I mean, from the perspective of the NKVD, it’s all just another round of imperialist pigdogs going at each other, so.

It’s snide and arrogant to assume they’re being tricked.

The Civil War was about Slavery. The English Civil War was fundamentally about religion, politics, and the interface between them.

Our civil war just cavaliers and round heads going at it, yet again. Slavery was the trigger. But you had two competing societies, with different values, and mutually exclusive visions of the future.

By that logic every war and revolution in the history of Man is the same war.

Sure, voters can choose values over economics. And they can be manipulated, lied to, and used by people who prioritize economics over values. It’s not universal but it’s not a rare phenomena

I would just submit that elevating values above economics is a valid choice.

By that logic every war and revolution in the history of Man is the same war.

I don’t think so.

We unfortunately inherited an unresolved conflict between the feudal aristocracy, and the new men of the 17th century. Ivanhoe was all the rage in Richmond before the war, which says a lot about the Confederacy, and how they saw themselves.

Another interesting and little known factoid which says a lot about the Confederacy is that they thought black people were property!

Except that no one on either side was in favor of a fucking feudal aristocracy.

Except that no one on either side was in favor of a fucking feudal aristocracy.

The plantation south was effectively feudal in structure.

As was White Russia which Putin is bringing back 😄

If we see the politicians playing the trick, we know the trickery is happening. Isn’t it snide and arrogant to assume they’re playing the trick to no purpose, that they don’t know their business? Or that you know it better than they do?

Economic concerns are values. It’s all values. The question is, why does someone choose to elevate one over another, and whether that decision-making process is subject to outside influence. Human history tells us that it is, and we see it happen nearly every day, and clutching your pearls when someone points it out is just damned silly, the sort of thing not to be taken seriously.

This is another silly notion. Which of the plantation owners in the American South in 1860 were nursing a grudge about their recent defeat in (checks notes) 1651? And weren’t the Articles of Confederation a rather odd governing document to emerge from a council of feudal lords? You might as well claim World War 1 was the same war; after all, it pitted the ambitions of an imperial king against those of Republican commoners.

No one is being manipulated here. We simply never gave a dam about that sort of thing. That’s why the the North was a bustle of commercial and industrial activity before the war, and the south, generally, was not.

If you read Sewards letters from his travels across the South, it drives him crazy. The dilapidated buildings, the poor roads, the general lack of investment in civil infrastructure. He couldn’t understand why the poor, backwards, bastards, seemed so content with their lot.

This quote captures the attitude in Richmond in the years before the war.

“We, who once swayed the councils of the Union, find our power gone, and our influence on the wane,” mourned one member of Virginia’s traditional elite in 1852. “As the other States accumulate the means of material greatness, and glide past us on the road to wealth and empire, we slight the warnings of statistics, and drive lazily along the fields of ancient customs.” - Culture of Defeat

The speaker was acutely aware of his peoples indifference to development, and appreciated the consequences. But that was the culture, the culture that had created him, and the culture that he loved.

Culture of Defeat has an interesting consideration of the two visions of America, the Northern and Southern version, and how the South internalized defeat.

Herman Melville, Henry Adams, and Henry James were all among the losers in the victor’s camp. In the prevailing climate after 1865, they all felt, in Adams’s words, as lost as “the Indians or the buffalo who had been decimated by our ancestors.” None of these three men had been particularly interested in the South, let alone had sympathized with it. All had deplored slavery. Nonetheless, in their works they used Southerners as mouthpieces for criticizing their times and as a representatives of the “other” America. In all three cases, the heroes are former Confederate officers who message differs starkly from that of the Yankee bridegrooms of plantation romances: not the optimistic belief in progress but a critique of the decadent civilization, not the elevation of the South of plantation s and belles to the economic and ideological level of the North but the reverse - a profound questioning of the North’s industrial and commercial triumph and a reminder that that there were values other than that of the almighty dollar."

[quote=“scottagibson, post:6288, topic:67267”]
This is another silly notion. Which of the plantation owners in the American South in 1860 were nursing a grudge about their recent defeat in (checks notes) 1651? And weren’t the Articles of Confederation a rather odd governing document to emerge from a council of feudal lords?[/quote]

You’re being literal to the point of oblivion. I’m sure no one was thinking about the events of Glorious Revolution, but they were the product of that conflict, and those cultures. Cultures that had jumped an ocean, but otherwise had remained intact, setting the stage for another round of fighting.

I don’t particularly see the relevance of your second point, but the articles produced a weak central government, which is what a feudal lord would want. It would minimize the power of a king, or whatever analog existed, while maximizing his own power and influence.

As was White Russia which Putin is bringing back 😄

KONSTANTIN VON EGGERT in Newsweek

In the early 2000s, Vladimir Putin personally supervised the reunification process of the Russian Orthodox Church and Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, founded in the 1920s by emigre bishops. Putin cultivates descendants of White Russian émigré families, including the Romanovs.

The authorities have repatriated to Russia for reburial the remains of those who were forced to spend their lives in emigration – White Russian commander general Anton Denikin, monarchist philosopher Ivan Ilyin, and the writer Ivan Shmelyov, known equally for his idyllic recreations of life under the Tsars in a childhood memoir The Year of Our Lord and hair-raising descriptions of the Red Terror in The Sun of the Dead .

Putin enjoys seeing himself as an inheritor of the Tsarist legacy. He could not hide his satisfaction when during a pilgrimage last year to the Russian monastery on Mount Athos he was seated on the throne reserved for the emperor.

This is one of the rare articles I’ve seen in America media that actually captures some of what’s going on in Russia. We are a profoundly insular people, so in love with our manifest destiny, that we have trouble understanding other peoples. We blithely assume the rest of the world is just like us, and we analyze behavior in strictly American terms, expecting people to act as we would, and judging them when they don’t.

The past is never dead. It’s not even past

This is a constant, everywhere. Look at how Erdogan is trying to transform Turkey into a neo Ottoman state. Travel Saudi Arabia, for all its trappings of modernity, it is still a fundamentally medieval society.

Florida

I don’t get Sergeant Mark’s complaint. Two gun-toting morons killing each other and no one else seems like the start of a solution.

From the story, it’s not clear to me why you think the first guy is a moron. Now, it may have gone down differently than reported, but that’s the info we have.

Because he’s carrying a concealed weapon. He’s in an air-conditioning service truck, working, which means he’s carrying a concealed weapon into his customers’ homes.

Maybe he was worried about getting shot.

Yeah, the gun didn’t help though.