quote:

Originally posted by Lira But nuclear deterrence only stops a full-frontal invasion � it doesn�t stop what he might see as NATO�s "creeping war", which I mentioned above: former Soviet states slipping through his fingers, Russian influence dissolving one election at a time, Ukraine choosing Brussels over Moscow.

But that was the whole point of my original comment you claimed to disagree with. You cut off your quote right before this bit:

quote:

The real reason seems to be more that Russia fears the alignment of former Soviet satellites with the West, diminishing Russia's political and economic influence.

The trouble is, that doesn't cut it in matters of international law, does it? "We had to invade a sovereign nation because we were losing influence over our former puppet states" doesn't exactly wash with the United Nations, so instead we get this obvious nonsense implying there's a genuine existential threat to Russia's national security from NATO.

___________________
Mixes:
> Higher Peaks [Progressive House]
> Dance:Love:Hub Afterparty (The Return) 23.11.24
> Surface Tension [Progressive Trance]
> Back To Deep [Deep Trippy House]
> Terra Nova [Modern Progressive Trance]

If you enjoy any of these sets and want to hear me live, I'll be playing a 2 hour progressive trance set at Basing House in Shoreditch, London on 11th October.
I'm also a resident at our bi-monthly party Kibosh in Manchester: https://www.instagram.com/kibosh.mcr/

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J But that was the whole point of my original comment you claimed to disagree with.

Oh, my apologies. So, if I understood you correctly, your argument is that Russia�s real concern isn�t security but influence: power slipping through its fingers, the old empire unspooling thread by thread. And because "we invaded to stop losing influence" isn�t a justification that holds up under international law, Putin needs something bigger, something grander. An existential threat. A war for survival. Would that be right?

If it is, I definitely see your point. Our disagreement isn't as stark as the difference between a certain leader and a dissident about to be served Earl Grey Polonium tea or cold-brew Novichok, but more a matter of perception. Because, wouldn�t you agree that for Russia, influence is security? That what we call "NATO expansion" is, for them, a slow-motion dismemberment?

You say this is about power, but maybe we should frame it as permanence, something all states, regimes, and Neo-Platonists seek

Why permanence instead of just power? Because power ebbs and flows�one decade, you�re hosting international sporting events; the next, you�re banned for doping violations and your athletes can't even rally around your flag. One decade, your puppet regimes are thriving; the next, you�re scrambling to prop them up with military contractors who technically don�t exist

But permanence? That�s something else. Power is the game. Permanence is the scoreboard. It�s about making sure you�re still in the room when the next game starts. Like bad sequels to Fast & Furious�no matter how much things change, they�re still there, still shaping the landscape, still impossible to ignore.

And if this were just about power, why go this far? Why risk economic ruin, political isolation, the slow grinding down of his military? Why not just play the long game, like before, waiting for the right moment to tilt Ukraine back into Mother Russia�s orbit � like a guy in the friendzone waiting for his crush to break up, only to find out she�d rather date literally anyone but him

Russia is playing for permanence, but Putin is using a 19th-century strategy in a 21st-century world. The war was supposed to cement Russia�s influence, but instead, it�s accelerating its decline: because military invasions aren�t how great powers secure permanence anymore. Even now, despite the costs, Putin seems convinced that a NATO-aligned Ukraine would be a bigger disaster than a drawn-out war. The question isn�t just whether he miscalculated � it�s whether he even sees an alternative.

You might call it a miscalculation, and maybe it is�a gamble that backfired spectacularly. But to miscalculate this badly, you have to either truly believe in the stakes... or just assume Ukraine would fold like it's 2014 and that, within a few years, you�d still have enough international clout to host a Winter Olympics and a World Cup again.

The first sounds dramatic. The second sounds stupid. And yet, history suggests Russia has done both � like Raskolnikov (from Crime and Punishment?) after his third espresso and a YouTube binge on why Napoleon would have totally justified his crimes.

So no, I don�t think this fear is purely theatre, even if it's mostly a rational pursuit of power. But rationality comes in sets�like a worldview, an ideology, a playbook. Maybe not a rational one, but a deeply held one by those involved, like those incredibly sound and well-founded economic ideas held by the board of directors at Lehman Brothers � who were so sure everything was fine, right up until they looked around and realised they were standing in a burning building with no exits, no fire extinguisher, and someone in the corner playing the violin.

And that brings me back to what we were actually meant to be discussing: American democracy.

Because great powers don�t crumble all at once. They fade in increments. In rationalisations. In stories told so many times they start to sound like truth.

Like stopping steals. Like swarming capitols. Like saying, "it wasn't that bad, was it?"

Oh, right. Trump. Let's get back to him, shall we?

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J I talked about this in the thread Zharen made straight after the election result. The fact Trump convincingly won re-election tells me that the majority of American voters don't believe in the sanctity of democracy anymore. Because this is the man who tried to overturn an election result right in front of everyone's eyes, a man who incited a riot that invaded the very seat of American democracy in an attempt to overthrow that result through physical violence. Everyone saw what happened, everyone knew exactly what they were witnessing. And they still voted for him again four years later.

No, I get it. I do. Watching Trump win again after the 6th of January feels like watching someone walk back into a burning building because they left their phone inside. And not even a good phone � a cracked-screen Samsung from 2015 that barely holds a charge and probably started the fire in the first place.

It�s not just maddening, it�s terrifying. I agree.

And you�re right, there�s no ambiguity about what he is anymore. No one can say they weren�t warned. They saw what happened last time, and they still said, "Yeah, I�d like some more of that, please."

But I don�t think that means the majority of Americans have stopped believing in democracy itself. I think it means they�ve rationalised supporting someone anti-democratic because they care more about something else. Maybe it�s culture wars. Maybe it�s tax cuts. Maybe they just like watching liberals cry on Fox News. But that�s different from explicitly endorsing authoritarianism.

And that distinction matters: because democracy isn�t fully gone yet � but the cost of attacking it has dropped. And the cheaper it gets, the more likely someone else will try. That doesn�t mean institutions will collapse overnight � democracies have survived worse. But history shows that when attacking democracy stops being a career-ending move, it�s only a matter of time before someone pushes further.

And even then�this election wasn�t just about Trump. Biden had a rough presidency�some of it inherited, some of it self-inflicted. Inflation panicked people. The Afghanistan withdrawal was a trainwreck. Post-COVID, we�ve seen a global trend of voters turning against incumbents�Starmer, Lula, Milei, Orsi. But Trump isn�t exactly an incumbent. He�s an ex-incumbent running a revenge campaign. His win is less about continuity and more about a populist comeback: a political sequel nobody asked for but somehow made it to cinemas anyway

So, yeah, Trumpicana is horrifying. But does it mean democracy is already lost? Not yet.

I do think institutions in the US, in Brazil, in South Korea will all hold � but institutions don�t protect themselves. They survive when people fight for them. The biggest risk isn�t that democracy disappears tomorrow: it�s that breaking democratic norms stops carrying consequences. And once that happens, it�s only a matter of time before someone decides to push even further.

That�s why I�m still (cautiously) optimistic. But does this all scare the hell out of me?

Hard yes

Edit: Trimmed the post a bit, it's still too damn long, but it was worse.

Edit 2: Meh, the disagreement is over such a minor point unrelated to the main topic of this thread, so on second thought, we can all move on from that and lead more meaningful lives whether or not the apocalypse is nigh

___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

Last edited by Lira on Mar-10-2025 at 18:43

The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans

Brilliant.

^Of all the "you can't make this up" moments over the past couple months, this one takes the cake. I can't think of a better instance that perfectly illustrates the incompetence of this administration.

quote:

Originally posted by JEO The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans Brilliant.

When asked about the breach, Trump responded: �I don't know anything about it. I'm not a big fan of The Atlantic. To me, it's a magazine that's going out of business. I think it�s not much of a magazine. But I know nothing about it. You're saying that they had what?� There is nothing that the administration could say to make the situation better, but this made it worse. As national security specialist Tom Nichols noted: �If the President is telling the truth and no one�s briefed him about this yet, that�s another story in itself. In any other administration, [the chief of staff] would have been in the Oval [Office] within nanoseconds of learning about something like this.�

Zachary B. Wolf of CNN noted that �Trump intentionally hired amateurs for top jobs. This is their most dramatic blunder.� Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA) told Brian Tyler Cohen: �My first reaction... was 'what absolute clowns.' Total amateur hour, reckless, dangerous�. [T]his is what happens when you have basically Fox News personalities cosplaying as government officials.� Foreign policy scholar Timothy Snyder posted: �These guys inherited one of the most functional state apparatus in the history of the world and they are inhabiting it like a crack house.�







From this post:

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1ASLQPeaZs/

And just think, this happened in Month 2/48. We've barely left the tarmac in America's flight to Hell.

___________________
Everyone has an opinion. Mine just happens to be a little more informed than most.
Electronic Music Critic: Near-Daily Ruminations Of Music I Own, In Alphabetical Order!

Wuddup TAers,

Just wondering how the rest of you are viewing the US with all the protests, ICE raids, ect. I'm sure it's been on the news in your areas which I apologize for. I know there are many other issues going on in your neck of the woods only to be bombarded by crap that doesn't necessarily concern you.

Just hoping to hear from insights from the rest of the world.

___________________
Jaded, old fart is me.

quote:

Originally posted by 72hrpartyanimal I know there are many other issues going on in your neck of the woods only to be bombarded by crap that doesn't necessarily concern you.

It's all right, really, don't worry.

We've had plenty of time to brace ourselves for the chaos, like taping up windows before a hurricane you know will come late and badly dressed. Trump-shaped turmoil isn't unexpected anymore to anyone... what's strange is how little of it actually reaches us, down here in Brazil. Not because we're out of range, but because we've developed this instinct, almost biological, to tune out the avalanche. The gaffes, the chest-thumping, the toddler-king proclamations and all that jazz. Men like Trump and Bolsonaro need to break things just to get the chance to fix them, loudly, badly, with duct tape.

quote:

Originally posted by 72hrpartyanimal Just wondering how the rest of you are viewing the US with all the protests, ICE raids, ect.

But still — sending in marines, the National Guard, and cruelly, Fox News anchors — it's a reversal of all the myths you once exported: equality, freedom, the sweet tea-flavoured Protestant ethic, the idea that anyone could make it big if they just worked hard enough and didn't stop to ask too many questions. It's as if the Fanta Menace wants to Make America Great Again by smashing every mirror that still showed something vaguely beautiful.

And yet, there is one thing I believe in, with the kind of certainty usually reserved for gravity or toast falling butter-side down: Trump will screw it up. Always. With astonishing precision. Like a homing pigeon trained to find the worst possible outcome and arrive right on time. I can't help but conclude that the only reason he was voted into office is because news anchors had to say his name as often as Buddhist monks chant a sutra. If there is one thing I learned from that Presidential podcast by the Washington post a decade ago is that he combines Andrew Jackson's temperament with James Buchanan's competence. Nothing new under the sun, just louder and far less effective.

He picked a fight with China and backed off. Then he picked a fight with Harvard and I'm still not quite sure what came of that. So unless the protesters manage to alienate public opinion (which, let's face it: sometimes that does happen), his exaggerated show of force will likely backfire before long.

If there is anything of yours Trump won't keep as a memento of this visit? He won't Take California

___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

I've not followed it closely but they are ugly scenes that will only play into Trump's hands. Vandalising properties and burning cars is only going to justify his narrative that these people are criminals and a threat to society, and of course he gets his show of power which will appeal directly to his core supporter base. Even if 95% of the protests were peaceful, as soon as you get that kind of property damage with those images that can be plastered on the news, it will only go one way.

___________________
Mixes:
> Higher Peaks [Progressive House]
> Dance:Love:Hub Afterparty (The Return) 23.11.24
> Surface Tension [Progressive Trance]
> Back To Deep [Deep Trippy House]
> Terra Nova [Modern Progressive Trance]

If you enjoy any of these sets and want to hear me live, I'll be playing a 2 hour progressive trance set at Basing House in Shoreditch, London on 11th October.
I'm also a resident at our bi-monthly party Kibosh in Manchester: https://www.instagram.com/kibosh.mcr/

Thanks everyone. I always value your opinions.

Coincidentally, I took my girls to Costco (big wholesale shopping place) this past Saturday and one of the No Kings protests were occurring right at the corner. I saw some of the protestors heading out to the corner of the street and showed my daughters their signs. I decided to bring them over to see what was happening. Thankfully, it was just the start of the protest and although a lot of people in attendance, the vibe was really awesome. I wanted them to see what it means to stand up for your rights. We read out the different signs people had. We read the signs of these 2, nice older ladies and they told my old daughters "we're fighting the both of you. We won't be here much longer but we want to leave the world a better place for the both of you." I was quite inspired by it all.

___________________
Jaded, old fart is me.