Thank you for your kind offer, and I will contact you. However, can’t you be persuaded to send them here? Would you mind, Neo? I don’t think I’m the only one who is keenly interested in the Russia factor.

Sergey, your posts are always interesting and informative.

Your reports from Russia are most interesting and helpful. Also, I don’t know if there is any equivalent in Russian political thought, possibly from Czarist times, but your views are perfect expressions of classic Anglo-American conservatism. (No disrespect to the new fangled varieties, Neo-Neo)
Can the gangocracy that you describe last? At some point doesn’t a society, a nation, have to have guiding beliefs, some point for existing? Putin seems to be trying to replant some, a mixture from the USSR and Imperial times.
Is it working? A healthy and sane Russia, attached to the West by ties of religion, culture and interest would be most welcome in these weird and frightening times.

On 14 August 2006, the day the ceasefire was imposed ending Israel’s war in Lebanon against Hizbollah, and just days after police in London arrested a group of people in connection with an alleged plot to blow up transatlantic airliners, President Bush strode to the podium at the state department to describe global conflict in neater and tidier terms than any convoluted conspiracy theory.

Almost in one breath he explained that events “from Baghdad to Beirut”, and Afghanistan, and London, are linked in “a broader struggle between freedom and terror”; that far-flung terrorism is “no coincidence”, caused by “a lack of freedom” – “We saw the consequences on September the 11th, 2001” – and that all these emanations are being combatted by his administration’s “forward strategy of freedom in the broader middle east”, and that “that strategy has helped bring hope to millions.”

If there were any doubt about “coincidence”, the president concluded a sequence stringing together Lebanon, Iraq and Iran by defiantly pledging: “the message of this administration is clear: America will stay on the offense against al-Qaida.” Thus Bush’s unified field theory of fear, if it is a theory.

Then, once again, Bush declared “victory.” Hizbollah, he asserted, had gained nothing from the war, but had “suffered a defeat.”

Sidney Blumenthal is a former assistant and senior adviser to President Clinton. He is the author of How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime (Princeton University Press, [forthcoming, September 2006)]. He writes a column for Salon and the Guardian.

Also by Sidney Blumenthal in openDemocracy:

“Bush’s Potemkin village presidency”
(September 2005)

“Republican tremors” (October 2005)

“George W Bush: home alone” (October 2005)

“Dick Cheney’s day of reckoning”
(November 2005)

“Dick Cheney’s shadow play” (November 2005)

“Condoleezza Rice’s troubling journey” (December 2005)

“Bush’s surveillance network”
(December 2005)

“Bush’s shadow government exposed” (January 2006)

“The Republican system” (January 2006)

“George W Bush: running on empty” (February 2006)

“The rules of the game” (February 2006)

” The imprisoned president”(March 2006)

“Bush’s world of illusion” (March 2006)

“Bush’s truth”
(April 2006)

“The secret passion of George W Bush”
(May 2006)

“The ruin of the CIA” (May 2005)

“The president of dreams” (May 2006)

“The Bush way of war” (June 2006)

“The war for us”
(June 2006)

“The rule of law vs the war paradigm”
(July 2006)

” The infallible president”
(July 2006)

“Bush’s axis of failure” (August 2006)

Parallel worlds

At the mome

For many of us, we would take care of our selfs. You do not have to imagine what happens in populaces that tends to be armed and with that attitude – we can see it now. There is a reason when you hear about attempted mass shootings and such in the south eastern US (and a few other states) – they tend to go no further than “attempted” (Most of the south eastern states carry permits are as easy or easier to get than a drivers liscense. Schools are pretty much the only places they are restricted – by federal law and even then at least two in Tennessee have been stopped by a carry permit holder).

The biggest problem with this is that the protective state people (who like to throw blame) tend to react about “The Old West coming again” or act as if I’m blaming the people who were hurt (no, they never had the ability to defend themselfs – and even if they did it is still the agressors fault). Heck, in Tennessee we have had our carry permit for over a decade and some are *still* predicting the return to the OK corral in the next few years.

*shrug* simply giving the means to protect one self back to the people isn’t enough (and in this respect I understand why many are afraid of such things – in thier society it *would* be dangerous). The society has to think that way – otherwise it is simply extreme danger. To arm yourself with deadly weapons yet assume the state is protecting you is *really* bad. I wouldn’t give a child a deadly weapon (and note, I do not say firearm – I think the 2’nd amendment and it’s philosophy covers MUCH more than just that – the ability to defend yourself and to overthrow a corrupt govt) any more than I would give them to a culture that has no idea of the responsibilities of having them.

And, to anyone who ever says “But what good would they do in a revolt – our military is too powerful” may I remind you of your outlook on Iraq. That’s what a very small dedicated armed force can do – if it ever were to become a popular movement we would be gone within a month (either wilfully pulling out or killed). As is less than 1% of the population is doing quite a bit of harm and will take years to root out.