Russia invades Ukraine

[hwhatting]

(I wonder what Kadryov is thinking. Is he just happy that a rival is gone? Surely a part of his brain is mulling over what Prigozhin got right or wrong.)

The calculations are different for him, though - on the plus side compared to Prigozhin, he has his own feudal territory and a power base in Chechnya; on the other hand, I guess most Russians, including those who count in the security services and armed forces, would react quite differently to Chechen troops following the orders of a Chechen warlord marching on Moscow compared to Wagner mercenaries who are seen as Russian troops fighting for a Russian player. If Kadyrov feels that he's losing the support of Putin, his play most likely would be to hole up in Chechnya, maybe declare independence.

[zompist]

From A.Z. Foreman, on Twitter:

The major weakness of Wagner is trying to pull off improbable plots, combined with a tendency to wildly overdo the drama

True in Germany in the 1800s

True in Russia today

[rotting bones]

The 4D chess speculation that's floating around is that Putin was trying to flush out potential traitors by dangling Prigozhin as an alternative. Personally, I think stongmen only do this kind of thing in movies unless they have their back to the wall.

I've forgotten pretty much everything about Russia, but I think Prigozhin is serving himself up as Putin's number one successor, and Putin swallowed it.

[WeepingElf]

From A.Z. Foreman, on Twitter:

The major weakness of Wagner is trying to pull off improbable plots, combined with a tendency to wildly overdo the drama

True in Germany in the 1800s

True in Russia today

That's great!

[hwhatting]

The 4D chess speculation that's floating around is that Putin was trying to flush out potential traitors by dangling Prigozhin as an alternative. Personally, I think stongmen only do this kind of thing in movies unless they have their back to the wall.

I'm with you on this.

I've forgotten pretty much everything about Russia, but I think Prigozhin is serving himself up as Putin's number one successor, and Putin swallowed it.

I rather think he was milking his relationship with Putin as much as he could, and trying to knock out the competition for Putin's favour. Constantly attcking the army and other players at the court made him no friends, and when his troops weren't able to achieve the breakthroughs at the front he had promised, they started coming for him. He must either have grossly miscalculated what he can achieve or have been really desperate to go for mutiny to knock out his rivals.
The only reason I can see for Putin to allow him and his men to leave (for now) is that stopping Wagner with what troops and equipment could be scraped together quickly proved impossible, and taking them out would have required moving siginificant troop contingents away from the Ukrainian front at a time when Ukraine was probing the frontlines for its expected big counter-attack.
As I said before, Prigozhin is a dead man walking. Those of his troops who won't be able to leave the country will be used as cannon fodder, and for Prigozhin to become Putin's successor, whole bataillons of pigs would need to develop wings and start flying lessons.

[Man in Space]

As I said before, Prigozhin is a dead man walking. Those of his troops who won't be able to leave the country will be used as cannon fodder, and for Prigozhin to become Putin's successor, whole bataillons of pigs would need to develop wings and start flying lessons.

Well…there is that one Pink Floyd album…

[rotting bones]

As I said before, Prigozhin is a dead man walking. Those of his troops who won't be able to leave the country will be used as cannon fodder, and for Prigozhin to become Putin's successor, whole bataillons of pigs would need to develop wings and start flying lessons.

Prigozhin now has the same support with the masochist masses as Putin did. I swear, I think fascists have a parasocial sexual relationship with dear leader.

I don't doubt that Putin is hostile to Prigozhin, but seeing the amount of support Prigozhin has in Russia, it looks to me like he can waltz back in after Putin's death. Him being a successor is not Putin's intention. It's the state of the game board.

[rotting bones]

"Republicans gotta be completely confounded by this one, though, like who do you root for, the Nazis or the other Nazis?"

I heard the official Republican position is that all reports of foreign coups are a distraction from the humongousness of Hunter Biden's cock. I've managed to avoid seeing it so far, but if it's really that great, I might have to Google the image.

[hwhatting]

I don't doubt that Putin is hostile to Prigozhin, but seeing the amount of support Prigozhin has in Russia, it looks to me like he can waltz back in after Putin's death. Him being a successor is not Putin's intention. It's the state of the game board.

He has no support among the Russian elites; they actually hate him. If there is a revolution or turmoil in Russia when Putin goes, he maybe has a chance to be a player; if it's a palace coup against Putin, an orderly succession. or some bigwigs drawing straws after Putin's death, then Prigozhin doesn't have a chance.

[rotting bones]

He has no support among the Russian elites; they actually hate him. If there is a revolution or turmoil in Russia when Putin goes, he maybe has a chance to be a player; if it's a palace coup against Putin, an orderly succession. or some bigwigs drawing straws after Putin's death, then Prigozhin doesn't have a chance.

How will an uncharismatic successor keep winning elections like Putin? If this successor tries to abolish democracy entirely, that's the opening for Prigozhin to make an entrance to save the motherland a second time. Remember how Napoleon returned after a year's exile? Assuming Prigozhin manages to survive imprisonment and a return from exile, I suspect Lukashenko, or whoever is controlling Belarus at the time, will try to extract concessions for Belarus in exchange for their help. That was the custom among monarchs.

Of course, all this is based on analyses I've seen that Putin has been facing a succession crisis. The Russian people hate the oligarchs and the administrators. They love Putin because of a widespread perception that he showed the oligarchs what for. If a charismatic successor turns up just as Putin passes away, that's bad luck for Prigozhin.

[hwhatting]

I think you simply overestimate how much real support Prigozhin has in Russia (in the sense of people ready to go on the streets and even fight for him, not just people buying Wagner meorabilia), and how much of a say the people will have in the succession. If there will be a revolution in the next couple of months, or a civil war, Progozhin may have some kind of chance; but I don't think that's likely. And the longer he sits outside Russia, the less of a chance he will have.
Napoleon was a very succesful, very popular leader for years and forced out by invaders, to be replaced with a monarch who, in the famous phrase, "had forgotten nothing and learnt nothing". Prigozhin is not in that league and not in that situation.

[Torco]

yeah, comparing prigozhin with napoleon a bit far-fetched. besides, this from his communications and the kind of thing one would see in pro-russia and pro-prigozhin telegrams, it felt more like a protest / march / feudal uprising to demand the removal of the vizir, rather than an uprising against the war and the state. as i understand it supplies kept going through rostov-on-don towards the russian troops after he took it. then again, who knows, russia is weird.

i wonder what kind of effect this sort of thing had on the morale of the russian soldiery. is anyone else getting an east india company kind of vibe from wagner ? like, it's a dangerously powerful servant of the state, but the state needs it because it needs the gold it extracts from poor and faraway countries?

[rotting bones]

I think you simply overestimate how much real support Prigozhin has in Russia (in the sense of people ready to go on the streets and even fight for him, not just people buying Wagner meorabilia), and how much of a say the people will have in the succession.

Am I?

1. Prigozhin is a hero in the holy war against Satanic NATO. I read an article saying he still has supporters in the army.

2. Did you see that video of teenagers chanting "Wagner! Wagner!" at the intersections?

3. Russian nationalists have been saying that Prigozhin is now the real president of Russia: https://twitter.com/yasminalombaert/sta ... 9066369024

...

Napoleon was a very succesful, very popular leader for years and forced out by invaders, to be replaced with a monarch who, in the famous phrase, "had forgotten nothing and learnt nothing". Prigozhin is not in that league and not in that situation.

yeah, comparing prigozhin with napoleon a bit far-fetched.

I only meant that it's possible for an ex-leader who still has soldiers in the country to return from exile.

Besides, I thought comparing everyone to Napoleon is just what Marxists do.

besides, this from his communications and the kind of thing one would see in pro-russia and pro-prigozhin telegrams, it felt more like a protest / march / feudal uprising to demand the removal of the vizir, rather than an uprising against the war and the state. as i understand it supplies kept going through rostov-on-don towards the russian troops after he took it. then again, who knows, russia is weird.

It was a protest march. The thing is, he was noticed in an authoritarian state where everyone keeps their head down so as not to challenge Putin.

i wonder what kind of effect this sort of thing had on the morale of the russian soldiery. is anyone else getting an east india company kind of vibe from wagner ? like, it's a dangerously powerful servant of the state, but the state needs it because it needs the gold it extracts from poor and faraway countries?

My impression is that the British government has been driven by purely profit-driven interests for a very long time. IIRC in the beginning, the East India Company toppled empires when the king expressly told them not to. Nothing came of their disobedience. Later, the British fought wars for the express purpose of getting the Chinese addicted to opium. By WWI, the government existed to ratify whatever decisions the business class wanted. While Putin is pro-business, he seems to guard his personal image more zealously than that. I guess a traditional monarch needs to care less about their image since they have the weight of tradition behind them.

[zompist]

My impression is that the British government has been driven by purely profit-driven interests for a very long time. IIRC in the beginning, the East India Company toppled empires when the king expressly told them not to. Nothing came of their disobedience.

Well, nothing except losing a world war with France and losing the vast majority of its colonists in North America, the territory which would go on to the be the richest nation in the world.

(And yes, there's a direct connection. The government had to bail out the EIC to finance its acquisition of Bengal. So it had to raise taxes. Which pissed off its colonies.)

Later, the British fought wars for the express purpose of getting the Chinese addicted to opium. By WWI, the government existed to ratify whatever decisions the business class wanted. While Putin is pro-business, he seems to guard his personal image more zealously than that. I guess a traditional monarch needs to care less about their image since they have the weight of tradition behind them.

This is a pretty weird comparison... if you're counting up sins, Putin's Russia has to be up there pretty high: brutal wars against Chechnya and Syria; meddling in Africa; the invasion of Ukraine; campaigns worldwide to destabilize democracy; the establishment of a fascist dictatorship at home. And do you really think Putin is more popular in Russia than Queen Victoria was in the UK?

The EIC, and the UK raj after it, were nasty pieces of work. But there's no need any more for leftists to be sentimental about Russian colonialism. It's just as nasty and way harder to eradicate.

[rotting bones]

Well, nothing except losing a world war with France and losing the vast majority of its colonists in North America, the territory which would go on to the be the richest nation in the world.

(And yes, there's a direct connection. The government had to bail out the EIC to finance its acquisition of Bengal. So it had to raise taxes. Which pissed off its colonies.)

I meant the EIC continued to operate with impunity.

This is a pretty weird comparison... if you're counting up sins, Putin's Russia has to be up there pretty high: brutal wars against Chechnya and Syria; meddling in Africa; the invasion of Ukraine; campaigns worldwide to destabilize democracy; the establishment of a fascist dictatorship at home. And do you really think Putin is more popular in Russia than Queen Victoria was in the UK?

The EIC, and the UK raj after it, were nasty pieces of work. But there's no need any more for leftists to be sentimental about Russian colonialism. It's just as nasty and way harder to eradicate.

I don't see support for Putin as Leftist. When fascists say they oppose capitalism, they're saying they want a leader who subjectively appears to take no crap from business leaders. This has no relation to what scientific socialism is about. Fascists either don't understand or don't care.

I honestly don't understand what makes you think my post was pro-Putin. Are you sure you want to leap to a reflexive defense of the British monarchy? Even recently, they've been unsavory characters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDW78GWnnBc (Edit: This is not the video I thought it was. It barely discusses the monarchy. Sorry.)

[zompist]

I meant the EIC continued to operate with impunity.

Kind of? I mean, they were eventually dissolved, and the UK slowly dispensed with the fiction that the EIC was running things.

Britain was not really happy with the EIC's shenanigans, but the UK colonial mindset was not up to thinking "This land was acquired deceitfully and will cause us untold problems, we should give it back." The 1700s French were marginally better at deciding when something was a cost sink.

The EIC, and the UK raj after it, were nasty pieces of work. But there's no need any more for leftists to be sentimental about Russian colonialism. It's just as nasty and way harder to eradicate.

I don't see support for Putin as Leftist. When fascists say they oppose capitalism, they're saying they want a leader who subjectively appears to take no crap from business leaders. This has no relation to what scientific socialism is about. Fascists either don't understand or don't care.

Reflexive support for Russia and China should have died circa 1995, but we still see it in some elements of the left.

I'm not saying you are doing it yourself; but I am suggesting that when you look at Britain and chiefly see colonialism, and then look at Russia and don't see the same colonialism, you're still under the influence of tankie thought.

I honestly don't understand what makes you think my post was pro-Putin. Are you sure you want to leap to a reflexive defense of the British monarchy?

I honestly don't understand how "the UK raj [was] a nasty piece of work" is a "reflexive defense of the British monarchy".

As I said, it's a bit weird to compare 1800s Britain with 2000s Russia. But if you insist on doing so, it's even stranger to conclude that the comparison favors Putin.

[Travis B.]

Reflexive support for Russia and China should have died circa 1995, but we still see it in some elements of the left.

Look at all the tankies' bizarre views of the Russo-Ukrainian war, for instance.

[rotting bones]

As I said, it's a bit weird to compare 1800s Britain with 2000s Russia. But if you insist on doing so, it's even stranger to conclude that the comparison favors Putin.

I honestly don't understand what you're talking about. In response to Torco, it was my intention to write a 100% descriptive post about how Putin appeals to fascists vs. the British monarchy not having to care about its apparent helplessness against business interests.

[zompist]

As I said, it's a bit weird to compare 1800s Britain with 2000s Russia. But if you insist on doing so, it's even stranger to conclude that the comparison favors Putin.

I honestly don't understand what you're talking about. In response to Torco, it was my intention to write a 100% descriptive post about how Putin appeals to fascists vs. the British monarchy not having to care about its apparent helplessness against business interests.

To me this sounds like "Is Putin more of a fascist than Picasso is a cubist?" I don't know why you think your comparison shows anything.

[hwhatting]

1. Prigozhin is a hero in the holy war against Satanic NATO. I read an article saying he still has supporters in the army.

2. Did you see that video of teenagers chanting "Wagner! Wagner!" at the intersections?

3. Russian nationalists have been saying that Prigozhin is now the real president of Russia: https://twitter.com/yasminalombaert/sta ... 9066369024

You're extrapolating on a small base of information and temporary sentiments.
The significant thing about the mutiny was that no one shouted "Putin! Putin!" - it is now very clear that Putin's support among the masses and the rank and file of the security forces is very hollow; people have been cowed into not protesting, but nobody is ready to risk life and limb for him when not directly ordered to. That means the next time someone decides to march on Moscow, he*) may be able to force Putin out. But Prigozhin has fled, and lost most of his troops and sources of money; and he has systematically made enemies of everyone else who commands troops over the last year or so. Someone may overthrow Putin, but it won't be Prigozhin, and he also won't be the one to ride in as a white knight and take over when Putin's regime falls apart. I'm ready to bet you 100$.

*) Except if it's Kadyrow.