Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're arguing against a point he did not make. He said that science does not support the idea that the neo paganism practiced by some Russians today is what was practiced prior to the Christianization of Rus.
As for your religious commentary, it doesn't make sense. I know of no serious religion claiming the universe is 6,000 years old (some adherents probably do but people disagree on everything). In the context of Russia, its Orthodox Church makes no such claim. So you kind of knocked down 2 strawmen there with a false dichotomy thrown in for good mix.
You're right. I went over Maksim's post again and realized what he was talking about.
With religion, it's definitely very tricky as there are so many different interpretations around. My post about religion wasn't specifically targeting the Russian Orthodox Church, but was meant to be more of a general observation about the discrepancy between science and religion.
He said that science does not support the idea that the neo paganism practiced by some Russians today is what was practiced prior to the Christianization of Rus.
Yes it is, thanks!
Modern Slavic paganism was fantasized over the past 30 years.
Da, Russians are the most courageous people I've ever seen. Dangerous situations don't seem to faze them. Not sure how this applies to their Olympic athletes but okay
Putin made Ukraine important to our geopolitical goals. I give him a lot of credit for pushing our two countries closer. As long as they continue reforms, the closeness will continue. There is always the risk that they will backslide though.
Not true.
The US made Ukraine geopolitical goal long before Putin.
If there were no Putin, this goal would have remained the same.
Read Brzezinski pls.
The domestic front is the most important one in my opinion. Citizens care about their livelihood and improving those should be the priority of every government.
It depends.
Sometimes international issues are closely connected to domestic ones, sometimes they don't.
Quote:
If both Sanders and Grudinin are weak on the international front, then they may hold the key to reconciling the differences between the US and Russia.
That train is gone.
Quote:
To a certain extent, though someone covmpared their positions on a number of issues and found out that Clinton's is quite similar to Sanders (90-95%). Sanders ended up backing Hillary in the finals.
Sanders is an "old school" - he did that out of comradery and "good of the party."
Quote:
I think Greece is the original left leaning country to be frank. Many of the civic concepts we take for granted can be traced to them. They were the first to coin the term "democracy" even if their brand differs from what we see today.
No, not really.
Greek democracy was going hand in hand with slavery.
So think of American democracy, coexisting side by side with slavery as well.
"It was a system of direct democracy, in which participating citizens voted directly on legislation and executive bills. Participation was not open to all residents: to vote one had to be an adult, male citizen i.e. neither a foreign resident, slave or a woman."
I would add France to the list as well, since they came up with the notion of "Liberte, Fraternite, Egalite" which equates to Freedom, Brotherhood, Equality in English.
That was a change of formation, from monarchy/aristocracy, to bourgeoisie society. From ultra-right, to more moderate right, that's about it - "fraternite" or not.
Quote:
I don't think Putin's Russia is entirely right wing either, it still has a lot of elements of the left.
Like what?
Quote:
American exceptionalism has been around since at least the end of WW2 and possibly even before, so it's hardly a new thing. To be fair, I can kind of see where it's coming from with the level of obsession with the US found around the world and many countries are still playing catch up with the States.
Yes it has been around for long time, when America had its own novelty and when it was a "promising" country, promising to "transform the world."
Those promises are long gone, yet H. Clinton decided to revive the notion, but exactly why?
Quote:
I mean, I'm defending the US on this forum all the time as I get very irritated when I see people bashing it. I'm fine with criticism and I've got my fair share of them, but if I see people taking cheap shots, it makes my blood boil.
US is just another country, with its own pluses and minuses, and it deserves severe criticism only when some of its people keep on claiming that America is destined to "transform the world," and therefore it has every right to bend the rest of the world to its needs, to make the whole world to serve its interests.
Quote:
Indeed, but it's hard to truly fit into one category. I support most social policies that one would typically associate with the left, yet I draw the line with militant feminism and excessive PC culture. I support feminism in it's original form where the goal was to get women to be socially equal to men, but not the concept of man-hating that is becoming prevalent.
I imagine that women "becoming socially equal to men" was not the end goal after all, and that's where the hatred of men is coming from, and becomes more pronounced.
Quote:
I like certain aspects of PC culture that revolve around raising awareness about different issues, but I get annoyed at it when it becomes too extreme.
And that's what Russians see as a part of cultural decline of the West.
It depends.
Sometimes international issues are closely connected to domestic ones, sometimes they don't.
True
Quote:
That train is gone.
Wrong. History is irrelevant. Politics is all about the alignment of interests. If those two cross paths then they will form an alliance.
Don't think much about history as it's not important. It should only ever be used for educational purposes.
If past wrongdoings were that important, then the US and the UK would never have reconciled their differences as the latter one tried to prevent the first one from gaining independence. Germany would never have been accepted in the EU due to it's role in WW1 & 2.
People use history to justify their beliefs, but those are just emotions running wild, playing tricks with the mind.
History only works if you consider it in it's totality, which means that every event should be given prominence. If that condition cannot be satisfied, then history loses it's value as it becomes a slave to time and humans become chained to the darkness that comes before.
Quote:
Sanders is an "old school" - he did that out of comradery and "good of the party."
He also got quite a bit of flack for it.
Quote:
No, not really.
Greek democracy was going hand in hand with slavery.
So think of American democracy, coexisting side by side with slavery as well.
"It was a system of direct democracy, in which participating citizens voted directly on legislation and executive bills. Participation was not open to all residents: to vote one had to be an adult, male citizen i.e. neither a foreign resident, slave or a woman."
I'm well aware of it's original conception. Nevertheless, it came from the Greeks. The US adopted that when it formed in a manner where it emulated many of it's aspects, including it's exclusionary nature. What I'm getting at, is that the framework for democracy was set a long time ago and it's up to us to play around with it so that we get the optimum results.
BTW, foreign residents are still barred from participating in elections in every country, so the Greek mindset hasn't been totally neglected.
Quote:
That was a change of formation, from monarchy/aristocracy, to bourgeoisie society. From ultra-right, to more moderate right, that's about it - "fraternite" or not.
The same could be said about Russia then. It went from a monarchy to a republic. The French did it well over a century before though, so they went through five different republics. There's a good reason why France is often considered a model country in social development. It exhibits many of the traits found in "free market countries" while still placing an emphasis on social welfare.
Quote:
Like what?
How about healthcare or public transportation?
Quote:
Yes it has been around for long time, when America had its own novelty and when it was a "promising" country, promising to "transform the world."
Those promises are long gone, yet H. Clinton decided to revive the notion, but exactly why?
She's hardly the only politician to use that term. John Kerry used it during his election campaign. Trump's MAGA, on the other hand, implies that the country has fallen from grace and needs to reclaim it's spot.
Quote:
US is just another country, with its own pluses and minuses, and it deserves severe criticism only when some of its people keep on claiming that America is destined to "transform the world," and therefore it has every right to bend the rest of the world to its needs, to make the whole world to serve its interests.
That's known as "Manifest Destiny". The US took over following the end of WW2 and has not had an easy ride since then. We've not had a WW since then, though it may happen at some point. When Europeans were in charge, we had widespread colonialism and two global conflicts. Prior to that, we had conflicts all over the globe. Despite what many news outlet may claim, the world has never been more stable then since the time the US became the dominant power.
The US is also defending the Earth against any incoming asteroid, so humanity's survival may well depend on that.
Quote:
I imagine that women "becoming socially equal to men" was not the end goal after all, and that's where the hatred of men is coming from, and becomes more pronounced.
Feminism got hijacked by the wrong people.
Quote:
And that's what Russians see as a part of cultural decline of the West.
PC in moderation is fine as it raises awareness about issues plaguing fringe groups.
People in Russia are forced going to the rally in order to support mr. Putin against their will. Same story every time - government keep forcing budget workers and students take a part in rally. It only seems to be a nice picture - tonns of people marching along Red Square, smiling and shouting any slogans. A friend of mine was telling me how he participated in a couple of those rally. Though he was given a day off for it. Anyway as long as we are forcibly have to go to that sort of events we never is gonna be democratic country.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
