"John Ganz is a Stalinist, Marxist, Leninist, Trotskyist and Pol Potist. There’s really no better word for what he is. For some reason, people have a lot of trouble grasping this or just coming out and saying it."
"Where does John Ganz speak from?" (Also a famous Marxist strategy to disqualify the opponent.)
Does this open a debate or disqualify and vilify the author?
Why is attacking the person instead of his ideas getting the norm? Lake of arguments? Standardization of activism? Bolsheviks' tactics (Make them swallow the word, they will swallow the thing.)?
Jerome Powell announced an important factor for you during the last FOMC meeting: "We can't allow a wage price spiral to happen."
This means that the FED will certainly increase the unemployment rate and put pressure on companies. Why? Because they do not want a 70s type of inflation auto-fueled by wage increases which is actually already the case in the US but not in Europe.
During a time of layoffs, HR uses generally a LIFO (Last In First Out) list. => Changing job adds risk.
As several have noted: Work is not an individual sport (Forget the tv shows). You need allies. Working on your social skills will increase your income faster than changing job. And it will decrease your probabilities to be fire if (when?) a recession hits.
Why not punishing only the government: cancel all visas to the people working in the gov and especially their family. So no more rich gov kids in Western universities, etc.
I find a little unfair to punish people to push them in the streets and have them arrested, tortured or "administratively" punished (remember what happen after the Turkey coup in 2016? Military were punished but also many people working in the public sector.)
Sanctions are a form of economic warfare: they are intended to make broad swaths of the population suffer, with the goal of producing general discontent. A discontented civilian population means an unpopular war, and unpopular wars are harder to wage. Or so the theory goes.
I can only see a list of suffering people without expected outcome: North Korea, Venezuela, Iran, URSS, Cuba, etc.
(Genuine question to History geeks) Do we have an exemple of mass sanctions on a country that worked? Why are we repeating strategies that do not seem to work?
Theses sanctions seems to be designed to only short term please the people/voters/journalists of the sanctioning countries but are terrible to the sanctioned country/people long term without solving anything.
I'm not enough of a history buff to say whether sanctions are consistently successful. But I will point out that the point of (broad) sanctions isn't to win wars: it's to punish governments by punishing their people, who are then expected to pressure the government to acquiesce.
Among the targets of US sanctions in the last 50 years, contemporary Russia is somewhat unique: it has a relatively large and urbanized middle class, one that's used to the benefits of global trade and cheap European travel. Sanctions that hurt those people seem, on face value, more likely to impact Putin's decision making than e.g. sanctions on North Korean peasant farmers.
Another perspective: Russian society as of now is mostly an bubble. They don't have media that talks about the war their country started. Cancelling SWIFT is giving them something they cannot silence away in order to maintain the bubble.
Cancelling SWIFT would be a very clear signal to all people in Russia that their government overstepped a line. Without punlic support from the public an offensive war is way harder to pull off.
> They don't have media that talks about the war their country started
Stop spreading misinformation, this is not true.
This is basically the only thing that all russian-speaking media outlets are talking about. Plus, there is nothing preventing one from opening reddit and seeing what the western media has to say.
On the other hand, people in the West seem to be completely (and willingly!) disconnected from the situation in ru-net.
Most news outlets in Russia nowadays aren't even registered as proper media, so they couldn't care less for any "propaganda filters".
The article tries to assert that there is a huge difference between a perception of a "military operation" and a "war", but in Russian "military" and "war" is the same word (the same word root): "военная", "война" -- so everyone is just calling it "war".
As an example, take look at this article (vc is a massively popular news/blogs site): https://vc.ru/finance/371584-glavnoe-v-ekonomike-na-fone-voy... -- use google translate to see what words are used and what people have to say in the comment section.
I would actually argue that Russians have much more sources of information available: Russian, Ukraininan, Western, independent. The evident post-truth politics from all sides breeds radical skepticism. The current situation is far from what can be called "a bubble", probably even further from what is happening in the rest of the world.
The problem is that rich gov kids would go to China or India then. Which is the fundamental problem of all these sanctions. Ultimately it's counter productive to push Russia into closer relationships with our rivals. And it hurts twice because it does so at some economic cost to the EU/US.
The path we're on is the worst for everyone involved.
Rich people don’t want to go to China or India, and I think if you compare the offerings of the West versus these other two countries for just a moment, you’ll understand why.
Russia is a classic abuser, the only way out from a relationship like that is to walk away regardless of the personal cost.
>Rich people don’t want to go to China or India, and I think if you compare the offerings of the West versus these other two countries for just a moment, you’ll understand why
That's not really the point
>Russia is a classic abuser, the only way out from a relationship like that is to walk away regardless of the personal cost.
How exactly can the Ukraine walk away from Russia? Its impossible. So long as Russia has an army & a willingness to use it every country will have a relationship with them whether they like it or not.
Exactly. And ban re entry for a decade. When oligarch kids start showing up in mother Russia and bitching to their parents, it might help the privileged oligarchs realize they don’t have impunity outside their bubble and nobody outside Russia cares about their influence whatsoever.
Just Devil's Advocate, but what do we do if those oligarch kids simply go hang out and party with their Chinese and Indian counterparts in Shanghai instead?
Part of the problem here is that we are not the only game in town anymore.
When you start a war of aggression you calculate in that there will be sanctions against your own people. This is first and foremost on Putin. Not that he cares, and probably not that this will be a popular sentiment in Russia.
The alternative to sanctions is a shooting war, it is probably a good idea to put as many steps in between that point and now as we can, who knows, there might be someone with a change of heart high enough up in the Russian ranks that it makes a difference.
(Swiss speaking) What is important is that the vote/referendum process must be slow. Very slow.
We often see a trendy referendum being launched because of an event. Years later when we finally have to vote about it, we realize that it was only an historical parenthesis.
"Where does John Ganz speak from?" (Also a famous Marxist strategy to disqualify the opponent.)
Does this open a debate or disqualify and vilify the author?
Why is attacking the person instead of his ideas getting the norm? Lake of arguments? Standardization of activism? Bolsheviks' tactics (Make them swallow the word, they will swallow the thing.)?