perestroika

It’s very clear that putin is a symptom and the cause is russian society (not every single person of course, but the overwhelming majority).

To some degree, I agree - but a detailed view is beneficial.

I'll give the diagnosis first: Russia remains an empire with suppressed regions and suppressed ethnic groups. This feature almost guarantees that whoever rules will worry about separatism, is likely to grant lots of power to 3-letter agencies -> this means they're available to repress domestic opposition.

The progression of the disease can be observed.

1980-ties: everyone was tired of the USSR being in stagnation and falling behind, preference for democracy became widespread, Gorbachev attempted reforms but lost control of the economy, allowed free elections and subsequently lost all authority (personality profile: he was economically incorruptible but also incompetent, and also an inefficient organizer).

1991: seeing Gorbachev lose control, the August coupers temporarily ousted him, but ended up triggering the dissolution of the USSR, since parallel power was already well developed on the level of individual SSRs (in Russia, it was vested in Yeltsin), but preference for democracy was still widespread in society. Military units disobeyed, people came to protest by large numbers.

1990-ties: everyone got tired of economic turmoil, corruption and organized crime. Yeltsin entered a power struggle with the Supreme Soviet and during the constitutional crisis, used military force against the parliament. He was still popular, but enacted reforms to give the president unchecked power. I would suggest that Yeltsin's personality profile might have been "corrupt alcoholic with good instincts but despotic tendencies, average organizer". Yeltsin knew his health was failing and popularity fading - he selected Putin, installed Putin and booted Putin up. And started giving three letter agencies unchecked power to fight Chechen separatism.

Half-diagnosis: it could have been different if the decision had been made to let Chechnia go. The decision to use armed forces to subdue separatism catalyzed both the arrival of Putin (he had a suitable profile to manage suppression) and created the environment for things to happen his way.

(At this point in the narrative, the agency of society starts decreasing and the agency of one guy starts increasing.)

2000s: the only period when the economy actually improved. Putin got the credit and was viewed as a saviour, despite having done little to achieve this. He welcomed the power Yeltsin handed him, protected Yeltsin and his accomplices from any review or prosecution, allowed Yeltsin's family to keep stolen riches and let the ex-president die in peace. Meanwhile, he staffed media, law enforcement and armed services with loyal people, surrounded himself with accomplices and created a party (United Russia) to pretend democracy. The general population was experiencing economic improvement and were politically illiterate, they just let it happen. A characterization of Putin during this decade might be: efficient, motivated, corrupt, good organizer. Since nearly everyone was corrupt, nearly everyone could be blackmailed to comply. Every business oligarch or local leader could be told "we know what you're doing, you could be charged 10 times over, but if you obey, we'll let you continue doing it". Personally, I think this approach was crucial. IMHO this was the recipe Russia was taken over with - Putin became the grand vizier of corruption. His hierarchy accepted it, controlled it and licensed it for obedience.

(At this point, opposition still existed and its main organizers weren't threatened with death, but the playing field was already tilted against them.)

2008: war against Georgia boosted Putin's ratings. "I have mastered the art of a small successful war" might have been his conclusion.

2010s: economic crisis hit the world and likewise hit Russia. Discontent appeared because living standards were dropping. Taking over the last bits of media was a struggle, resistance appeared. Elections could be already "won" without the people consenting (central TV and vote counting was under "good" control). Putin ran out of terms, but was not ready to drop pretenses. He needed cover and let Medvedyev rule for one term, then resumed presidency. The party he had created was handy for this purpose.

2014: revolution in Ukraine opened a window of opportunity, Putin calculated correctly that annexing Crimea without much resistance would bring him popularity as a military victor. Media was already fully controlled and presented him as such for maximum effect. Ukraine was unable to mount a defense. Western sanctions were half-assed. There was no downside, no punishment for the deed. "I have mastered the art of annexation," might have been his conclusion. But he was growing old and increasingly surrounded by yes-men. He most likely started approving orders to kill opposition leaders, and some were indeed killed. The last effective opposition leader might have been Nemtsov. Navalny and Kara-Murza already had no hope, but tried regardless.

2022: threat of catching COVID has made Putin extremely isolated. Perhaps he'd become aware of being mortal and wanted to leave a legacy. Perhaps circles of yes-men assured him that yes-they-could (in three days). One thing could have still happened: the West (which had started raising defense spending in 2014, after Crimea) could have mounted a convincing deterrence. The West could have said "we'll do everything it takes to keep Ukraine intact" and it would have worked. But the West did an unconvincing deterrence. Ukrainians probably didn't fully believe he'd try to conquer, because they kind of knew his troops were too little to conquer them. And it started.

At this point, any critic could be labeled a traitor and disposed of in a wide variety of ways. People's agency had reached a minimum. As the state ran into a dead end and Ukraine proved such a tough cookie to bite, people's agency started very slowly rising, because he needs to arm a certain amount of people and the low-ranking loyal are increasinly dead. But it has not risen anywhere appreciable. :(

The ultimate problem, I think, is that people have been indifferent to injustice (as long as they have bread and circus), easy to manipulate (illiterate about politics and propaganda) and really poorly informed about world affairs (many haven't ever traveled abroad, and speak no foreign language).

The task of manipulation becomes even easier if they have chip on their shoulder (e.g. perceived indignity of historical collapse). And even easier if large groups consume information only from Russian language TV - it can be taken over and used to brainwash them.

Now, after 2 decades of increasing deception / repression, they're trapped. If they want out, they need to overthrow their institutions, but very few are capable of wanting that. Of my anarchist comrades, most are in exile or hiding, or in prison.

Levada's recent study, unless I recall wrong, showed wide consensus among groups (even the "I don't approve of Putin" group) that economic protest is not likely (less than 20% considered it possible) and political protest is even harder (I think this indicator was below 15%). Apparently extra bad in Moscow. In the regions, you might find space to disagree, but Moscow has central institutions, gets policed harder and excempted from burdensome measures. Putin wants the capital to be particularly safe for his reign.

I don't know what will get him out, but speeches like the articles describes - will not. But it's nice if people try. A challenge of some kind, even if doomed to fail, raises the social temperature at least a bit.

Please note: he held the speech inside Russia, to a regional assembly of representatives. Massive compromises to avoid getting dragged off stage in 30 seconds.

It's OK to blame him for making those compromises. His speech is an experiment at testing limits / inciting to action. One starts testing limits with small steps and feels if the water is too hot without jumping in (because maybe it's boiling).

However, it is unwise to think that those are his innermost thoughts. He'll keep those to himself... and for saying what he considered possible to say and did say - he will sadly be charged and found guilty.

The essence of his point? "Russia can't win. Ukraine can't win either. Putin has painted himself into a corner and won't stop. Use your influence to stop him in a way that offers him a way out."

This is arguably naive of him to propose, but the only thing he can propose in public, without getting charges of treason heaped on him really fast.

From a viewpoint outside of Russia, yes, his speech was a joke. But I respect that he did hold it, knowing that he'll be charged of something. Outside of Russia, he could have done better holding a speech asking for donations to the AFU. In there, you cannot do that. For some reason, he has decided to stay in there. I guess he believes that some opportunity for action will be available at some time.

I have held off commenting on this disaster since I could not understand what happened to get so many killed.

Having seen the photo The Guardian published, I can now comment. "Egg rack" insulation foam (likely polyethylene or polyurethane foam or something comparably combustive) - added to the ceiling to achieve favourable sound absorption for performing music - is incredibly dangerous.

For a fast chemical reaction, you need:

• material that melts easily
• large surface area and porosity (coned foam is porous and has large surface area)

Contributors to the casualty numbers likely were: narrow exit passage, overpopulation, intoxicated people. Sadly I suspect that a considerable number of victims died due to crowd crush. If 200 people are trying to evacuate a space and one stumbles on the stairs, crowd crush is what follows, and very few get to evacuate after that. :(

Condolences to friends and family. I hope that injured people will heal. Criminal liability for the installers of the material seems almost inevitable.

If you see a music venue that accommodates more than a handful guests practising egg rack foam, tell them to remove it unless they can prove it's fire retardant. If they don't, sadly I must advise contacting a local fire department preventively, to have such materials removed. A note about styrofoams: most of them are a class F material from a fire safety perspective - almost as bad. Needs to be covered with something from a far higher fire resistance class.

Notes: combustion test of PU foam, untreated vs. fire retardant

He's 82 years old. You lose fear of height in that age. Lucky ones keep enough sense to effectively criticize stuff. He seems one of them.

To buy tech from China, they need exchangeable currency. To get that, they need to sell products or resources worth something. But their ability to sell that is limited by labour shortage (getting a million men killed or injured + diverting a lot of labour into arms manufacturing) and by resource shortages (Ukrainian "sanctions by drone" and other kinds of sanctions).

War is very expensive because an opponent won't pay money for the goods one delivers them, but the goods are high tech and need to be delivered in high volume.

The vessel Fitburg, operated by a Turkish company Albros Shipping and Trading, crewed by citizens of Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, which MarineTraffic indicates should have the flag of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, according to the article actually flew the flag of Saint Kitts and Nevis, and claimed to be sailing from St. Petersburg to Haifa (there is little doubt that it came from St. Petersburg, actual destinations may change during voyage).

Ship ID: https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:402709

It was caught with its anchor trailing in water.

It had passed over several data cables (one of which broke) and was approaching the gas pipeline which a previous sabotage ship broke in a previous year, when Finnish coast guards boarded it with a ship and helicopter.

(The previous case is still in court and Finnish law might need to be modified as courts say they don't have jurisdiction over the case. To the GRU, unfortunately, "we don't have jurisdiction" can be misunderstood as "please hire someone to do it again, it's a safe and fun passtime". They have somewhat biased reading skills like that.)

A reasonably detailed article from the Estonian public broadcaster:

Finland detains vessel after cable damaged between Tallinn and Helsinki

Interesting hypothesis, but I'm not convinced. I would need to see some kind of backup for this sentence:

Authorities later identified them as housings for VM-4SG nuclear reactors.

Russia has a rail connection to North Korea and most submersible reactors are small enough to transport by rail. We can determine the dimensions of a submarine-based reactor using this article: "Rare Look At Nuclear Reactor Inside Russian Ballistic Missile Submarine". Using the foot of the sailor for reference, we can conclude it's pretty compact - it would fit on a rail carriage. This seems to remove a rational motive for transporting by sea, putting the component within reach for other states.

The parts visible on the aft deck were very likely to be nuclear reactor parts - reactor covers for a Project 10510 icebreaker they're building. Large ones, not something you put on a submarine. The only possible consumer would be a large vessel.

In the middle of the ship, there were two large cranes. Also intended for Vladivostok, which was suffering from logistical backlog. Consequently, we can be pretty sure it was sailing towards the Far East and likely would have visited Vladivostok first - to get rid of the cranes and reactor covers.

What was in the hold - I wonder if anyone knows.

North Korea is in the far east, there's no denying that.

It should be noted that North Korea is building a nuclear submarine. It seems to resemble the ancient Russian "Golf" class ships, but isn't a direct copy. So they would definitely need nuclear reactor parts, but the ship seems mostly completed - it should already have a reactor inside.

Technical note: in a type 10510 icebreaker, two reactors sit on the top deck side by side (for ease of maintenance) and Ursa Major / Sparta / whatever its name currently was - it was carrying two components resembling a reactor cover. In a nuclear submarine, the reactor (or several) is embedded deep in the hull. When you start painting the hull of a submarine (and NK has started), you generally must have a reactor installed. This does not preclude them wanting a better reactor for a next generation sub.

I'm surprised that someone still practises the ancient art of physical brick-and-mortar bank heist. I guess the bank was also surprised.

First, in Germany, governent does not "abolish basic welfare support", as government has no such authority. Bundestag (parliament) passes laws, which government may propose. The federal budget is a law passed every year, outlining next year's revenues and expenses. This article seems to discuss the federal budget. I should note: news about passing the budget is 1 month late, we read about it on November 28.

Also, this is quite a biased reading of this year's federal budget. I would say it's approximately 50% disinformation. Especially sentences like:

"These attacks on working people can only be understood in connection with the pro-war policy and Germany’s grasp for world power."

Reality check: the neigbour of Germany's neighbour is being invaded. War is occurring about 1000 km away and has the potential to arrive fast. Germany has been pursuing a policy of pacifism for decades. With the US, under Trump, showing disregard for international law and pressuring Ukraine instead of Russia, Germany has had a rude awakening and is indeed raising defense expenditure. Mostly by borrowing, because passing the bill directly to citizens would shock them.

The author, Marianne Arens, is from some small Troskyist political party. I'm not sure if she's paid from Russia. She might be capable of writing in this style on her own. But I propose some more neutral sources:

Germany: the 2026 budget and rising debt

What Germany's 2026 federal budget means for you

For general context, quoting from the first source:

The federal budget for 2026, adopted by the Bundestag, envisages expenditure of €524.5 billion – €21.5 billion more than in 2025 (see ‘Germany’s budget: increased investment and debt’) – made possible by further increases in borrowing, which will rise by €98 billion next year. As in previous years, the largest share is allocated to social welfare benefits (mainly pension subsidies), accounting for 38% of total expenditure.

Quoting from the second source:

A draft of Germany's federal budget for 2026 was agreed on in the early hours of Thursday by the government's budget committee.

The total planned expenditure stands at €524.5 billion, which is €4 billion more than initially anticipated.

New borrowing will reach nearly €98 billion in the core budget, with overall new debt – factoring in special funds for defence and infrastructure – exceeding €180 billion.

My comment: when a state needs more revenue, raising taxes in unpopular. It's easier to borrow. Especially if the special circumstance (named "Putin") can be imagined to go away after some time.

A significant feature is the increase in aid to Ukraine, which will rise by €3 billion to €11.5 billion. Other notable allocations include €800 million in subsidies for climate-friendly home heating, and €50 million to support home renovations for the elderly and disabled -- although this is less generous than a popular federal program it replaces.

My comment: since Trump stopped supporting Ukraine, European counties are moving to replace the US in that field. This costs actual money. Very little money. COVID relief cost about 800 billion for Europe. Supporting Ukraine costs about 100 billion per year. Germany is a big contributor with 11.5 billion this year.

The draft budget was finalised in a “reconciliation meeting” (Bereinigungssitzung) in which government leaders negotiate remaining disputes and amendments to the draft budget before it's presented to the German parliament (Bundestag) for the final parliamentary vote. According to German media reports, in this case the meeting dragged on for 15 hours.

This step, scheduled for a session to take place at the end of November, is widely seen as a formality because the black-red coalition has enough seats to pass the budget on their own.

What does the budget mean for you?

For residents in Germany, the most immediate impacts of the latest changes will be felt in mobility, long-term care contributions and heating costs.

Climate-friendly home heating subsidies

From next year, €800 million will be available to help homeowners, companies and municipalities switch to climate-friendly heating systems.

Subsidies can cover 30 percent to 70 percent of installation costs, with extra bonuses for installing efficient heat pumps, replacing old systems early, and also for lower-income households.

Applications must be made via the KfW portal and require a contract with a specialist heating company.

My comment: I guess the subsidies for switching over to ecologically sustainable heating are the "handouts to the rich". Good grief.

Social care

In a last-minute decision, an additional loan of €1.7 billion was approved for long-term care insurance on top of the €1.5 billion already planned, with the aim of preventing any increase in contributions for nursing care and health insurance at the start of next year.

Chancellor Friedrich Merz told the press that these contributions would remain stable.

The measure is intended to provide immediate financial relief for people reliant on social care, addressing concerns about rising costs and ensuring continued support for vulnerable groups.

My comment: they are borrowing to avoid people having to pay more. Having to pay more is incredibly unpopular everywhere. I guess this is "slashing" social security.

Sadly, brainwashing works. Brainwashing + threat of violence = obedient population. :(

De-programming these kids is going to take a little time. Fortunately you can't make a kid heavily invested in such ideas easily - they grow, find new passtimes, unless constantly pounded with propaganda, some (maybe even most) will heal eventually. Getting adults to come to their senses is likely much harder.

But there has to be an environment that enables healing. One such environment would be a coup or revolution deposing Putin, and a subsequent government saying there was a big mistake (even if they don't admit everything).

Meanwhile, there will soon be a million veterans telling their stories. Some will tell exaggerations and rationalizations, but some will tell how things happened - and evidence will favour only those folks.

Still, I would not hope for a quick return of sense. In the current situation, I would think 10 years of brain damage has been already dealt for sure.

It doesn't burn as well as oil refineries, has only symbolic value and is likely 10 x better protected than an average strategic industrial site.

However, sending one or two drones irregularly - with no hope of arrival, just to keep the air defense launchers stationed there - that would make sense.

In year 2025, a foreign minister looking slightly like a horse makes a claim without video evidence.

I will first believe that a two-humped camel has been sighted in the forests of occupied Donbas. At least the video showed a camel and a forest, even if I don't know if it was Donbas. :)