advertisement


Ukraine II

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm slightly conflicted on this Tchaikovsky thing. I know it is stupid to ban stuff just 'because Russia', and I know it's the start of a slippery slope, so I'm not endorsing the decision. But I can nevertheless understand and respect it. It's the 1812 Overture, which is about a war being fought in the Crimea, it is jingoistic and triumphalist in nature and tone. It has resonance that other Russian work does not, and I think if I were in the audience I would hope for a couple of hours' respite from the cares of worrying about Ukraine, and this would just serve to bring me back to that place.
Say like this: 1812 Overture not banned, but deleted from specific current performance in programming decision, due to specific thematic content. Out of consideration for current audience sensibilities. Not done as a political statement, either in West, or for the completely unlikely benefit of Russia. That would be sensible.
 
Ah, you think tribal genetics are what count? No, I'm being silly. You're working on 'sensitivity,' not logic.

They 'updated' family name Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to British sounding Windsor in 1917, during First World War. As we know, to project the family in UK. In Austria for instance they banned whole royal class and removed 'von' form names (which indicated royal roots).
It was just 105 years ago. In America you call black people African-American, and first slave arrived in America from Africa around 1526.
Btw. Why white people in America are not called European-American?
 
The first couple of minutes of this video explain where Chelski money came from,

What a load of bollocks. Unless we are going to nationalise western resources, this is hypocrisy of the highest order. The idea that Abramovich has stolen assets from the Russian people is as absurd unless we are going to have public ownership of our own assets. Abramovich bought assets at knock down prices in exchange for political support. So did all sorts of institutions who bought newly privatised industries at knock down prices under Thatcher’s selling off of the public resources.

I seem to remember that at the time the vast selling off of Russian assets to private interests was a heralded as victory for the virtues of capitalism, a triumph for liberal democracy.

What utter cant.
 
They 'updated' family name Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to British sounding Windsor in 1917, during First World War. As we know, to project the family in UK. In Austria for instance they banned whole royal class and removed 'von' form names (which indicated royal roots).
It was just 105 years ago. In America you call black people African-American, and first slave arrived in America from Africa around 1526.
Btw. Why white people in America are not called European-American?
All true, but evades the question as to whether tribal genetics are important. I know people often seem to think they are important, but are they really?
 
Seize and sell the flat and donate the money to the Ukraine appeal.

Though in reality will probably be sold at a massive profit to a shell company in the Virgin Islands. Owned by a mysterious Mr L. Avrov.
Allow all Ukrainian refugees a lottery ticket on entry...prizes = confiscated oligarchs properties.
"Last week I was playing football with my friends in the street. This week I own Chelsea"!
 
All true, but evades the question as to whether tribal genetics are important. I know people often seem to think they are important, but are they really?

Opinion depends on the sitting point.
That is true for different scales: nations, races, religions, and single people.

If one would look at the earth from vantage point as Carl Segan once presented, from Voyager space probe far away into solar system, than one needs to think what is all about. We all live on this rocky planet, and instead of living together in peace ,we just argue, judge and fight. I presume that all comes from our evolutionary predispositions, survival of the fittest in some civilized complicated form. Simply saying, we are doomed.


Charlie Chaplin was (I think) fist one to be recorded on TV, who was able to convey those thoughts in "The Great Dictator". So sad it is still relevant today...
 
Opinion depends on the sitting point.
That is true for different scales: nations, races, religions, and single people.

If one would look at the earth from vantage point as Carl Segan once presented, from Voyager space probe far away into solar system, than one needs to think what is all about. We all live on this rocky planet, and instead of living together in peace ,we just argue, judge and fight. I presume that all comes from our evolutionary predispositions, survival of the fittest in some civilized complicated form. Simply saying, we are doomed.


Charlie Chaplin was I think fist one recorded on TV who was able to convey those thoughts in "The Great Dictator". So sad it is still relevant today...
Good reply, thank-you.

Combining the two, it's a call to use our minds to intentionally evolve in the way Chaplin envisions. Consciousness is key.
With consciousness, one might remember not to slur people with reference to their ethnic ancestry.
 
I think the theatrical canon fire the piece calls for was a bit of a non starter given the circumstances. They could have substituted another Tchaikovsky composition, something calming like Serenade for Strings.

These kind of arguments always come back to where to draw the line. I take Tony's point about book burning. For me, the line is where the Russian state profits. I would temporarily ban any state-sponsored enterprise, including cultural. If the moral argument applies to oil, then it also applies also to ballet, orchestra and other touring companies. Anything that helps to fund Putin's war effort, no matter how small, should be banned.
 
Say like this: 1812 Overture not banned, but deleted from specific current performance in programming decision, due to specific thematic content. Out of consideration for current audience sensibilities. Not done as a political statement, either in West, or for the completely unlikely benefit of Russia. That would be sensible.

1812 is a russian try to kill your hifi.
 
Allow all Ukrainian refugees a lottery ticket on entry...prizes = confiscated oligarchs properties.
"Last week I was playing football with my friends in the street. This week I own Chelsea"!
They could accommodate many of them on board the yachts and in the apartments
 
Interesting thread on Lavrov's step-daughter.

https://twitter.com/pevchikh/status/1501878715709632518

This stuff is just like a mafia just on a state scale. I see Putin is on TV today saying they will take over the assets and businesses that are exiting Russia. I am sure someone will post the full speech shortly. I was reading an article about Afghanistan today concerning Unicef. The treatment of women and the conditions they are living under compared to the instagram stuff you linked is so incredibly sad. There is a evil to this that is very deep.

Eventually the West will have to intervene it is just a case of what event will be significant enough to make it unavoidable.
 
Abramovich bought assets at knock down prices in exchange for political support. So did all sorts of institutions who bought newly privatised industries at knock down prices under Thatcher’s selling off of the public resources.
The loans for shares scheme in Russia was not an open market arrangement. It was not open to 'retail investors'. It is widely regarded as corrupt. As I understand it, its structure was as follows:
  • at the oligarchs suggestion, the oligarchs (mostly bankers) lent money to the state in order to fend off fiscal collapse before 1996 election
  • in exchange the state loaned interests in state companies to the oligarchs as security, at a knock-down valuation. This was done via rigged auctions (the oligarchs owned the banks running the auctions, and it is likely that they arranged not to bid against each other).
  • the oligarchs knew that Russia would not be able to repay the loans on the terms agreed because the Russian economy was on its knees
All the oligarchs had to do was to use their money and media interest to influence the election, to ensure that Yeltsin beat the resurgent communists. If Yeltsin won, and the state defaulted on the loan repayments, the shares in the companies, taken as 'security', passed into oligarch hands.

The loans for shares scheme is not in any way comparable to the privatisation of the UK's public companies.
 
Say like this: 1812 Overture not banned, but deleted from specific current performance in programming decision, due to specific thematic content. Out of consideration for current audience sensibilities. Not done as a political statement, either in West, or for the completely unlikely benefit of Russia. That would be sensible.

Having read the statement put out by someone on behalf of the orchestra, I don't think they are "banning" anything at all. Its was simply a decision that the playing the particular pieces originally in the program would appear somewhat insensitive at this time. Music by other Russian composers is due to appear later in the season.

As others have commented, German (and Austrian) music certainly was played in Britain during WW2. I don't think this was so true throughout WW1. There is a nice (fictional) account somewhere in the novel "A Room with a View" where an officer persuades other officers to listen to Beethoven, having assured them he was actually Belgian.
 
The loans for shares scheme in Russia was not an open market arrangement. It was not open to 'retail investors'. It is widely regarded as corrupt. As I understand it, its structure was as follows:
  • at the oligarchs suggestion, the oligarchs (mostly bankers) lent money to the state in order to fend off fiscal collapse before 1996 election
  • in exchange the state loaned interests in state companies to the oligarchs as security, at a knock-down valuation. This was done via rigged auctions (the oligarchs owned the banks running the auctions, and it is likely that they arranged not to bid against each other).
  • the oligarchs knew that Russia would not be able to repay the loans on the terms agreed because the Russian economy was on its knees
All the oligarchs had to do was to use their money and media interest to influence the election, to ensure that Yeltsin beat the resurgent communists. If Yeltsin won, and the state defaulted on the loan repayments, the shares in the companies, taken as 'security', passed into oligarch hands.

The loans for shares scheme is not in any way comparable to the privatisation of the UK's public companies.
I’m not saying it wasn’t corrupt, just how corrupt is it compared to what goes on in our own country?

2008? The issuing of corrupt loans designed to fail by a banking network and then that same banking network that was betting on those loans failing? Then bailing out the gamblers that made those bets?
 
This stuff is just like a mafia just on a state scale. I see Putin is on TV today saying they will take over the assets and businesses that are exiting Russia. I am sure someone will post the full speech shortly. I was reading an article about Afghanistan today concerning Unicef. The treatment of women and the conditions they are living under compared to the instagram stuff you linked is so incredibly sad. There is a evil to this that is very deep.

Eventually the West will have to intervene it is just a case of what event will be significant enough to make it unavoidable.
He could do to Russia what Franco did to Spain in the 1930s (as well as the brutal repression) and that’s some kind of closed economic self sufficiency but with conquered territory. Trump tried it with America First. Pharaoh is going to his tomb and he’s taking his slaves with him.
 
Lavrov went full Pyongyang at the negotiating Panto he put on today,

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ganda-in-ukraine-talks?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Lavrov showed a surprising desire to speed up the decoupling of the Russian economy from the west. He said Vladimir Putin was taking care of the Russian economy, and that measures would be taken to ensure “no Uncle Sams” destroyed it. “This should have been done long ago, ” he said, in an implicit admission of the failure to prepare for the inevitable western economic sanctions of the past fortnight.
This time I assure you we will come out of this crisis with a healthier mentality and consciousness since we will not have illusions that the west can be a reliable partner,” he said. Private property and the presumption of innocence had both been violated, he said”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top