On a related note, I read this article earlier today and thought that it was worth sharing with everyone to generate a discussion.
The author makes some important, and "politically incorrect", points that few in this part of the Alt-Media Community feel comfortable discussing.
I don't agree in full, nobody ever completely agrees with someone else, but I like how he draws attention to how inaccurately some have portrayed recent events:
Yeah, for me Rurik’s articles are real head-scratchers.
I mean I follow all this as closely as I can, but then I read RS’s take on the whole thing and I think to myself WTF?
I dunno…. I guess the old Russian steamroller is finally getting into gear, and now, being on a downhill slope, it’s going to be hard to stop it.
At the end of the day it’s all just speculation, and looking to a likely outcome it’s probably best to focus on what’s happening on the battlefields right now.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and your writings - always worth serious consideration.
He does a great job of saying what I think some people have thought but didn't feel comfortable expressing for whatever reason.
I'm all in favor of what I call the "diversity of discourse" and the "information buffet" where people are exposed to different narratives and pick and choose what they like.
While there might be some of what he or whoever else writes that you don't agree with it, there might also be other parts that make you think or you appreciate his points.
He's done an excellent job exposing the shallowness of many Alt-Media Community (AMC) narratives on this conflict, which is something that I feel strongly about too.
At this point in the conflict, I feel that parroting "politically correct" talking points is almost intellectually insulting, self-discrediting, and sometimes harms Russia's cause.
What's needed are candid, mature conversations that might make people uncomfortable but at least might get them to think about everything a bit differently too.
The purpose should be in better understanding what we're seeing in the conflict and in the narrative space since "politically correct" talking points don't fully account for that.
I'm become very concerned that cookie-cutter trends in AMC whereby everyone just repeats everyone else for morale-boosting purposes are no longer effective.
Most of the big names all say the same thing nowadays and dishonestly ignore "politically inconvenient" facts like the ones I've written about before.
Everyone hyping up BRICS ignores Russian-Chinese payment problems, the BRICS Bank complying with sanctions, and the SCO Bank (both in China) doing the same.
That's just one example but it conveys my point that "semi-official"/"state-adjacent" channels like Russian-promoted influencers don't often share the full story.
I think it's a combination of wishful thinking delusions and having a self-interest in saying what they think others and Russia want to hear, but some are definitely maliciously lying.
I'd rather read something critical, perhaps even overly so which characterizes things in ways that I disagree with, but which is honest than more "5D chess master plan" slop.
You can't fake authenticity, some people can be fooled but not everyone, and what I see a lot in the AMC nowadays is a lot of inauthenticity and grifting.
There has been pretty intensive work done by Russia and Turkey on exploration of oil and natural gas plays in the Black Sea since about 2012, numerous wells having been drilled off the Crimean coast and south of Odesa Oblast - and north of Turkey. It's essentially just another resource conflict which can be resolved by lease negotiations and transit rights - Turkey controls the Dardanelles, otherwise it's pipelines through the Balkans - more negotiations. And warmwater ports already exist at Taganrog, Feodosia,Novorossisk, Odesa, and other places at which loading points and refineries can be constructed.
On a related note, I read this article earlier today and thought that it was worth sharing with everyone to generate a discussion.
The author makes some important, and "politically incorrect", points that few in this part of the Alt-Media Community feel comfortable discussing.
I don't agree in full, nobody ever completely agrees with someone else, but I like how he draws attention to how inaccurately some have portrayed recent events:
https://slavlandchronicles.substack.com/p/welp-zelensky-bombs-bryansk-russia
Yeah, for me Rurik’s articles are real head-scratchers.
I mean I follow all this as closely as I can, but then I read RS’s take on the whole thing and I think to myself WTF?
I dunno…. I guess the old Russian steamroller is finally getting into gear, and now, being on a downhill slope, it’s going to be hard to stop it.
At the end of the day it’s all just speculation, and looking to a likely outcome it’s probably best to focus on what’s happening on the battlefields right now.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and your writings - always worth serious consideration.
He does a great job of saying what I think some people have thought but didn't feel comfortable expressing for whatever reason.
I'm all in favor of what I call the "diversity of discourse" and the "information buffet" where people are exposed to different narratives and pick and choose what they like.
While there might be some of what he or whoever else writes that you don't agree with it, there might also be other parts that make you think or you appreciate his points.
He's done an excellent job exposing the shallowness of many Alt-Media Community (AMC) narratives on this conflict, which is something that I feel strongly about too.
At this point in the conflict, I feel that parroting "politically correct" talking points is almost intellectually insulting, self-discrediting, and sometimes harms Russia's cause.
What's needed are candid, mature conversations that might make people uncomfortable but at least might get them to think about everything a bit differently too.
The purpose should be in better understanding what we're seeing in the conflict and in the narrative space since "politically correct" talking points don't fully account for that.
I'm become very concerned that cookie-cutter trends in AMC whereby everyone just repeats everyone else for morale-boosting purposes are no longer effective.
Most of the big names all say the same thing nowadays and dishonestly ignore "politically inconvenient" facts like the ones I've written about before.
Everyone hyping up BRICS ignores Russian-Chinese payment problems, the BRICS Bank complying with sanctions, and the SCO Bank (both in China) doing the same.
That's just one example but it conveys my point that "semi-official"/"state-adjacent" channels like Russian-promoted influencers don't often share the full story.
I think it's a combination of wishful thinking delusions and having a self-interest in saying what they think others and Russia want to hear, but some are definitely maliciously lying.
I'd rather read something critical, perhaps even overly so which characterizes things in ways that I disagree with, but which is honest than more "5D chess master plan" slop.
You can't fake authenticity, some people can be fooled but not everyone, and what I see a lot in the AMC nowadays is a lot of inauthenticity and grifting.
There has been pretty intensive work done by Russia and Turkey on exploration of oil and natural gas plays in the Black Sea since about 2012, numerous wells having been drilled off the Crimean coast and south of Odesa Oblast - and north of Turkey. It's essentially just another resource conflict which can be resolved by lease negotiations and transit rights - Turkey controls the Dardanelles, otherwise it's pipelines through the Balkans - more negotiations. And warmwater ports already exist at Taganrog, Feodosia,Novorossisk, Odesa, and other places at which loading points and refineries can be constructed.