Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>The local rulers have de facto control over government, jurisdictional and businesses.

isn't that a tautology?



It isn't normal (at least in a democracy) for the local rulers to have that kind of control over businesses. "Jurisdictional" I presume means that they don't have an independent judiciary either. Those things matter quite a bit.


> It isn't normal (at least in a democracy) for the local rulers to have that kind of control over businesses.

Democracies are preventing businesses from operating in russia. What exactly makes democracies so special that it isn't beyond corruption or evil? People have said democracies don't commit genocide, democracies don't invade and steal territory, democracies don't enslave, etc. When the truth is that democracies have committed the greatest genocides, stolen the most land, committed the worst evils. I've yet to get a satisfactory response. Russia is a democracy and the current bogeyman was elected. It's like people are so brainwashed by propaganda that they can't see the truth.


> When the truth is that democracies have committed the greatest genocides, stolen the most land, committed the worst evils.

Yeah... re-read history without the biases, and you'll see that that is absolutely false.

> Russia is a democracy and the current bogeyman was elected.

Well, Russia has elections. It also jails those who are trying to run against Putin, and Putin controls the media. So you wind up with the trappings of democracy without the reality. (At least today. I think the original election that he won may have been fair.)


> Yeah... re-read history without the biases, and you'll see that that is absolutely false.

I have re-read history. Who has committed more genocides than the US? What non-democratic country has nuked a city? I don't think I'm the one with the bias here. Just in the post cold war era, almost all the invasions have been carried out by democracies.

> Well, Russia has elections. It also jails those who are trying to run against Putin, and Putin controls the media. So you wind up with the trappings of democracy without the reality.

Right. And who do you think controls the media in other democracies?

> (At least today. I think the original election that he won may have been fair.)

So ultimately, democracy gave us Putin? So democracies are bad.

Instead of just blindly accepting propaganda, maybe you should ask why the propaganda doesn't align with facts and reality. Perhaps, as socrates said, democracies are not good to begin with.


> Right. And who do you think controls the media in other democracies?

Nobody “controls” the media. Any clown can start a media company and many do, across the full spectrum of opinion. Media also has far less share of communications now anyway. Everyone can publish, as you are here. Go ahead, write what you want. I’m far more likely to be arrested in eg Russia than you are in eg US. Remember https://www.iraqbodycount.org/ ? That’s still up and nobody is in jail. Try post this a few times in Russia and see how that goes: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukra...

Or better yet, https://twitter.com/Schwarzenegger/status/150442684419966976...


Just a few years ago we had Trump banning certain media outlets he disagreed with from the White House. Or the UK government attacking hard disks at the Guardian with an angle grinder. You could say that neither of these governments are “democratic”, but then it becomes somewhat of a no-true Scotsman argument. We have to accept that control of the media happens in democracies. It’s not as bad as in Russia, but it is an overt goal of many democratic governments, and many media outlets go along with it in the name of access.


He could ban it from while White House but not from your house. It’s not control like where you go to jail, it’s minor influence over very few selected places.

Every elite seems to want to cement their power and we have to combat it, always. But democracies in general don’t have “control” in any way recognisable to Russians, Chinese, North Koreans. In South Africa we had the most corrupt shit going on and the media drive politicians nuts. There’s some doublespeak and us/them but that’s just humans for you. In Russia those journalists would be dead or in exile. 30 years ago in SA we had some of that. Incomparable to political influence over media in a democracy, which is typically only over part of it. Not all.

Besides you don’t need to control the media. That’s far too much work. Just have an alternative that your tribe prefers. It seems you can make up any shit and a lot of people will take it as gospel.


> Just a few years ago we had Trump banning certain media outlets he disagreed with from the White House

He tried. Then those banned reporters went to a judge and he told the White House to let them back in. And they were let back in.

The US press is free.


Who controls the media in the US? Not the president. That's an improvement over Russia.

Who has done more genocides than the US? Seriously? Imperial Spain. The Mongol Horde. The Muslim conquest of much of the near east. Imperial Japan. Soviet Russia. Nazi Germany. The Aztec Empire. That's with about two minutes' thought. If I were a historian or bothered to do research, I'm sure I could expand the list.

Your bias is blinding you. Take an actual look at actual history.


> Who controls the media in the US? Not the president. That's an improvement over Russia.

Is it? The people who control the media also control the president. Don't think it is any better.

> Who has done more genocides than the US? Seriously?

Yes. Show me one nation/empire that genocided an entire continent full of peoples. Completely wiped out dozens of peoples, cultures and languages. To a point where we don't even know the etymology and meanings of the names of a bunch of states, cities, etc.

> Imperial Spain.

Not even close. There are tens of millions of full blooded native americans all over spanish colonies. There are hardly any in the US.

> The Mongol Horde.

Who did the mongol horde genocide? The russians? Ukrainians?

> The Muslim conquest of much of the near east.

Who did the muslims genocide? Persians? Spanish?

> Imperial Japan.

Who did the imperial japanese genocide?

> Nazi Germany.

Are you claiming nazi germany committed more genocide than the US? They committed 1 genocide. Now compare that to the dozens of peoples we wiped out.

> That's with about two minutes' thought.

It shows. 2 minutes seems about right. There have been dozens of native american nations wiped out. Dozens of native languages wiped out. Dozens of native cultures. Show me another peoples who wiped out a continent full of nations. I'll wait.

> Your bias is blinding you. Take an actual look at actual history.

Says the person who claims imperial japan committed more genocides than the US. Imperial Japan committed 0 genocides. US committed dozens. Are you going to claim imperial japan nuked more cities too?

It seems like you are confused about what the word genocide actually means. It doesn't mean conquering. It doesn't even mean killing a lot of people. It has a specific meaning which makes it one of the most evil acts in human history.


Australia


qiskit, it's silly to compare the situation in russia with the democratic world and see some equivalency. Russia kills the opponents of the leaders, they actively subvert opponents in the sense of killing them with poison, put them in prison, shoot them down in the night.


Not sure what yardstick of horrors matter to you, but the Soviets were definitely in the running for “winning” the trophy for most senseless murder in the 20th century — no small feat.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: