The Tory failure is, as Helen Joyce mordantly details, spiritual too. The care of souls is what Trans extremists have squarely set themselves at, and this Tory government has, in law and administration alike, conceded to them. Penny Mordaunt, Maria Miller and Caroline Nokes head a very long list of Tory MPs who have not just done the bidding of Stonewall et al, they have cheered them on and denounced their critics.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Tories delenda estJanuary 9th, 2024 |
 51 comments to Tories delenda estLeave a Reply |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Yet another reason why in the 2025 Conservative leadership race the devious Mordaunt, despite her command of parliamentary debate and photogenic contribution to the Coronation, should not be allowed anywhere near the top job – not even during a lengthy period of opposition and general irrelevance. She could easily be to the Conservatives what Liz Cheney has been to the Republicans.
Sadly with today’s Conservative MPs I fear she is a shoe-in to at least make the final two and the 5/1 on offer at various bookmakers seems generous. Incidentally they make Kemi Badenoch favourite presumably not having considered which of the squishes she will need to support her.
Tactical Voting Ahoy as the Right Honourable Member for Portsmouth North might say.
The book jointly written by P. Mordaunt and a leftist should be noted – either P. Mordaunt did not read the book (always possible – politicians sign their names to all sorts of things as “their work” without reading them) or the lady agrees with the work – in which case the lady accepts the doctrines of “Critical Theory” (people complain when I use the “M” word – but that is where “Critical Theory” comes from). I am sorry – but there are no other alternatives.
Ludwig Von Mises (1881-1973) used to say that the Marxist students were the most intelligent and the conservative students much less intelligent – that might seem a very odd thing for Mises, a passionate ANTI Marxist, to say – but his argument was that the Marxist students understood the implications of the doctrines (in the study history, literature … well just about everything, even the natural sciences) taught in the schools and universities, whereas the “conservative” students went along with the flow, not even understanding that they were serving Marxism.
As for the “Trans” campaign directed at children – it is the latest manifestation of the Frankfurt School “Critical Theory” campaign to destroy society (which they call “capitalist” society).
It must be stressed that “Woke” (Frankfurt School) Marxism is NOT, and it not intended to be, a social system – so saying it is better or worse than Putin’s Russia or Xi’s China is to totally miss-the-point, “Woke” Marxism is a WEAPON designed to destroy the social system, destroy society. If anyone still can not see what the “Woke” Marxist “Diversity and Inclusion” agenda is about, the destruction of society (so called “capitalist” society), they must indeed be rather stupid.
The problem for the Tories is that once they’ve lost the next election they have nothing to campaign on.
“Vote for us and we’ll do x, y & z”
“We gave you and 80 seat majority to do exactly that and you didn’t.”
“We have a new leadership.”
“You have replaced our choice of leader with your choice in the past.”
“We’re better than Labour.”
“Citation needed.”
When the Marxists went after the statues of General Lee (and so on) President Trump said they would eventually go after the statues of Washington and Jefferson as well – as, after all, they were slave owners and General Lee was not (the Marxists do not really give a damn about slavery, or about black people – see what Dr Marx said about blacks, but they find it a useful weapon in their war to destroy “capitalist” society), and President Trump was correct – but now a Federal American government agency is proposing getting rid of a statue of a man in a park in Philadelphia, and getting rid of the model of his house and the “timeline” of his life.
What man? William Penn of course – the Quaker founder of Pennsylvania. If you think this is really because “he owned slaves” you are an idiot. The destruction of history and culture is what the “Diversity and Inclusion” Marxist agenda is about – so attacking William Penn in Pennsylvania is as logical part of their program as is the sexual indoctrination of children into various perversions, and, indeed, the sexual mutilation of children.
Until conservatives (in any country) understand that the “Culture War” is just that, a WAR, and that there can be no compromise or “deals” with the Marxist forces of “Diversity and Inclusion”, which means uniformity and exclusion, the destruction of Western civilisation will continue.
RlJ: Exactly. It’s not that I disagree with what they claim to stand for, it’s that they can’t be trusted not to actively undermine it.
One good part about the coming “Conservative” wipe-out is that it is unlikely that Penny Mordaunt will be an MP after the general election.
JohnK.
Perhaps – but generally (generally) speaking “Central Office” has ensured that it is the better Conservative Members of Parliament who are in the vulnerable seats, and it is the worst MPs (the “One Nation” Collectivist “Global Citizens”, their own term for themselves) who are in less vulnerable seats.
Also I think people have not yet grasped what the next Labour government will mean.
There will be no “GB News” or “Talk TV” and no “Samizdata” website either.
All these things can be presented as “racist, sexist, homophobic, Transphobic, Islamophobic, Climate Deniers” – as can dissenting newspapers.
Mr Starmer (the Leader of the Labour Party) is many things, but he is not a fool – he will not tolerate dissent, why should he tolerate it – he has no philosophical or practical reason to tolerate “reactionary” opinions.
There will be no dissent (at least no dissent from the right) under Labour – remember Freedom of Speech is “Repressive Tolerance” (Herbert Marcuse) which “harms” “disadvantaged and marginalised” groups.
There is no 1st Amendment here – and judges would “interpret” it out of existence if there was.
People still do not seem to understand what is about to hit them.
This process started a very long time ago, 1965 in the United Kingdom (the Race Relations Act included an attack on dissenting opinions as “incitement to racial hatred” – that was the start of the process, which was only going to be applied to very-bad-people – till it stated to be applied more widely by later pieces of legislation and other policies), and the next few years will see it reach its conclusion.
There will be no more dissent – at least no dissent that is not punished.
Again – there is no philosophical or practical reason for the next elected government (which will be in tune with the unelected permanent government) to tolerate dissent – so they will not tolerate dissent.
Within two years – GB News, Talk TV, various newspapers and this site (Samizdata) will not exist, or they will be castrated. The process started some decades (almost 60 years) ago – will be complete.
I already know people who have been arrested (one of whom lives only eight miles from me) for saying quite mild things online – and it is going to get a lot worse, presently they tend to be released after a “night in the cells” when their local Conservative Member of Parliament complains.
But the complaints of such people are soon going to be worth a lot less (and they are not going to be in Parliament anyway) and it is going to be a lot more than “a night” in the cells for dissenters.
I will be one of them – I will end up in prison.
I would advice wealthy people (people who can) to leave the country – but I am not sure where you can go.
The problem with a Conservative wipe out, is that Labour will just be worse and go further.
jgh – correct, you put is it much briefly than I did, and that is a virtue (I am too long winded – too verbose).
But people will not really grasp what is coming till it is too late.
For example, they think in terms of “the election after next” – not understanding that dissent will be de facto outlawed before then.
On the article itself….
Yes what the Trudeau family have done in Canada is terrible – although it started BEFORE Mr Trudeau senior became Prime Minister, it started in 1965 (that terrible date again – year I was born) with the new FLAG (yes as “small” a thing as that) – now the old Red Ensign (under which Canadians fought the Nazis) is “racist” and so on, the new flag was for the “new Canada” – a country that was to have no history (at least no history to be proud of) and no traditional culture (one does not have to be Edmund Burke to grasp that this will lead to disaster.
All an evil fruit of the Kennedy Administration influenced election – yes the American left (including the CIA – yes that is NOT a “right wing” organisation, quite the contrary) influenced the election that brought the Liberal Party to power in Canada – with their dream of a “New Canada” without cultural links to the past, and with no remembered history – like a man who does not know who his parents are, indeed has no memories of before he woke up this morning. To say that such a person is vulnerable to every fad and fancy is to state the obvious, he can be told any lie about his past (“mass graves of First Nation children”) as no matter how absurd the lie – he has no historical memory to check it against.
But what is going to be done in the United Kingdom is going to be much worse.
We are going to out do Canada – by a country mile.
Dissent is going to be wiped out here by the next elected government – which will be tune with what the unelected government already believes.
And we do not have the vast natural resources that Canada has – so we will not be able withstand a regime of fads and facies, not even economically.
Leave if you can – if you have somewhere to go.
My question for you Brits — after the Tory party is burned to a crisp, and Labour comes along and ruins whatever is left… then what? Will the Tory party take a spanking and go back to its Thatcherite roots, or will it look at the result more as a “we weren’t woke enough” or “this is because of Brexit” and double down?
What, if anything, can save Britain from turning into a third world country?
The Tory Party might or might not even exists as currently understood if they get nuked from orbit. Perhaps Reform might occupy their slot, or perhaps something yet unimagined might come into being.
Fraser Orr asked:
What, if anything, can save Britain from turning into a third world country?
Given the demographic shift in the UK (and US, and every other country in the Anglosphere, and Europe), nothing can save it now. When you import the Third World by the millions upon millions, you end up with the Third World.
The only thing that can save the West is to do the unthinkable and we simply don’t have the will to do what needs done.
Paul:
Obviously I don’t want to be subjected to Starmer’s Red Terror, but there is nothing much to stop it happening now. The Conservative Party had its chance, and blew it in the most spectacular way. For some reason their MPs preferred Rishi Sunak to Liz Truss, and the electorate are seriously unimpressed.
A party which espoused conservative values might have stood a chance, but that has not been the Conservative Party for a long time.
The establishment will do their best to preserve an emasculated left-centrist Conservative Party (as per the current incarnation) rather than allow the ascendancy of anything less malleable.
Just look at the tactics previously used by media, law enforcement etc to stymie and inconvenience Nigel Farage at every turn. Reform will need to succeed against opposition that cares nothing for the rules.
Assisting Mordaunt to be elected leader will be a useful first step in this process.
@Steven R
The only thing that can save the West is to do the unthinkable and we simply don’t have the will to do what needs done.
FWIW, although I agree with you, I think there is something that can help. I have been watching this guy Ramaswamy and I think he is pretty amazing. He focuses on the things he can do without congress and he is just a straight up libertarian. I know people have grumbled about him here, I guess perhaps on his Ukraine policy — which I fully endorse, but I know a lot of you don’t like at all. But I really do think that him as President he would make a real, substantive difference, even through the insane turmoil we can expect over the next few years.
For sure his election is not at all likely, but it isn’t zero, and I think that is exciting. And if America fixes itself (or more likely slows down the rot) it will make a difference for everyone.
Of course the establishment doesn’t take him too seriously, but if he ever was a threat I think he is the only man in America they’d want President less than Donald Trump.
Nonetheless, I am a fanboy. I love listening to him talking in town halls, I love listening to him handle hostile press, and his policies are sensible, practical, executable, free market oriented and, for the most part, libertarian. I think he is the real deal. I’ll be voting for him. I hope some of you might consider doing so too.
Not only does he spout ludicrous Russian talking point right out of Russia Today, I would oppose US disengagement from the war in Ukraine for exactly the same reasons I would have opposed US disengagement from Britain’s war against the Nazis in the 1940s.
@Perry de Havilland (Wiltshire)
I would oppose US disengagement from the war in Ukraine for exactly the same reasons I would have opposed US disengagement from Britain’s war against the Nazis in the 1940s.
Because Russia is going to invade France and the low countries or threatening Britain, and planning on turning Brits into slave labourers? Or because an ally of Russia is bombing and invading American territory? Or because Russia has declared war on the USA? Or because Russia has concentration camps gassing the Jews into non existence? Or because Russia is sinking millions of tons of merchant shipping in the Atlantic? OR because the Russian Axis is spreading through the Pacific region threatening the international trade in goods and services that the US depends on? Or because we have to stop Russia from developing a nuclear weapon and delivery system that might threaten the US homeland?
You might have good reasons for wanting to continue this war with Ukraine, but I don’t think the two situations are at all similar.
Because Russia is not going to stop with Ukraine unless it is stopped in Ukraine. They are gearing up for a long war on the assumption the west (particularly USA) does not have the stamina & willpower for one (i.e. enough people take your view). Then Russia is going to invade Moldova (again) and the Baltic States (if they conclude NATO is actually a dead letter) if they have good reason to believe that when the going gets tough, the USA loses focus & stops shipping those inconvenient weapons.
No they are not going to gas the Jews but they are going to exterminate a large chunk of Ukraine’s population, particularly it’s entire intelligentsia.
And your understanding of history is a bit rubbish. The USA was sending weapons to UK well before anyone attacked it.
Hmmh, I thought I deleted that follow on comment, because I didn’t want to get sucked into a debate about Ukraine. I am well aware of your position, and although I am a minor player here, you might be somewhat familiar with mine, so I’m not sure there is much profit in warming up that old debate.
However, Presidents are a package deal, and I assure you I am far more concerned with a system where kids are systematically being mutilated in the name of the trans agenda, or the economy if falling apart because of the climate agenda, or the inflation is out of control, where I, a moderately successful person, winces every time I go to the grocery store (god help those who are struggling) or where the country is becoming a third world hell hole, and our public services are falling apart because of our bleeding open border, or where victims are at risk of being prosecuted where criminals seem immune to prosecution, or the USA is a few years away from interest payments being the largest line item on our budget. Where massive tax increases and massive social services cuts seem inevitable. Where we have an utterly failing healthcare system. Where young people can’t buy a house, or get a job that pays the rent. Where massive corporations are using billions of dollars in “lobbying” money to suck up all the wealth by government corruption, where we have a President currently who seems to be a manchurian candidate bought by the Chinese, or the Ukrainians or a the whole UN in his bank account, where the DOJ and others are using fake charges to destroy a candidate for president for the crime of being a candidate for president, where half the country, justifiably, has no confidence in our elections thinking the system is utterly corrupt. Where the schools are promulgating the most appalling dangerous nonsense to children, where racism and sexism is at historic highs. And on and on.
I promise you I care vastly more about these things than I do about the sovereignty of Moldova, or even, with apologies to Snorri, the sovereignty of the Baltic States, article 5 notwithstanding. Even though the US does have to honor that commitment which is to say, bring about the end of modern civilization.
If you want a full on Ukraine engagement then you are going to have to advocate for Biden or Haley, and they both don’t care at all about fixing the problems above. The west is falling apart, and it has nothing to do with external enemies. We are destroying ourselves. There are very few people who can do anything about it, and Ramaswamy is one of them.
.
Which is exactly the sentiment Moscow is hoping will spread (the end of NATO). The only upside is the wakeup call to Europe to stop relying so heavily on USA in defence matters.
And if the alternative to a resurgent Russia is Biden or Haley, well so be it, although I find it hard to believe there are no actual conservative Republicans who see the importance of ending Russia as a security threat once and for all (which really is what unambiguous Russian defeat in Ukraine would have the effect of doing).
John K. I am certainly not a fan of Dameon Green and his 100 plus Global Citizens (they describe themselves as “Global Citizens” – I am not smearing them) of the “One Nation” group in the House of Commons.
Of course, they hated Liz Truss – as they lady stood for individual liberty and national independence, and they hate (yes – hate) both.
However, the Labour Party stands for the tyranny of the accursed International Community even more than they do.
It is not the “Global Citizens” (“One Nation” group – “One Nation” really meaning death-to-the-nation) who are, in the main, likely to lose their seats in Parliament – it is people who oppose the rule fo the World Health Organisation and so on. The fans of “Net Zero” and all the rest of it will, mostly (mostly) remain – along with Labour.
As for the dispute between Perry and Fraser…..
I think they are both missing a basic point.
The next President of the United States will not take office till January 20th 2025 – more than a year away.
The war in Ukraine will be won or lost by then – so it does not matter, from the point of view of Ukraine, who is elected President of the United States.
As for Vivik Ramaswamy – the real concern about him is not his Ukraine policy (again the war will be won or lost long before January 20th 2025), but his closness to big pharma companies in relation to Covid – although everyone, including Governor DeSantis, former Governor Haley and President Trump fell for the Covid “vaccine” scam – which has caused such terrible harm.
Former Governor Haley really is a joke – for example her response to children being sexually mutilated was “leave it to the parents”.
So if the parents agree with their children being sterilised, losing the chance to ever have children of their own (because the parents support the “Trans” cult) that is just fine according to Nikki Haley.
As with not knowing that the American Civil War was about slavery, the lady is just dumb – I hope the voters of Iowa and New Hampshire see through this Corporate candidate, who was given various WELL PAID non-jobs by arms companies in return for pushing policies that benefit them. And that goes back years before Ukraine.
Perry:
This argument is, in the abstract, rigorously valid. The problem is that it can only be understood by people who understand that people respond to incentives. Which neither Fraser nor Ramaswamy understand.
In Britain of MPs, only really Christopher Chope MP and Andrew Bridgen MP tried to expose the Covid “vaccine” scam that has injured and killed so many people – in America I am not aware of anyone in office challenging the pharma companies.
Robert Kennedy Jr was not in office – and he attacks every vaccine (and has done for many years), good as well as bad, so his attacks were discounted.
“Crying wolf” repeatedly over the years, he was not believed when a real wolf appeared.
Snorri – even if Russia had-had a reasonable government, and Mr Putin is NOT reasonable, Russia was not offered any incentives.
“If we do not invade will you accept that Crimea (handed to Ukraine as an administrative matter, with no intention of breaking it off from Russia, in the 1950s – under the Soviet Union) is part of Russia?” – answer NO, we will NOT accept this. Russia, even under a reasonable government, would then have asked for secure access to Crimea – but it was NOT accepted that Crimea is even part of Russia. Even in the 1850s (1850s – or mid 1700s for that matter) Britain and France accepted this – but now, NO, it is NOT accepted. That Russia give up Crimea was not a demand in the Crimean war – but now it is a demand.
“Will you at least guarantee that Ukraine will not be accepted into NATO and the European Union?” – again NO, we will NOT guarantee this.
Again Mr Putin is NOT reasonable or trustworthy (so negotiating with him is rather pointless) but Russia was not offered any incentives.
However, the Putin regime does not accept the right of anyone else to defend their vital interests – witness the endless hostility of “RT” to Israel in Gaza.
To Mr Putin only the vital interests of Russia matter (really his own personal interests – NOT the interests of Russia as he claims) – no other nation has any rights at all (certainly not Ukraine) – that is why one can not really have dealings with him.
Russia was not offered any positive incentives – as for negative incentives the idea that “sanctions” would influence Mr Putin was based on the weird (indeed semi Marxist) assumption that Mr Putin represented an “Oligarch Class” and threating their financial interests would lead to him changing policy.
Mr Putin does NOT represent an “Oligarch Class” in relation to the “means of production” – indeed he is quite happy to murder “Oligarchs” (i.e. the owners of large business enterprises) – the West used a basically Marxist frame of reference to formulate policy, and Marxism is false.
As for Western Corporations pulling out of Russia – Mr Putin has for years (indeed decades) denounced Western Corporations which he claims (I think falsely claims) got a stranglehold of the Russian economy under President Yeltsin.
So the negative incentive of “if you invade Ukraine – Western Corporations will pull out of Russia” would lead to Mr Putin thinking “great – that is just what I want, that is an extra reason to invade”.
Casualties? “If you invade Ukraine we will give the Ukrainians even more weapons and other help – many Russians will die!”
Mr Putin is a rather cold fish – he does not care very much about Russians being killed. If he was personally going battle himself he would care – but political leaders do not do that any more.
On balance he would have preferred to win with fewer Russian casualties – but “many Russians will die!” was not going to be a key influence on the thinking of Mr Putin.
And there’s the truly unbridgeable gap. The question is existential for both of us – and the solutions are contradictory.
bobby b – Mr Biden will not be the Democrat candidate, he will not even be President in November.
And if Nikki Haley is the Republican candidate the Deep State will not have to rig the election – as many people will not bother to vote.
Perry:
bobby:
At first sight, you both seem to be wrong.
Neither “Biden” nor Haley would bring oil prices down, and therefore they are definitely not the alternative to a resurgent Russia.
After consideration, however, Perry is not wrong, because he hastens to add:
I guess I should clarify:
The specific names to which I responded – Biden and Halley – are less significant than the underlying principle in my comment.
To much of Europe, Putin hegemony is an important and immediate existential issue.
To Americans, it is one of several, and it is attenuated. Fraser Orr nicely set out the list of those immediate crises we face above.
Those are of more significance to us than the Putin issue.
Of what use would we be to NATO – or to ourselves – if we devolve into the Marxian Utopia that our Socialist Democrats envision for us? None, I’d say. A Biden win would bring that on quickly, a Halley win would bring it on more slowly, but would still bring it on.
So we’re going to be selfish in a way, and we’re going to try to avoid that fate by voting based on how our candidates will deal with our internal Marxists. To the extent that we end up helping NATO, great, but that has to be secondary to helping ourselves.
That’s what I mean by an unbridgeable gap. We have to help ourselves first. And picking leaders based on Ukraine policy – and ignoring US internal policy – fails to do that.
@Snorri Godhi
although I find it hard to believe there are no actual conservative Republicans who see the importance of ending Russia as a security threat once and for all
There is no such thing as “once and for all” in geopolitics, only “for the time being”, I suppose with the exception of all out nuclear war. Ukraine cannot win this war with Russia, all they can do is continue throwing their men into the meat grinder to delay and delay. Though it isn’t clear what happens when they run out of Ukrainian men. Eventually peace will have to come with a treaty. All the fantasies about Putin being overthrown are just fantasies, and even if he were, who the hell knows what would happen then?
And, as you demand we put in charge of America people like Haley and Biden, then America itself collapses in on itself, and becomes impossibly weak. And what then? A rump America, a wasteland of Britain, an EU consumed in its own contradictions, and a resurgent Sino-Russian alliance? Is that really the world you want? Because that is what you are going to get.
The battlefield to defeat Russia is in the marketplace, most especially the marketplace for oil. And that is the one thing that people like Biden and Haley will not do. Drive the price of gas to $1.50 a gallon and the war will be over in a month.
You may be right to fear a strong Russia, although its combat performance doesn’t seem to bear out that fear, but you should be VASTLY more fearful of a weak America. Not too many people can prevent that, but Ramaswamy is one of the few who can.
Or perhaps not. The typically sensible Mick Ryan is of the view Ukraine should embrace positional warfare & use 2024 to attrit Russia at a more favourable ratio with a view to offensives in 2025.
@Paul Marks
As for Vivik Ramaswamy – the real concern about him is not his Ukraine policy (again the war will be won or lost long before January 20th 2025), but his closness to big pharma companies in relation to Covid – although everyone, including Governor DeSantis, former Governor Haley and President Trump fell for the Covid “vaccine” scam – which has caused such terrible harm.
With all due respect Paul, I think you are misinformed. Ramaswamy is a subversive in the pharam business. They don’t love him, they hate him. He was very successful by successfully getting approved drugs that Big Pharma has dropped. And he is not at all pro vaccine, in fact he has publicly stated that he is not vaccinated himself. His wife (who by the way is a delightful woman — and very, very accomplished in her own field, a throat surgeon — you know an actual doctor rather than the fake doctor Jill) has been vaccinated, which may or may not make sense given that she deals with the airways of cancer recovering patients surgically. She is a very interesting woman. If you have time I’d recommend you listen to some of her interviews.
He is perhaps the least tainted by the vaccine thing of all the candidates. Even Trump, who I would also vote for, has more culpability here.
Don’t believe what the press says about him. Actually watch him answering questions.
There is a *very* real chance the fallout from defeat in Ukraine would be the long overdue fragmentation of Imperial Russia. That really would mean the days of Russia as a meaningful geopolitical threat would be over, once and for all.
@Perry de Havilland (Wiltshire)
There is a *very* real chance the fallout from defeat in Ukraine would be the long overdue fragmentation of Imperial Russia. That really would mean the days of Russia as a meaningful geopolitical threat would be over, once and for all.
But two things: firstly Russia isn’t going to be defeated in Ukraine as things stand. Either we will continue to have a grinding stalemate or perhaps we have much heavier NATO involvement — something that is indeed likely to lead to a VERY permanent solution for the whole of civilization in cinder and ashes. Or alternatively we will have a peace treaty where Ukraine concedes some territory in exchange. These are the only possible outcomes I can think of. The last one is the only one with any positive aspects to counterbalance the negative ones.
And even if Russia were defeated, and what you said did happen (something that seems to me to be very far from certain), do you think a world with, for example, eight new states with massive nuclear stockpiles is a better situation? Don’t you quake in your boots at the thought of what would happen during the break up where nuclear weapons were passed around like candy ending up in the hands of terrorists? I sure as hell find that terrifying.
Are you really so naive that you think a ‘peace treaty’ giving Russia what it wants, or even what it currently occupies, will be anything other than a ceasefire? It will work as well as throwing Czechoslovakia under the bus in 1938 worked.
StevenR:
The only thing that can save the West is to do the unthinkable and we simply don’t have the will to do what needs done.
—————————————————–
… and only Americans still have their guns.
@Perry de Havilland (Wiltshire)
Are you really so naive that you think a ‘peace treaty’ giving Russia what it wants, or even what it currently occupies, will be anything other than a ceasefire?
All wars end in some sort of peace treaty. All peace treaties are temporary. All peace treaties where there isn’t an overwhelming winner involve both sides getting something. Given the very low chance of what you want — the utter destruction of the Russian Empire — I’m not sure what other outcome you are expecting.
What I do know is that if there is a temporary peace — and all peace is temporary — then the last thing you want is some insane politician destroying you and your country so that when hostilities inevitable restart you are too weak for the fight.
Nonetheless, I shouldn’t worry too much, no doubt you will get what you want — the continuation of this war. Unfortunately, a side effect of that will be the collapse of western hegemony, the end of Pax Americana, and the dominance of China aligned with Russia. When America is too poor and with too little creditworthiness to borrow to be able to pay everyone else’s bills, NATO will be a spent force, and I’ll leave that to everyone’s imagination.
If this was 1980s America and 1980s Britain I’d be more inclined to follow your logic. But the west is broken and hobbled, self loathing and poisoned. We just don’t have what you expect of us. FFS, the US military no longer knows the difference between a boy and a girl. It is only a radical change, like Ramaswamy would bring, that has any hope of reviving the situation. Otherwise, I suggest we all find bolt holes, because we are gonna need them.
Bobby:
Fair enough; but you still have to accept that people respond to incentives, and elect people sane enough to realize that people respond to incentives.
Trump and DeSantis hopefully fit the bill.
Hopefully.
“Biden”, Haley, and Ramaswamy do not.
I do not understand, from Paul Marks’ replies, whether he realizes the practical implications of people responding to incentives.
In any case, what i mean by “people respond to incentives” should be clear by the quote from Perry that i included in my comment.
Allow me to repeat a list of 4 axioms of Snorrian Realism that i postulated in a comment in Walter Russell Mead’s blog, over 10 years ago:
* Political actions are to be judged solely on the basis of their likely consequences:
the intentions of the political actors are irrelevant.
* Always keep in mind the difference between politics as it is and politics as it should be (hat tip to Aristotle).
* Always keep in mind the distinction between what you can change and what you can’t.
* People respond to incentives.
I’ll certainly agree that people respond to incentives – yay, Skinner – but I don’t concede that they always (or even usually) respond intelligently or even rationally to them. Oftimes they respond just as the marketing experts in government wish them to respond.
Mencken said “no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public”, and I think that expecting that the current American people will work out the best path through incentives is . . . optimistic. Our record of late isn’t good. We WILL respond. The quality of that response . . . ??
I THINK that is responsive to your point, but I may be missing it somehow.
Bobby: in my current state of inebriation, i cannot give an intelligent answer.
All what i can say is, what concerns me wrt Ukraine is not what incentives American voters respond to: it is what incentives Putin, and Xi, respond to.
But tomorrow i might give a more intelligent answer.
Ah. That is clearer. I did miss.
Bobby: entirely my fault.
I wrote:
What i meant is:
The alternative is Russian victory, which initially means Russia on the border of Slovakia & Romania once again. That’s it. It doesn’t mean peace.
Russian defeat on the other hand means at best the permanent fragmentation of Imperial Russia, the world’s last great empire, or at worst Moscow tied down for decades trying to keep the Buryats & Chechens etc. from heading off into a post-Muscovy future. Either way, Russia stops being a meaningful threat.
Perry, that sounds good, but how do we stop Putin from pressing the nuclear button? Could we send in some secret agents so that their missiles don’t work?
How does that help him? Pressing the nuclear button does not advance any of Putin’s goals (Perun did a pretty good episode on escalation during which he explains why nukes don’t make much sense from a Russian perspective).
@Paul Marks
As for Vivik Ramaswamy – the real concern about him is … his closness to big pharma companies in relation to Covid
Paul, your comment here came to mind recently. I watched this video about 4 minutes long, which he talks about some of the things he plans to do, I am sure you’d be in favor of most of them. In fact at time 3:30 he says that he would eliminate the exemption that Pharma companies had against vaccine injury lawsuits, including for Covid. Does that statement make you wonder if he is still close to Big Pharam?
I don’t mean any disrespect to you, there is a lot of bogus info out there about him, but if you are curious I’d suggest you listen to one of his many town halls and see if you still find his non Ukraine policies unappealing.
BTW, I was wrong he did take two Covid shots, though he says if he knew then them what he knows now he would not have done so. Which I think is a position a lot of reasonable people took.
Snorri – Russia was not offered positive incentives, and the negative incentives it was threatened with did not bother Mr Putin.
Fraser Orr – if I have spread false information about Vivik Ramaswamy, then I am sorry I did so. I apologise and will be more careful in future.
I did not know he regretted accepting two Covid injections – so do I, every day. Although the injections I accepted were not MRNA stuff he took – they were still harmful, indeed the British government quietly dropped them soon afterwards (of course – they did not admit fault).
@Paul Marks
Fraser Orr – if I have spread false information about Vivik Ramaswamy, then I am sorry I did so. I apologise and will be more careful in future.
Oh, I wasn’t criticising you, I just thought you might be interested.
Paul:
This has nothing to do with what i wrote.
Absolutely nothing.
…But as a matter of fact, Putin WAS given (not ‘offered’) positive incentives: “Biden” removing the US veto on NORDSTREAM, together with vetoes on non-Russian pipelines and a ban on fracking, clearly indicated (if you have Putin’s turn of mind) that the new administration was much more compliant than Trump. And the new German government, too, had become more Green, less Trumpist!
But let me repeat: Nowhere, except in the paragraph above, did i speak about PRE-WAR incentives.