Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:53, 9 November 2014

Archives

/Archive 1/Archive 2

So, what you know and what you do not know? (concerning to my positions)

Well, I haven't started to edit on Misplaced Pages about Ukraine or Russia, honestly. I started to edit it about the Portuguese economy and Turkish Airlines. And when I noticed that the Euromaidan people in Ukraine were so mad in love about the EU, when we, here, in Portugal, in Greece, Spain, Italy, Cyprus, and also in Ireland, are sufferering because of EU, I thought: thouse guys must be mad! And then I saw EU officials going there to support the Euromaidan!... And then, I made my mind: OK... this guys are being manipulated by greedy eurocrats in Brussels, under "Nazi following orders" from Berlin! And I got more mad when I saw all those people burnt by neo-nazis in Odessa! But!... Then I saw a lot of anti-semitic, very racist conspirational opinions on RT (comments), and a lot of non-sense edits on Misplaced Pages, from both sides! And I thought... No, both sides have problems here, and they must resolve it. So... I think that, if the differences are so great that they can reach that "Fox-News" style extravaganza, the best way is to have fair and truly (not commanded by USA) independently scrutinized referenda in Crimea and in Donbass! That's the solution! And, as I told, I continue to support the peaceful reunification of Cyprus through referendums, on both sides, and the self-determination of peoples when they're majoritary in certain regions. Mondolkiri1 (talk) 03:32, 11 October 2014 (Lisbon/London/Dublin/Casablanca Time)

@Mondolkiri1: Thank you for that explanation. The only reservation I have about that recent edit to your user page is that you imply that the Crimean independence referendum was not valide. No one seriously questions that the result accurately reflects the will of the people. When it comes to the DNR and LNR independence referendums, I will grant that they were carried out in the middle of a military conflict, so they were not completely without problems.

As for antisemitism, it is a problem in western Ukraine, but not in eastern Ukraine (or Russia, for that matter). I actually found a quote from a Ukrainian rabbi saying exactly that and put it in the DNR article where that article goes on and on about that anti-semitic leaflet hoax, but my edit was reverted, of course.

I agree with you about Cyprus. That Turkey continues an illegal occupation should be a major scandal, but since it's a NATO member, it's allowed to get away with it.

I don't visit RT very much, since I prefer to read the Russian media in Russian. As for "non-sense edits", I would say there are about ten times as many made by the Maidan sympathizers then by the Novorossia sympathizers. Nevertheless, I think that recently I have finally gotten used to dealing with editors with pretty much all points of view when it comes to the Ukrainian articles.

Finally, here is a news site about Russia that was recently set up: Russia Insider. It was started by an American investment banker who lives and works in Moscow. The purpose is to counter the anti-Russian propaganda constantly spewed out by Western media, without being financed by the Russian government.

I very much appreciate the contributions you make to the Ukrainian articles. (I think that editors dealing with this subject have calmed down somewhat since the start of the nominal cease fire.) – Herzen (talk) 03:12, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Whatever what your opinions about Turkey are, don't forget that that Turkey is also an Eursasian country, like Russia, like it or not! I was sincerely shocked about the inaction of Turkey in Kobane, in the Syrian-Turkish border, just because they were Kurds, which made me even more sympathyzer of the Kurdish independence movement,... and after this shocking attitude, also in Turkey! If they don't regard the Kurds as Turks, why should the Kurds belong to Turkey, after all? But remember! The Turks are also Eurasians! And I'm Latin. I don't identify myself with the EU. I ideltufy myself more with Moldova, Angola, Cape Verde, Brazil, Guatemala or the Phillipines than with Germany! Mondolkiri1 (talk) 04:29, 11 October 2014 (Lisbon/London/Dublin/Casablanca Time)

@Mondolkiri1: That's an interesting list of countries! Turkey may be part of Eurasia, but it is certainly not European. European countries are Christian, virtually by definiton; Turkey is Muslim. Nothing Turkey does can surprise me: Erdogan is an Islamist. – Herzen (talk) 03:53, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Well. I'm actually disgusted about Erdogan's inaction in Kobane, and that directs me more to a Kurdish independence movement, not only in Iraq, but also in Turkey. I know Turkey, I know nice Turkish people, but they're not represented by this government! Well, as a couple of people don't represent the country as a whole, as this is the Turkish reaction, for sure, I'm for the Kurdish self-determination, in the Kurdish majority regions, and in the Alevi region of Tunceli. Now, this Eurasian issue is very complicated. Because: Some countries or regions regard themselves as Eurasians (including Mongolia!). Others (including Chechnya), don't regard themselves as Eurasians. Turkey and Ruassia certainly regard themselves as Eurasians. The official religions of Russia are: Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Judaism. Turkey doesn't have any official religion. Now... Why don't you join in Baku, discuss your differences and the major threats above them, and fight against the germanic eurocrats that have destroyed the latin, greek and celtic Europe in the last few years? (I don't think Erdogan is a crazy Islamist, by the way, I pay more attention to the Portuhueses and Italian news than to the Russian version of the Fox News, which is RT) Mondolkiri1 (talk) 05:42, 11 October 2014 (Lisbon/London/Dublin/Casablanca Time)

Userboxes concerning to Crimea and Donbass (for my userpage, and others who eventually agree with them)

Hi Herzen, I'd like to create 2 userboxes on my userpage, supporting the right of self-determination of Crimea and Donbass. I haven't figured it out yet (I've been an editor for less than a year, so, I'm still getting acquainted to it). Do you know, how to create them? Thanks for your attention! (By the way, I'm glad to meet someone who's (I'd hope, but I'm not sure) for the Crimean people and the Donbass people, instead of just being for the Western (USA and Eurocrats) and Russian imperialist desires that have already cost so many civilian lifes in Donbass.Mondolkiri1 (talk) 23:43, 15 October 2014 (Lisbon/London/Dublin/Casablanca Time)

Hi Herzen,

I have a difficulty following the argument on the talk page, but as for the BBC video, there was one which got deleted and then restored

http://www.bbc.co.uk/russian/blogs/2014/07/140725_blog_editors_bbc_story_republished

BR, Usernick (talk) 01:04, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Reply

Hi Herzen, I did get the email, but I will not use my email account for the purposes of Misplaced Pages. Email, phone, Skype, all these things were invented to improve the lives of their owners, but whenever the phone rings, an email arrives, Skype sirens, what do we do? We drop everything we're doing and jump to it! An email account is a convenience, and I like to keep it strictly for MY convenience - tough luck anyone else LOL! No offence.

There's no need for spin off into bilateral exchanges, the Talk page is fine and I have already set out my views on it on the Talk page (in Forgive us Netherlands). I didn't pull any punches while staying polite. Do read if you have about 10 hours to spare (joke, it's long, but not 10 hours long).

I've looked at your "systemic error" theory, and I don't think there is a systemic problem - the Misplaced Pages policy is fine, the problem is it's not being followed. If an admin can be got to enforce what the Core policy says, the article will become neutral.

Re last sentence of your email, your terminology is out of order, I was saddened to see you use it. Good luck, Tennispompom (talk) 22:26, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

@Tennispompom: I said that there is systemic bias in the Ukrainian articles. I did not say that there is any problem with Misplaced Pages policy. I can't think of a more sensible policy for an encyclopedia written by anonymous editors who are not expected to be experts.

I guess you are not a fan of Monty Python, and that Monty Python make you sad. – Herzen (talk) 22:37, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Aha - Ukraine articles! I've been avoiding them like the plague!

Love Monty Python! Can't recall the exact words, something about an instruction to line up against that wall over there, the hell or purgatory sketch? I've forgotten most of the details now. Humour is allowed some leeway, and Monty Python was in the 70's - very different times. Perhaps we should go on the MH17 talk page and sing Eric the Half a Bee as a duet? Would be most apt don't you think? Half the article "... must ipso facto half not be." Tennispompom (talk) 23:12, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Whoops - that should have been Rowan Atkinson, not Python! There is a youtube version "welcome to hell", but it's been cleaned up. Tennispompom (talk) 00:01, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

@Tennispompom: I've never heard of Rowan Atkinson. Like most Americans, I didn't get into much British TV comedy besides Monty Python. – Herzen (talk) 00:13, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

You, Herzen, and Iryna Harpy... I've worked with both Ukrainian-speaking and Russian-speaking Ukrainians. And I know that the relationship between them is not optimal. From my point of view, this unhealthy relationship has brought Ukrainians and Russians (either Ukrainian citizens or Russian citizens) to a war. And I think is abysmal, since my own neighbours and cousins (as a Portuguese) are the Spaniards and the Brazilians, with whom I'd find anecdotal, at least, to have a war with them. I think that Western Ukrainians were too much deluded by Eurocrats (in order to think that they'd be in paradise if they'd join the EU... but as for us in Portugal, for Greece, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Cyprus, Hungary, etc... it wasn't just as wonderful as that, while Norway, Switzerland, even Turkey, have performed amazingly well outside EU). The Eastern Ukrainians (mainly in Crimea and Donbass) don't feel that way. The present situation in Ukraine is a result of forced external powers, it has nothing to do with the interests of the Ukrainian people, in opinion! And those external powers are either Russia!, Brussels, Germany and USA, which wants to rule all over the places! I'm sorry for you, Iryna, since you're Ukrainian, and I've loved every Ukrainian person that I've met, but that's the reality. I'd suggest that Ukraine would follow a Turkish way, between the Western and the Eastern world, but is it possible? (not to subject to Russia, obviously, as Azerbaijan hasn't subjected to Russia, by the way... it held its head high...though it's a dictatorship, but that's not the point). Mondolkiri1 (talk) 23:41, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

It's not just "Ukrainian-speaking and Russian-speaking Ukrainians": you can't leave Russians out of it. The relationship between eastern and western Ukrainians is "not optimal" because western Ukrainians think that eastern Ukrainians are not really Ukrainian because the latter identify with Russia. What is going on in Ukraine is exactly what happened in Iraq: division along religious, ethnic, or sectarian lines was created where it did not exist before. This is an old technique of AngloAmerican imperialism. And I don't know why you keep on putting Russia on the same level as Brussels, Germany and USA. The only one of these four who cares about the Ukrainian people is the Russian government. The Ukrainian government sends Ukrainian men to their deaths with wild abandon and, imposing brutal austerity measures, and letting letting foreign corporations own natural resources which belong to the Ukrainian people. The last is another thing that eastern Ukrainians don't like about the present Kiev government. – Herzen (talk) 23:58, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

I came very close to writing a treatise on the subject as a response. Rather than do so, I choose not to make any assertions about Western Ukrainian chauvinism. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:09, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

@Iryna Harpy: Well, I wouldn't do it anywhere but on my Talk page. In any case, Mondolkiri1 raised the subject. By the way, since you live in Australia, I might as well point you to a Talk section I started for an Australian article. – Herzen (talk) 00:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

I guess that was to Iryna... Though the place where anyone lives is not important at all! Iryna Harpy is from Ukrainian descent! (Zaporozhian Cossacks, close to the Dniepr River!))! And I'm from Napoleonic descent... descendant from a Napoleonic Colonel... but yes, I consider myself as a Napoleonic descendent (Liberal Revolution of 1820), and I'm not ashamed of it. Now... Where are you from @Herzen: ? Would you like to be bullied about it? Honestly! You're bullying Iryna and that's absolutely unacceptable| Mondolkiri1 (talk) 00:43, 23 October 2014 (UTC) 01.43 (Lisbon/Dublin/Casablanca/London Time)

@Mondolkiri1: Here is what the article you link to says: "Today, most of the modern descendants of the Zaporozhians, the Kuban Cossacks, remain loyal towards Russia". Also, no Cossacks are western Ukrainians, and we were talking about western Ukrainians. In any case, I think that Iryna Harpy and I understand each other, so no, I was not bullying her. – Herzen (talk) 02:11, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Response in your Talk Page... By the way, you, me, and even more the very respectful Ukrainian Iryna Harpy are all victims (and eventually responsible, but Iryna is the least of all of us) of this POV editing concerning to Ukrainian related articles. Mondolkiri1 (talk) 03:49, 24 October 2014 (Lisbon/Dublin/Casablanca/London Time)

Maybe by mistake I wrote some stuff in your own Talk Page, rather than here, but, the point is: what I wrote is what I think (and I wouldn't write here as a forum topic)... Now, what you think about Iryna Harpy or not is up to you! I won't be the one to say that the Cossacks are from Western Ukraine, how that is relevant or not and how many of them ended up fighting for the pro-Russian side in this war! This is just pathetic! We here in Portugal have crossed this line with Spain in 1668! And you there haven't crossed it in 2014! Find a way to cross it! Mondolkiri1 (talk) 03:59, 24 October 2014 (Lisbon/Dublin/Casablanca/London Time)

Sorry, I can't make any sense of what you wrote. If you want to understand the Ukraine, here is an Anglophone blog that helps with that. (Sorry, there are French and German versions, but so far, no Spanish version, although Spaniards do fight on the sides of the Novorossians, because what has happened in Ukraine reminds them of the Spanish Civil War.) – Herzen (talk) 05:49, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Apologies, but I haven't had time to respond to any of the chat here as I'm about to go on holiday for a week and just want to tidy a couple of things before I go.

I'm keeping out of the Whitlam article for the moment, Herzen. There's a serious lack of balance between his being almost mythologised and the reality of his term (although I was one of the students who used to paint "Remember, remember the 11th of November, 1975!" on walls as my 'erhem' objection to the monarchy having any real representation in Australian politics, much less the fact that a Governor General could dismiss an elected government).

As regards my heritage, Mondolkiri1 is correct. My family was anti-monarchist and anti Russian Imperialism. I think you might have to brush up on your history because I have nothing to do with the Kuban Cossacks. After the razing of Sich, the Hetmanate continued for some time, and more Cossack families left than stayed and to be shoved off to Kuban, plus were prepared to swear allegiance to the Russian Tsar. Kuban Cossacks also have mixed allegiances. Many consider themselves to be Ukrainian and can trace their ancestry to Ukraine (plus the older generation still speak Balachka, although the younger generation want to be Russian and think it uncool to have anything to do with their old ways). --Iryna Harpy (talk) 02:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

@Iryna Harpy: Thank you so much for taking the time to "tidy up" before you head off. I enjoyed working a tiny bit on the Whitlam article, because controversial matters get discussed so much more coolly there. And I do think the one small edit I made to that article made it more balanced. Apparently, Australian editors were not willing to make that edit, even though it had been discussed.

As for Cossacks, Ukraine, and Russia, I was basing myself not on "my history", but on the WP article that Mondolkiri1 linked to. So maybe you need to fix that article? The only claim I made based on "OR" was that no Cossacks are western Ukrainians. Is that not the case? Enjoy your holiday, Herzen (talk) 03:07, 26 October 2014 (UTC).

Nope, Cossacks were not western Ukrainian (although they did travel there for a few skirmishes against the Poles). They were based in the Eastern Slavic heartland (although there were Cossacks on the Hungarian borderland later in the piece)... and, yes, those articles need some major overhauls, but they're also subject to massive POV pushes. I'm just about to leave my 'on holiday' message on my user and talk pages, then I'm packing. Thanks for the good wishes! I intend to have a Misplaced Pages-free week. Yay! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:29, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Not an accidental 'thank you'

Just to let you know that I've followed the talk page (although I've been bogged down in other articles). It's good to see that you're taking to the learning curve like a fish to water. It's difficult to get a grasp of policy and how to adhere to it (particularly when it counters your own intuitive perceptions as to bias in the media, as well as jumping into the deep end by editing controversial articles), but you're doing well. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:55, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

@Iryna Harpy: LOL. Thank you. Misplaced Pages sometimes gets criticized, but I do think the rules are rational and well thought out, given that it is written by anonymous editors who are not expected to be experts. When there is a civil war international conflict going on, people are going to tend to be vociferous in advocating for the side they sympathize with, so it is nice to see that there are many editors who make an effort to collaborate with other editors who have a different, perhaps even "opposite", POV. In this way, Misplaced Pages can perhaps contribute in a small way to mutual understanding between the different people's of the world. (Jesus, I sound like a Soviet internationalist! But really, my background is White Russian.) – Herzen (talk) 06:22, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

White Russian with a streak of red probably makes you a pinko. That's a combo worthy of a bit of an inner conflict. I hope you don't beat yourself up about it... I mean literally, don't beat yourself up over it! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 08:55, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Template:U:Iryna Harpy No inner conflict. I have always been a social democrat along the lines of Willy Brandt and Helmut Schmidt, so I never identified with the Red or the White side. White Russians began losing their antipathy to the Soviets when Perestroika began, and lost it entirely when Russia stopped being communist. The rapprochement between White and Red Russians became final with the current Ukrainian crisis, with Russia once more under attack by the West, as it had come under attack before from Napoleon and then Hitler. – Herzen (talk) 22:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Well, the Western media and I are natural enemies. I'm grateful for the fact of Misplaced Pages's meticulously thought out and carefully developed policies & guidelines, even if it means that I have to adhere to upholding RS antithetical to my own POV. Personally, I wouldn't touch current affairs articles here except for the fact that the inevitable happened in Ukraine, and I just got caught up in trying to maintain some form of balance despite myself. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:42, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

@Iryna Harpy: I am not that bothered by Western media. They just serve their function. Sure, Western media have a POV I don't share, but the reason that that POV is highly dominant in politically sensitive articles is that some editors game the system to keep other POVs out. And many of these editors are acting in good faith as far as I can tell: they actually believe that they know the truth, because they believe what the Western media tells them. To hazard a guess, I would say that the underlying problem here is that Western schools and universities don't teach critical thinking skills anymore. – Herzen (talk) 23:26, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Don't get me started on the decline of the Western education system because I'm likely to implode. That's another reason I support the Misplaced Pages project: students are encouraged to participate and end up being exposed to critical thought processes as a fringe benefit. I get a buzz out of mentoring younger POVers and watching their perception open to that which they'd never have been exposed to otherwise. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:32, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

@Iryna Harpy: Give him a break, please! Well, we must distinguish between what are the Education systems and the media between the West and the East (either if they're Russians, Turks, Arabs, Indians, Chinese, Japanese or Southeast Asians, etc)... I think the West wasn't always correct! (I've been in Vietnam myself, and I can tell you that... Vietnam is not any nightmare at all). The several wikipedias, which I already have told, are naturally, conditioned, in a way, by the cultural framework in which they're written. We may rely on what we consider to be the reliable sources, but I ask myself, in such a delicate situation, for instance: would I trust more the New York Times, or Edward Snowden!... I could be wrong, but I'd trust more Edward Snowden!... Sorry for this thought. But, yes, concerning to Amnesty Internation, no doubt, for me! Russia involved (which doesn't mean, for me, USA or Germany not involved!) Mondolkiri1 (User talk:Mondolkiri1) 23:59, 23 October 2014 (UTC) 00:59, 24 October 2014 (London/Lisbon/Casablanca Time)

@Mondolkiri1: Goodness, I didn't see this ping from you! You've misunderstood my response here: I'm in absolute agreement on the matter. I've been at the epicentre of watching the Australian tertiary system being dismantled by the overlaying of US corporate methodologies for the running of universities over the last 20 years or so. The tradition of their being a venue for the broadening of the upcoming intelligentsia's formation into politically, socially and culturally aware and well-rounded human beings has been crushed. The only accountability being nurtured now is that of hedonism and social isolation. The only 'value' being placed on education is the churning out of workers with credentials compatible with what the market forces are demanding... and the corporate 'marketplace' for workers in any area is as fickle and unpredictable as the world's capitalist economy itself is. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:54, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

@Iryna Harpy: Oh, I'm sorry for that in Australia. I hope that in a few countries in Europe (probably the Nordic countries), and New Zealand, along with other developed countries that are not Western (like Japan, South Korea, so on) that old Australian tradition still is in place. Following my thoughts concerning to what I was saying, I wouldn't think that the Chinese media is reliable enough, either, though that would also apply to the Anglo-Saxonic media. I've actually seen more regularly the France24, for a long time, as I said to RGloucester, and the Portuguese and Spanish-speaking information about these particular Eastern European events have also been more balanced, in my opinion, than the Anglo-Saxonic media (but being my opinion doesn't mean that it's true, since I live in a Latin country, with a lot of Ukrainians, but quite more suspicious about the standard American views than most Northern European countries). As I also said previously, my main concern about what's happening in Donbass is about the people who live in Donbass, and all the other interests, for me are either secondary or rubish. I thank you a lot for your reply! I wished that these articles about the events in Ukraine, in several languages, would be more consistent with each other, but that isn't what I've noticed, most noticeably between the Spanish and English Misplaced Pages, but that, as I said, has to do with cultural views. RGloucester said to me that the differences were because he's more bold about it because he has a strong feeling about what is right and wrong. And I answered: yes, I also have a strong feeling about what it is right and wrong but maybe our perceptions are a bit different given that I also watch and read non-English news about the issue. And I mentioned France24, and the conversation stopped there, so far. Mondolkiri1 (talk) 04:30, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Concerning to your considerations in the Talk Page

I can't write this there, since this would be a forum conversation. I've felt a lot of pressure both from the pro-EU side and the pro-Russian side concerning to this topic. Well, what I have to say is that I think this conflict is difficult for me, from scatch, to really understand it. It's almost like if we (Portuguese) were confronting the Spaniards.... Though the Soviet Union, during Stalin, actually killed a lot of Ukrainians (during Holodomor), it also killed of Russians. It was not targeted at one single single ethnicity, by what I've read... it was targeted against whoever, rich or poor, wouldn't agree with Stalin's policies. I'm learning Italian, now, for 3 years, and the professor was born in Poland, and she has said to me some very embarassing stuff concerning to Stepan Bandera (like the Khmer Rouge, and my username is actually a Cambodian name, Mondolkiri, which is a region in Cambodia). So, as I told her that I was editing about this issue (to a Polish-Italian woman), she just told me the most despicable stuff about the Ukrainian colaborationists during WW2, that sounded a lot like what the Khmer Rouge did to the Cambodian people (either if they were Khmer, Vietnamese, Chinese, Thai, etc ethnicity). So... I tried even more to spot who was who, and there are a lot of self-declared fascist ppl in the Ukrainian government. There are plenty of fascists in Russia too, but at least Putin has kept them down (because he's himself very nationalist, narcissistic and pragmatic person). Whatever the future will be, there will be the self-proclaimed fascists in the Ukrainian govt, and the pro-Putin people in Ukraine. It's complicated but the best that I can wish is that there will be peace and, when it becomes obvious (for me it has already become), that Donbass people has its own right to a fair and independently scrutinized self-determination process. Regards! Mondolkiri1 (User talk:Mondolkiri1) 06:03, 24 October 2014 (UTC) 03:44, 24 October 2014 (London/Lisbon/Casablanca Time)

@Mondolkiri1: I don't know why, but I hadn't noticed that you created this new section here. I only went to my Talk page because I wanted to respond to a comment you made elsewhere. First, I have to say that I know nothing about Portugal or the Portuguese. My only connection to Portugal is port wine and my seventh grade social studies teacher being Portuguese. My impression is that your response to the current Ukrainian crisis is highly colored by struggles that Portugal has gone through which I know nothing about. Thus it is very hard for me to understand what you are trying to say with your comments about the Ukraine crisis.

A case in point is the comment you just made: "I actually thought about the case between Israel and Gaza. … I don't really think that the Russian shelling was a consequence of that particular event." (1) Are you actually comparing Russia to Gaza? Gaza is a tiny strip of land with no autonomy. Russia is by far the largest country in the world, and one of the world's few truly sovereign states. How can two things be more different than those two? (2) I am not sure what you mean by "Russian shelling". Do you mean shelling by Russia of de jure Ukrainian territory? First, I do not believe that Russia has ever shelled Ukrainian territory during this crisis. Second, if you think that Russia would engage in a military action for the sake of revenge or retaliation, you do not understand Russians at all. – Herzen (talk) 00:50, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

No, in this case I was more thinking about an eventual comparison between Russia and Israel, not between Russia and Gaza. Concerning to the Portuguese issue, let it go, I guess I was rambling.Mondolkiri1 (talk) 01:10, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

"Cultural Marxism"

• As an American, perhaps you are better suited to dealing with this matter. I simply don't understand what's going on at that article. I guess that's the way canards work. They seep into the facts and twist them. I'm still flabbergasted that I was tricked by the purpose of that article. It is absurd. I strongly identify with the Frankfurt School in many respects, so it doesn't bode well for me, that's all. The article is a joke. It quotes theories and places them under the label of "cultural Marxism", without any sources describing them as such. And then, of course, we have the idiocy of "multicultural Marxism" and "political correctness" that some editors have tried to inject, which I'm fairly certain are antithetical to everything Marx stood for. Nothing about Adorno, Benjamin, or whoever had anything to do with "political correctness". In fact, if any of these rightist loons took the time to actually read their work, they might identify with the way that Benjamin stands up for the "aura of the work of art", and the idea that the "culture industry" manufactures "culture". RGloucester — ☎ 18:06, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

@RGloucester: My being an American doesn't mean that I understand American rightist loons better than anyone else. I have enough trouble trying to understand where middle of the road Americans, American libertarians, mainstream Germans, Slavophile Russians, and left-wing Russians are coming from. (I have no trouble understanding left-wing Westerners or Eurasianist Russians, since I consider myself to be both.) As for the Frankfurt School, I consider it to be part of my "cultural heritage", but I don't really identify with it. I got more into the later critical theory (Habermas) than Horkheimer and Adorno. (For some reason, you mention Adorno and Benjamin, but never mention Marcuse. By the way, if I recall correctly, the bête noire of the Straussian intellectial fraud Allan Bloom was Marcuse.) Also, when it comes to analyzing late capitalism, I find Baudrillard to be more helpful than Horkheimer and Adorno.

The "cultural Marxism" article is prima facie rightist looniness because it was created by someone whose Talk page is littered with the topics of abortion and "homosexuality". I read the article through to the "Use by 21st century US conservatives" section. The article appears to use two authorities to legitimize the term "cultural Marxism". One is a paper by Douglas Kellner; the other is a paper by William S. Lind. The first is problematic because it was never published; thus, it did not pass through peer review, and hence is not a reliable primary source. As for the second, I see three problems with it. (1) This paper appears in a book which, as far as I can tell from Googling, was never published. (2) Even if it had been published, it would not have been a scholarly work, and hence would not have been a reliable source. (3) The WP article claims that Lind is a historian, but he only has a Master's in history, so he is not really a historian. (Articles by Lind appeared in CounterPunch which I found to be highly informative. They dealt with 4GW, a topic I am interested in, since that is what the USG has unleashed on the Ukraine. Thus, it should be noted that Lind is an erudite American military type, not a loon.)

This article has no place in an encyclopedia, so I see it as my duty to help eliminate it. But I ask you to continue with your efforts in this regard, since you have much more experience with Misplaced Pages procedures than I. – Herzen (talk) 21:14, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm not a particular fan of Marcuse. Adorno, Horkheimer, and Benjamin are quite dear to me. As far as later stuff is concerned, I gravitate toward Althusser. I'm also of the opinion that the ideas of Derrida and Butler are natural extensions of Marxism, but that's another story for another day. As far as the article, I'm aware of everything you wrote. I was not at first, because I didn't take the time to go through it with a fine-tooth comb. However, I agree that it must be eliminated. The first place to start is removing all of the non-RS bunk. The second thing to do is get consensus for a merger. I fear I don't have the energy to counter a flood of rightist SPAs, however. RGloucester — ☎ 22:04, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Interview with Romano Prodi (former president of EU commission)

Hello, Herzen! Do you think that this inverview: could be included in any article concerning to the Ukrainian situation? Thanks for reading! Mondolkiri1 (User talk:Mondolkiri1) 03:10, 1 November 2014 (GMT)

I direct this to you, since, by what I've seen, you've been the only reasonable voice from the (I'd be glad not to call it pro-Russian) Novororossiyan (or Donbassian, whatever side), since most of the other editors (including RGloucester, I admire him, but I must aknowledge), are very lenient towards the Ukrainian side, when it's a fact, sustained by a lot of independent sources, that the Ukrainian government hasn't been any better than the insurgent side. I guess (though I'm not absolutely sure), Iryna Harpy would agree with this. I'm neither anti-Russian or anti-Ukrainian. I'm just anti-international-interefence in issues that have directly neither to do with any EU country (though I'm myself a Eurosceptic) or USA.Mondolkiri1 (User talk:Mondolkiri1) 05:14, 1 November 2014 (GMT/Lisbon/London/Dublin/Casablanca Time)

Herzen, if we are (as you are) pro-Novorossiyan, or neutral (as I am, and maybe also Iryna Harpy, though I'm not sure), we have to deal with the bias in the English Misplaced Pages... And we'll have to deal with it... And let me be clear, what I say is absolutely correct: I support the self-determination of Crimea and Donbass, independently (not exclusively by Russia, and not exlusively by the West or the Ukrainian govt... let's say other INDEPENDENT democratic countries like Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, for instance). Under such supervising, I support a new Crimean referendum and a referendum about Donbass (either if it is about continuing to belong to Ukraine as it has been, to be a federation, to be independent, to be federalized with Russia or to be a part of Russia without federalization, actually). Iryna Harpy has more experience than I have about Misplaced Pages (whenever someone calls a WP rule, I still, generally have to look what does it mean, since I've only been an editor since January... and she knows a lot and she's neutral, I can tell you... RGloucester, more pro-Anglo-Saxonic views). Thanks for reading! Mondolkiri1 (User talk:Mondolkiri1) 05:49, 1 November 2014 (GMT/Lisbon/London/Dublin/Casablanca Time)

I wish I won't edit anything else about this bullshit ... not even if it would have a less favourable position concerning to Russia. The interest of USA about Ukraine is not about USA (as it never was). I refuse to participate in this circus. I know that USA is playing with Ukrainian dead people to play their own dirty game of power. As a European left-winger, supporting Alexis Tsipras I refuse that! I support Iryna, absolutely, but I refuse the arrogance of RGloucester! I rest my case (I'm Portuguese, Agnostic, Latin, living in Setúbal, 40 kms South of Lisbon, with the phone 932352942 of Portugal. if I can't communicate further! I hope I can!.. Good morning from Portugal, with a lot of Ukrainians, and a lot of Russian-speaking Ukrainians! :)Mondolkiri1 (User talk:Mondolkiri1) 08:11, 1 November 2014 (GMT/Lisbon/London/Dublin/Casablanca Time)

@Mondolkiri1: If you are a European left-winger, you should be supporting Russia 100%. Yet you constantly lump Russia together with the US and the EU, which means that you see Russia as being no better than the US or the EU. That makes you just as biased against Russia as RGloucester in my book, so your criticizing him for holding "pro-Anglo-Saxonic views" is hypocritical. And I find really annoying that you keep on saying that the people of Crimea should be given a chace to make a choice. The people of Crimea had a referendum, and they voted to reunify with Russia. Until you admit that simple fact, I see no point in working with you. Refusal to admit that fact is unambiguous evidence that you have strong anti-Russian bias. – Herzen (talk) 19:11, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

@Herzen: My position is not concerning to Russia, it's concerning to the self-determination of people in Donbass and Crimea (and elsewhere, when it makes any sense). Putin is not any left-wing guy, whatsoever, why should I support him, based on my ideological principles? Mondolkiri1 (talk) 19:12, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Putin and Russia

In my view, no Marxist could ever support Russia. No Marxist could ever support a state that has a military, or that makes weapons, or that puts human lives at risk for the sake of material gain. No Marxist could support a state that leaves the vast majority of the rural population in abject poverty. No Marxist could support a state that puts ethnicity and language before humanity. RGloucester — ☎ 20:07, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

@RGloucester: Let's leave Marx out of this. Marx was a failed left Hegelian, who came up with a totalizing ideology very useful for justifying suppression. The case for the Left supporting Russia is simple. After the USSR fell apart, the US began a program to impose neoliberalism universally and to destroy countries which did not fall into line. Russia has emerged as the main obstacle to US hegemony and the unipolar world order that the US wants to preserve indefinitely. Thus, not supporting Russia entails supporting Anglo-American imperialism and neoliberalism. Why would any "Marxist" want to support those? – Herzen (talk) 21:46, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

First of all the major obstacle to unchallenged US hegemony is China and not Russia. Second the notion that "supporting Russia" is supporting US hegemony or imperialism is roughly at level of Bush's "either you are with us or against us". Not to mention that plenty of foreign policy "blowbacks" and historical diasters are based on such a scheme. If you want to challenge US hegemony than challenge it with a better alternative rather than with clone or even worse version of it. Or let it implode from within. Note that all these systems justify their action by external threats, meaning having multipolar world with US, China, Russia and alike is likely to perpetuate a bad situation rather than fixing it.--Kmhkmh (talk) 16:53, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

If I had to choose solely between Putinist fascism and neoliberal imperialism, I'd choose neoliberal imperialism. Obviously, neither of these are favourable in my view. However, from a "lesser of two evils" perspective, Russia is purely indefensible. I strongly agree that the neoliberalisation campaign that the US, World Bank, and IMF have been waging since the late 80s is abhorrent. I agree that neoliberalism is the scourge of this world. However, a potentially much worse scourge would be the return of 20th century fascist cronyism, and that's what Putin represents. He takes all the worst parts of 20th century ideology, such as revanchism, nationalism, religious exclusionism, corporatism, nostalgic conservatism, and material expansionism, and combines them all into a disgusting pile of tripe. RGloucester — ☎ 21:55, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

@RGloucester: Can you give me some references documenting that there is such a thing as "Putinist fascism", please? The idea that such a thing exists is loony Russophobia. Next thing I know, you are going to propose that the Putinism article (which I just found out about) be renamed to "Putinist fascism".

Seriously, since Putin has definitely left his imprint on Russia, when you say Putin is fascist, you say that today's Russia is fascist. That is a very serious accusation. Please back it up or stop going off on Russophobic rants. To consider just one of your claims: how does Russia engage in "religious exclusionism"? According to Russiapedia (but not, unsurprisingly, English Misplaced Pages, which is so infested with Russophobia that the Russophobia article has been renamed), "Four religions are official: Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Judaism". How do you think Putin is going to change that, to make Orthodoxy the sole official religion? – Herzen (talk) 22:47, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

"Russophobia" would imply I have something against Russia, or maybe samovars. I don't. I do, however, hold Putin accountable for his actions. I'm stating my opinion, which requires no references. I see the tactics that Putin has used in his own country and elsewhere as emulations of a certain fascist idea, with a modern twist. Anyway, I strongly dislike masculinity, so I've been pre-programmed to hate his little shirtless escapades. RGloucester — ☎ 22:50, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

"Strongly dislike masculinity"? Masculinity is a significant part of human reality. Since you reject reality, I no longer find it puzzling that you believe that there is such a thing as "Putinist fascism". – Herzen (talk) 23:15, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "human reality". There is only the reality that we construct. If we choose to construct a bad reality, we must deal with the consequences of that choice. And, of course, there is always the option to construct a different reality, if we're willing to put in the effort. RGloucester — ☎ 23:16, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

That we construct reality does not mean that that reality is not true in an objective sense. And by bashing Russia, you are working for the 0.01% to keep the people of the world who are not the super wealthy in chains. – Herzen (talk) 23:38, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm of the opinion that there is no objective reality, but that's a different matter. Uh, are you kidding about this ".01 percent" rubbish? Do you think that the present nature of the Russian state structure isn't a money-obsessed, greed-based, grandiose nonsense? What about Putin's "little" palace on the Black Sea? RGloucester — ☎ 23:45, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Putin made an important speech recently which the Anglophone press has trashed. I haven't watched it yet; I'll get back to you after I do. (That link btw is to the blog of a Dutchman who hates two things more than anything else: Atlanticism and Islamism.) – Herzen (talk) 00:39, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

SaintAviator

User:SaintAviator Forum contribution on MH17 transfered:

Agree Herzen, I mean I like WP in general, but its articles like this with sections like 'Causes' that bring WP down. What does not amaze me anymore is trying to get it unbiased and NPOV. It wont happen. People tend to want to keep what they wrote. Its WPs big failure. Thats one of the reasons people dont take some WP articles seriously and indeed WP itself. I dont know if it started out better or became this way. It is what it is, but definitely its these high stakes articles that are a fail. For instance trying to even closes down discussion of an important piece of evidence. What should happen in a NPOV article is mention there was no plume trail, videotaped to date. The second plane theory gets an airing. That sort of thing. Frankly its disturbing. SaintAviator lets talk 09:13, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

We have a problem with Alexpl. Seems to like to control things. . I reverted this, he took it off the talk page and put it here. I have warned him. Really, its poor behaviour. Do you know some good Mods SaintAviator lets talk 10:41, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

@SaintAviator: There are problems with more than one editor of the MH17 article. I agree with you that Alexpl should not have moved your comment to my Talk page (in violation of guidelines), but little actual harm was done. I'm more concerned about articles than what happens in Talk pages.

I don't know any mods. I didn't get into Misplaced Pages in a big way where I have to carefully interact with other users until this Ukraine crisis began.

I hope you will keep on watching the MH17 article! – Herzen (talk) 00:45, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

I see you have made a comment in the RfC about putting a POV tag on the MH17 article. I got into an edit war, putting a POV back in, for which I was reported by a malicious user for violating a technicality. There are too many editors who are opposed to a POV tag being put on that article, so there's no point trying.
My principle reservation about the article has always been that it maintains the fiction that there is only one possibility of who downed the plane. The new "Criminal investigation" section, however clearly states that there are two theories/scenarios. I see that as significant progress.
The lead and the "Cause" section are still wildly unbalanced, unfortunately. I would much appreciate any effort you made to grapple with those problems. The Ukraine related articles have a tendency to mention discredited information on the grounds that it was once considered to be newsworthy; the MH17 article suffers from that in a major way. – Herzen (talk) 01:13, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

It is a mess, like Ghouta. Almost hopeless. But I will keep an eye on things. ;) SaintAviator lets talk 03:25, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

@SaintAviator: I see you're digging up references. I've tracked news stories about MH17 fairly closely, and tried to add them to this article when I found them to be noteworthy, so I don't think your putting forward sources (unless they are new, i.e., from the last few days) is going to be very productive. A main problem with the article as I see it is that it has an awful lot of speculation and narrating of hearsay all to the effect that the rebels shot the plane down with a Buk missile. So maybe what we should be doing now is going through the article with a fine tooth comb (I have to admit that I find it very hard to force myself to actually read the article; it is full of so much rubbish) to see what we can get removed. – Herzen (talk) 07:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes theres some OK sources with good info pointing to the second theory. I wonder if the others know what 'critical thinking' even is? SaintAviator lets talk 08:11, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

@SaintAviator: I doubt it. Are you referring to the discussion I had earlier with Iryna Harpy? Because I wrote above:

To hazard a guess, I would say that the underlying problem here is that Western schools and universities don't teach critical thinking skills anymore.

Editors here are very quick to pounce on "Russian propaganda", especially RT. Yet they seem to be completely unaware that they are being subjected to US propaganda. (I'm talking about the Western editors here, not the eastern European ones who feel that their people have been oppressed by Russia.) – Herzen (talk) 08:26, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes it reads like that, like a 2nd rate newspaper, not an encyclopedia SaintAviator lets talk 08:41, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

I didnt know you spoke to Iryna, I enjoy her scathing replies to transgressors. BTW IMHO Iryna Harpy is the funniest, smartest warmest fairest astute editor on WP. And I dont want anything Iryna ;) SaintAviator lets talk 08:44, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

SCREEECH! Just flapping by to say hello, guys. I'm on my way to keep an eye out on this thread in order to keep this blog out of the article. Apparently, the academic who writes it is being conveniently elevated to an a world renowned 'expert' for the sake of POV. Incidentally, DYK that there is no evidence that harpies were house-trained? Off to drop some more pearls of wisdom, if needs be. Cheers for now! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:23, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

ROARRRRRRRR. Herzen, good luck with it, you have good points, but not the numbers. Im just too busy for a huge war. I gave it a low yield try but ahhh to much emotion involved. SaintAviator lets talk 04:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@SaintAviator: Well, thanks for trying. Drop by again sometime. Herzen (talk) 05:23, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

One more thing. The US now has a Nuclear first strike policy. I do admit to wanting WP to be not so US POV. SaintAviator lets talk 09:02, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Slow edit war

You've made essentially the same revert seven times in the past several days. Please stop this slow edit war. If it continues I'll let you pick your sanction: a 48 hour block, a 2-month 0RR restriction on the article, or a 2-month topic ban. ~Adjwilley (talk) 00:54, 8 November 2014 (UTC)