is resorting to middle school bullying. Not good and kind of silly.
Not the first time I’ve seen it from Greg, but you’re the first person to disapprove of it, so thanks.
To set the record straight, I’m 6’4” officially but now that I’m in my 50s I’m likely beginning to shrink.
I am 5’10”, 63 years old and I haven’t shrunk one bit heightwise one bit since 18. In fact, I have experienced great expansion since then. So the future ahead of you might be promising.
No
I am not defending GregB’s reply, but flerp! is being typically disingenuous when he plays victim here.
GregB wrote a heartfelt reply to your original post, Diane, and GregB explained that he was refraining from reading the comments because it kept his blood pressure down.
And FLERP! posted an entirely gratituous and provocative reply to GregB — “Hey, buddy!”.
flerp! has made it clear many times that GregB is not his buddy. So why did flerp! even post that.
flerp! is like the nasty mean girl who goes out of her way to make people feel bad, and when someone actually replies meanly back to her, she goes whining to the teacher complaining that she is being “bullied”.
In other words, flerp! started it. GregB perhaps responded intemperately, but flerp absolutely started it with his unkind and snarky response to GregB’s heartfelt post.
flerp! is as sincere as Eddie Haskell. flerp! sets a nasty tone or a gratutiously snarky tone when snark is inappropriate, and then complains that someone is being mean to him when it is called out.
I notice that flerp!’s complaint above leaves out his own snarky reply to GregB.
Someone who was kind would not have whined to Diane Ravitch, but might have replied “I am sorry, I commented to welcome you back because I missed reading your comments, and it seems you misunderstood my intent.”
Of course, that would assume that the person hadn’t intended to be mean and snarky in the first place.
NYCPP, it’s true that my “hey, buddy!” was a sarcastic greeting. That’s because the last time that Greg commented here, he told me that I should commit suicide. On another occasion, Greg wrote me that he wished I would die from Covid. In my view, Greg is the biggest scumbag to ever grace the comment section of this blog. So, again, yes, I’m guilty of a disingenuous “Hey, buddy” to a terrible human being.
On a side note, it’s interesting to me that you have never had anything to say about these comments of Greg’s, which I can only assume you approved of, especially given that your first instinct here is to attack me rather than to denounce what Greg wrote.
Just let it go.
If someone wrote what Greg did and directed it to Ted Cruz, I’d applaud.
Did you read GregB’s original comment?
Would you reply “Hey, buddy” to a heartfelt comment? It’s so rude and nasty that there is no way that you would ever do that, Linda.
But if you did do that and the person actually snapped and made an intemperate reply after you were intentionally mean to them, I bet you would not play victim.
I’ve never been a fan of temperance when responding to people who see value only in protecting their own interests.
I admire both Greg and you, NYC, because you have empathy for others.
I find it difficult to muster sympathy for those who show time and again that they reject the humanity of “walking in another person’s shoes.”
Reblogged this on Filosofa's Word and commented:
I do not like censorship. I believe that free speech, within certain limits, is an integral part of any democratic nation. That said, I struggled last week with a decision to moderate comments from a couple of readers. One such reader has been disrespectful to other readers, and both promote blatant lies and conspiracy theories in their comments. I did not make that decision lightly nor happily, but after much inner debate (those conversations between me, myself, and I sometimes get volatile!), I decided it was the right thing to do. I am obviously not alone in making this decision, as fellow blogger Diane Ravitch writes in her latest post …
Reblogged this on Ned Hamson's Second Line View of the News.
Putin with his support from the orthodox Christian Patriarch Kirill and Trump with his support from the conservative evangelicals and Catholics are the opposite of the “quiet” Episcopalian, George C. Marshall. Marshall was an FDR Democrat. Since FDR’s international policy was rooted in the Social Gospel movement, it is easy to infer that
both the Marshall economic plan and Marshall’s support for NATO derive from the movement.
The valiant liberal religious who are trying to reclaim Christ’s teachings from the noxious God-promoting kin of Charles Koch may find an FDR or a Marshall among the Democrats
and encourage that person to run for president. I hope so.
Your views are perfectly logical to me… I see no reason why you should entertain what goes against your principles… It is a pity that most persons don’t make themselves as clear…!
🇯🇲🏖️
One can compromise on a lot of things and with a lot of people. One cannot, if one is a moral human being, compromise with evil. Vlad the Impaler (Putin) is evil.
I was in a similar situation in which a colleague was telling me about a situation in which I had participated. A parent had given an untrue account. I proceeded to tell what actually had occurred. Finally the colleague said, “Well, there are always two sides to every story.” I said, “No, there is only ONE version of what happened and that is the true, actual events. What you are saying is not what happened, and there is no other version or middle ground between what did and did not happen.” You are exactly correct about the situation in Ukraine. There is no “other” side to present. FYI: the colleague later was in charge of the same event the following year. She actually learned that the parent’s version of what had happened previously could not possibly have taken place.
Extremely well argued, Sandra!
Thank you, Sandra. In some cases, there are not two sides. Slavery was wrong. Period. Hitler and Stalin were mass murderers. Period. Joe Biden is the duly elected President of the United States. Period. 2+2=4. Period.
Diane, thanks for your post. No country, including the US, can claim a clean slate. When imperfect people in leadership positions do not live up to our ideals, it needs to be pointed out, learned, remedied and avoided going forward. The Pentagon Papers revealed the US knew it was losing the Vietnam War for years and several presidents of both parties put American soldiers in harm’s way. That is just one example.
But, that does not give a hall pass for an autocratic acting leader in Putin to invade another country. Putin is a KGB trained professional in the art of disinformation. With social media, it is like shooting fish in a barrel to him. A Russian TV director once said on NPR Putin controls even the subject matter on drama and comedy shows aired in Russia – the director noted Putin lets small government criticisms appear in the shows, but requires pro-Putin references on bigger issues.
To the Russian trolls that spend so much time influencing Americans, Brits and others, nirvana is hearing an elected official repeat their planted story which goes from a conspiracy website to an opinion host to a news host back to opinion hosts and then to the elected official.
Believing anything Putin says is a fool’s errand. The same goes for the conspiracy parrots here in the US. Dr. Fiona Hill, who testified before Congress on the Ukraine extortion phone call and is one of the foremost experts on Russia, noted to the Senators who were parroting conspiracy stories during her testimony Russian influence is happening in front of our eyes.
Thanks again, Keith
Love your concluding point, Keith! Precisely!
Keith, thank you.
Writing from The UK – Europe.
In response to those trying to justify Putin’s action by making him a type of victim, as the American saying goes ‘Aww..Gimme a break!’
Europe (and Russia as far as the Volga River): Arguably in terms of size and populations probably the most fought over piece of land in the past 1,000 years (at least). We have many recent examples and long folk memories. Tragically we know by instinct how this works. Bear that in mind in what follows.
It is a disingenuous exercise to try to cite other atrocities as some sort of means to be critical of the USA’s policy over Ukraine. In the long history of Human no race, nation or community is innocent (with the possible exceptions of aboriginal folk living on the edge of liveable environments). Everyone has done this. I could start a few brush fires with the words ‘Don’t forget…..’. The events in Ukraine are happening now. That is the issue at hand here. End of conversation. Are you to suggest the USA should stand by because other mis-deeds disqualifies it from taking part? Take that argument to The Ukrainians, see where it gets you.
That Putin was provoked is the last cry of the desperate of those Right and Left communities who invested social and political capital in justifying their own prejudices and narrow views. To hold to those leads you down the ludicrous road that the UK is justified to invade Eire for the following reasons (A) To protect the rights of the Protestants of Ulster (B) Because the UK ‘knows’ there are still IRA cells backed by the government and this is a threat to the UK’s security (C) Eire’s coast is a means by which illegal immigrants can land and make their way to the mainland UK. Oh yes, those are the style of excuses Putin has been using.
In the hard world of Realpolitik Putin was once astute. He blew it The Russians were gifted a socially divided USA, a Europe divided by Brexit and a still shrill wing of the Left which squawked anti-USA bias at all opportunities. He could have used soft power, arm-around the should to Ukraine ‘Seriously? Do you really want to be associated with that lot? C’mon brother. Yes we’ve had a few spats and mistakes on both sides. Let’s talk it over. Huh?’…Oh no, he had to go Hitler/Stalin in some frantic turn around; classic brooding suspicion which sometimes erupts in Russian ruling classes (read up on Nicholas I, if you care to as an example).
This time, it is Russia at fault. Destroying cities. Slaughtering civilians. If you’ve still got problems with that summary, pack a suitcase, get a flight to Poland and then travel to Ukraine and tell the Ukrainians your views.
Otherwise, keep quiet your critics you are like irritating little flies buzzing around.
Well argued!!! And well written.
Thank you.
What a great response from our friend in the UK!
Thank you.
If I may add. This is why Europe leapt up out of the ‘starting blocks’ as it were.
Our own histories (the good, the bad and the stupid) came crashing back into our collective consciousnesses.
Well said as always, Roger!!! 👍👍
Thanks Jill🌼🌻
☺️
Here’s all-time-great heavyweight boxer and current Kyiv mayor Vitali Klitschko responding to a question about Russian war atrocities.
Excuse me, it’s his brother, all-time great heavyweight champion Vladimir Klitschko.
Reblogged this on Michael Seidel, writer and commented:
As she puts it as others try victim blaming for Russia’s unprovoked attack: rubbish.
Think back to the 50’s-60’s. We in this country believed that Russia had a DOMINO THEORY. Conquer one country at a time until the world was under their thumb. My own view…the war in Ukraine is a resurgence of that theory. Putin is fighting for land, which is a concept that we in this country do not understand. After WWI and WWII, after Korea, while China turned communist, we got no land, no territory. We look for thoughts to be our conquering motive, our fight, our cause. As Putin tries to re-establish the Russian empire, expect more of this. And, if we remain weak, if Europe turns their attention only half way, he just may pull it off.
I don’t think Putin will pull it off. He is already backtracking on his war aims. Not to capture control of Ukraine, but only to protect Donbas, which he previously seized.
George Will wrote today:
“Before sinking into insanity, Friedrich Nietzsche propounded a theory that still reverberates in the intelligentsia: There are no “facts,” “only interpretations.” That today’s war has been caused by one man’s wickedness is a fact. War is a harrowing means of embarrassing the faux sophisticates’ moral relativism, but by doing so this ill wind has blown some good.”
I agree with you totally on this post about Putin. He chose. His country’s military is invading based on his command.