←back to thread

Mikhail Gorbachev has died

(www.reuters.com)
970 points homarp | 5 comments | 30 Aug 22 20:37 UTC | HN request time: 2.28s | source
Show context
idlewords ◴[30 Aug 22 21:20 UTC] No.32655237[source]▶
Gorbachev secured his place in history by what he didn't do. While never endorsing the end of the eastern bloc, he made it clear beginning in the late 1980's that unlike his predecessors, he would not oppose democratic reforms in Eastern Europe by force. To general astonishment, he kept this promise, and with the regrettable exception of Lithuania this commitment to not repeating the crimes of his predecessors is Gorbachev's greatest legacy. In 1988 you would have been hard pressed to find anyone who could imagine the mostly peaceful collapse of the Eastern Bloc, but Gorbachev had the moral courage to accept this once unimaginable consequence of his policy and to see it through.
replies(5): >>32658309 #>>32659086 #>>32659566 #>>32661746 #>>32667131 #
rixrax ◴[31 Aug 22 07:59 UTC] No.32659566[source]▶
But the dissolution of soviet union is not over yet. You can see this nowhere as clearly as in russias attack on Ukraine[0] where imperialistic russians that dream of restoring the glory and borders of soviet union[1] are waging their genocidal war. Meanwhile they are using hunger[2] and energy as their weapons against the rest of the world[3].

If the russians are not stopped in Ukraine, then there is no reason to believe that they wouldn't rinse and repeat in Baltic states, Kazakhstan, Moldova, and all other now independent former russian states. Including Alaska[4], should opportunity represent itself.

To truly secure Gorbachevs place in history, world must decisively say no to the russians agressions in Ukraine, and help Ukraine deliver a humiliating defeat to the russians and the dissolution of soviet union reach it's logical conclusion by stripping russia and their dreams off of any status as military, or world power.

[0] https://edition.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-... [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26769481 [2] https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/world-news/russia/957367/russ... [3] https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putins-en... [4] https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/03/19/does-russia-want-alas...

replies(5): >>32659645 #>>32659728 #>>32659988 #>>32660262 #>>32660279 #
nivenkos[dead post] ◴[31 Aug 22 08:13 UTC] No.32659645[source]▶
poushkar ◴[31 Aug 22 09:02 UTC] No.32659944[source]▶
Here we come again with the "Ukrainian nationalism" and "coup". So boring. Will you ever update your guide on Russian propaganda? Even the russian troll factory stopped using these arguments like 2 years ago.
replies(1): >>32660128 #
nivenkos ◴[31 Aug 22 09:38 UTC] No.32660128[source]▶
I'm not pro-Russian.

But here in Europe we've had 25% of our savings and purchasing power destroyed almost overnight, for a conflict that really has nothing to do with us (CIS borders and nationalism after the USSR).

Why can't we just be neutral? We didn't do this for Georgia's claim in Ossetia or Armenia's claim with Azerbaijan (both similar scenarios), or the Iraq-Iran war, etc.

replies(9): >>32660202 #>>32660218 #>>32660242 #>>32660449 #>>32660506 #>>32660686 #>>32661297 #>>32662588 #>>32663287 #
1. gjulianm ◴[31 Aug 22 09:51 UTC] No.32660202[source]▶
> But here in Europe we've had 25% of our savings and purchasing power destroyed almost overnight, for a conflict that really has nothing to do with us (CIS borders and nationalism after the USSR).

Very weird to say those things

- Inflation isn't just caused by the invasion.

- Inflation is at ~9%, not enough for 25% purchasing power loss.

- The conflict has a lot of things to do with Europe. Since when is Ukraine not an european country? Even if you mean just the EU, both Ukraine and Russia border several EU countries, and Russia has threatened some of them.

- "Remaining neutral" doesn't mean "free of consequences".

replies(1): >>32660365 #
2. nivenkos ◴[31 Aug 22 10:21 UTC] No.32660365[source]▶
The Euro has also crashed 20% in a year though.

That's a massive loss in purchasing power considering most things are sold in USD (including oil).

We didn't intervene in Armenia or Georgia, there's not much difference here.

replies(1): >>32661413 #
3. simonh ◴[31 Aug 22 12:50 UTC] No.32661413[source]▶
The fact is we should have intervened in Armenia and Georgia. We should have intervened in Syria, at least to some extent. We should have imposed crushing sanctions on Russia after the annexation of Crimea in 2014. The fact that we did not is a causal direct line to this invasion.

Since the gulf war the west has become averse to foreign adventurism. I understand that and why, but it's misconceived. Washing our hands of the rest of the world and letting countries like Iran and Russia (and Iraq under Saddam Hussein) do whatever they like doesn't work. It comes back to bite us every single time.

Even if we say it's not our problem, it's not our responsibility, it always comes back and hurts us and our direct economic, political and humanitarian interests again and again. It leads to things like the rape of Kuwait and 9/11.

Being fully engaged internationally is expensive in money and lives, it's messy, it's morally compromising. It's also unavoidable. We are part of the world and can't deny responsibility for playing our part in it. Or rather we can, but at a heavy price to ourselves and others.

replies(1): >>32662240 #
4. _vbnz ◴[31 Aug 22 14:10 UTC] No.32662240{3}[source]▶
Why is it our responsibility?

Intervened on which side in Georgia? That Georgian government was absolutely terrible, putting dissidents in prison, firing on protests, etc. - just because they're anti-Russia doesn't make them good.

We should just try to live in peace and focus on our own nations and stop making enemies.

replies(1): >>32664760 #
5. simonh ◴[31 Aug 22 16:39 UTC] No.32664760{4}[source]▶
I'm sorry my friend, but our enemies are out there. They hate us and they want to kill us or force us to change politics or religion whether we like it or not. If they can't get to you they will get to your friends, or neighbouring countries, or countries you trade with, or that you visit on holiday. They're not going to suddenly decide to be all friendly and nice to us, just because we turn our backs on the people they are already terrorising and assaulting.

I'm in no way supporting or justifying the Georgian government at the time, we shouldn't have been tolerating that either. The point is what happens in these places matters to us. It affects us, whether we like it or not.

>Why is it our responsibility?

Because we are moral beings that live in the world, we benefit from the things that world provides to us, and therefore have responsibility for the state of the world we live in.