"Has become a mall society" - And the US has spent the last 30 years abandoning or malls. When I was a teenager it was definitely the place to hang out on weekends!
The mall in my town is 75% empty, and frequented mostly by older "mall walkers" such as my father, who does four laps a day. Was still cool when I was in high school (circa 2012). I have no idea how they're still open even after COVID. Dave & Buster's was supposed to open a location there but that fell through.
Ours seems to be staying open because of a planet fitness that took over a large section. Macys, Penney's, Seats and BonTon were the anchor stores. It's likely a casino will take over half the building.
You know... I think our's has a planet fitness as well! But same; Macy's, JC Penney, Old Navy, MC Sports, GameStop, Sears -- all gone. Only Kohl's remains.
We have a standalone Kohls and Target at the other end of town. The Wal-Mart and Sam's club across the street from the mall are the only thriving businesses.
Yikes, a casino? That sounds like a really bad thing for the community. I thought casinos need special permissions to operate and should not be too easily accessible by the “vulnerable”.
No, casinos are not necessarily bad for a community, you’re mistaken. Ohio legalized casinos in major cities and they aren’t bad (whether they’re successful or not is another matter).
And idk what you’re referring to regarding “vulnerable”? Vulnerable to addiction? Alcohol is addictive and bars are legal. Casinos are still heavily regulated, but beyond that people are allowed to make their own decisions and gamble if they wish.
The people who are the primary denizens of hole in the wall casinos are all gambling addicts. The same people who were illegal gambling in the "internet cafes".
> And idk what you’re referring to regarding “vulnerable”?
Not OP but worked in the industry and enjoying a casino visit once in a while: People left so far behind by society that they see their only hope of escaping poverty in gambling. Or people with issues (poverty, domestic violence, PTSD, ...) who don't have access to other outlets for their frustrations. Lotteries and gambling are called "taxes on the poor and stupid" for a reason!
> Vulnerable to addiction? Alcohol is addictive and bars are legal.
Yes, but you usually can't drink away your life savings in one night out (expensive whisky, wine and strip club champagne aside). You'll pass out before being able to spend more than 200$ in most bars. With gambling, it's scary how fast you can win and especially lose a lot of money - I watched someone at a roulette wheel winning 35k $ in one round (bet a grand on a single number), and lose that and more the next ten minutes.
They are certainly bad for the part of the community who have issues with addiction. As is alcohol and bars. I am not convinced that the misery that these people experience is offset by anything positive provided by casinos or bars.
There always have been and always will be casinos and bars. The only question is whether they will be allowed to operate openly with proper regulation, or be forced underground and run by criminals.
Our local mall (in SF bay area) will be shrunk down in size maybe 50% and the additional space and bulk of the parking will be converted into housing with some commercial stores in the bottom. Costco will take over a portion of the mall and some restaurant/food court area will remain. Not sure what will happen to the rest.
It's been interesting to watch the decline and fall of some malls and the rise of others. Hillsdale in San Mateo, Santana Row / Valley Fair in San Jose, and Main Street Cupertino are hopping. Vallco in Cupertino and Tanforan in San Bruno are dead already, and Mercado in Sunnyvale is getting there.
It feels like there's a certain style of "1980s mall", and another style of "2020s mall". The former is 2 stories of indoor corridors, primarily retail shops, with interspersed fully-enclosed restaurants and few areas to sit down. The latter is mixed-use, with condos, hotels, restaurants, and retail shops surrounding an open-air green space with lots of public seating and lawns. 1980s malls are dying fast, but 2020s malls are springing up in their place, and successfully drawing people to them.
Yes I've noticed the open outdoor malls are more popular now. I live in Fremont so Newpark Mall is the one I was talking about. You can see the plans on the attached link.
Same for my small town mall: elderly mall walkers, multiple jewellery stores, food court, the remaining 99% of stores are devoted to teen girl clothing.
Yeah our local mall used to have a pretty diverse assortment of stores. I haven't been inside it proper in probably 10 years, except some peripheral stores that have their own outside entrances (Target, and a couple of restaurants) but last time I was in it seemed to be all clothing or cosmetics. And the air smelled like farts.
I was in Moscow in 2008 and one of my fondest memories was visiting GUM (pronounced "goom") right in Red Square. Three or four stories of shops ranging from perfume to electronics to butchers.
I remember arguing with my mom loudly in English in its halls, and kids would come up to us to practice their english and try to help us :)
At the Motorola store in GUM I bought an unlocked Motorola ROKR with Cyrillic T9 keys, for the equivalent of US$200.
Our tour guide smiled on how much GUM was such a social hub for Russians since the 1920s. I couldn't comment on how the haves and have-nots viewed the location, or what it stood for over the years or today, but it was obvious to me its social status.
A mall across the Lenin mausolee in Soviet Union, pretty intriguing
> Several times during the 1960s and 1970s, the Second Secretary of the Communist Party Mikhail Suslov, who hated the idea of having a Department store across the Mausoleum of Lenin, tried to convert GUM into a Exhibition hall and Museum showcasing the achievements of the Soviet Union and Communism, without the knowledge of General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev. Each time however, Brezhnev was tipped off and put a stop to such plans.[8]
Last time I was in the mall in my town, they'd opened a place where you could go _Office Space_ on old electronics in a former storefront. The anchor stores have gone, of course.
From my tangential experience, Russian society is about 20 years behind the West, and 30+ years behind USA. As an American, I absolutely _loved_ mall society. But that peaked in the 1980s and 1990s in USA. It's mostly over at this point. I envy that they are (were) still enjoying it.
Isn't a mall just a private version of a public walkable space? Like what the town square used to be, except ironically with malls in order to reach the walkable space you have to drive there.
It's funny you say that because in Los Angeles, mall culture is MASSIVE. Malls aren't stagnant. They are high-end and a lot of fun. Kids go there to hang out and adults go there to shop. I love it and it's sad it didn't take in other areas.
> I love it and it's sad it didn't take in other areas.
It did take for a long time in other areas. (Long = approximately the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s.) But visits to malls across the US have been declining for some time.
Maybe it's simply because among the millions and millions of LA residents there are enough people who still like malls. Other areas might not be able to compensate the general loss of interest.
You find it sad because you have never experienced the beauty of a society without malls. With small little local shops instead of the big corporations and high street brands that all look the same. Europeans have. But it is being destroyed by the malls.
I was in my late twenties and expecting my first child ...it was definitely a positive time and the economy was just starting to pick back up. Even the first gulf war seemed like a just cause (liberating Kuwait). I did a lot of work in Europe as well as a couple projects in Brazil and Americans weren't largely disp ised then.
When people mention US aggression the first gulf war is never really one of them. I think most people still consider it pretty justified. I'm sure their motive was more about the oil but Iraq totally started it.
It also didn't leave a power vacuum in the country afterwards that allowed a worse enemy to grow (Like Isis in Iraq, the Taliban's return in Afghanistan). Civilian casualties were also an order of magnitude lower. The local population was better off with the intervention than if it hadn't taken place.
PS I don't despise Americans at all! Although I was opposed to the wars in Iraq (2003) and Afghanistan and my own country's involvement in them. However I don't blame the American people for it, same way I don't blame the Russian people for Ukraine.
These wars are orchestrated by interests so far above the heads of common people that they really have no control over it.
Maybe if the Soviet Union hadn't just completely collapsed, things might've been different. Or even just not having a corrupt, alcoholic clown for a president during the most critical period in Russian history since the war.
Maybe our FMI didn’t do such a good job at implementing capitalism in Russia. I know the World Bank criticized it a lot for its actions during the 1990 decade, namely Joseph Stieglitz.
The chaos was inevitable, it happens ever time and in every society, specially after 70 years of one brutal regime. I was expecting even worse ( and it was bad ).
And after a certain period of suffering and unrest, people just want "stability" and that's when any well-intention-ed politician in a country with 5min of democracy experience don't stand a change against the quintessential competent strongman savior of the once-great empire.
The problems and solutions for Russia are inside, but I don't see how that society after 70 years + 20 under alternate realities can change to actually modern and democratic ( which is very different from being Americanized ).
Most of the Warsaw pact are doing much better ( in terms of democratic and economic development ) than most of the ex-Soviet republics, even though they came through a similar path. So it wasn't inevitable.
All of them gone through a period of instability and serious economic hardship in the first years, that was my point. Then eventually they found the path and that path is not inevitable if they let themselves get caught by a “glorious savior”, then its inevitable they’ll end in yet another autocracy.
The former Warsaw Pact members got fewer decades of socialism, and they did not experience most of Stalinism; their experience was less brutal.
Being geographically closer to the West probably also made a difference; after the fall of socialism, more people could take a trip across the iron curtain and observe how things worked on the other side.
Maybe these days, people living in Russia should be invited to visit Europe and see how people live there. Like, maybe as a part of "propaganda budget", EU should offer one month of fully paid vacation here to every citizen of Russia. To see that we are actually not a hellhole full of Nazis; to see how even the life standards in Eastern Europe are these days closer to the West than to Russia; to understand that they could do even better (because they could do whatever Eastern Europe did, plus they would still have the oil).
Generally, people should travel more, see the world more. So that they can later return to their country and ask: "How is it possible that other countries have X, but here at home we say that it is impossible?" (And this applies to everyone. Like, Americans would probably also benefit from seeing that universal healthcare is possible and actually considered normal in some places.)
Yeltsin the predecessor was also corrupt. To protect himself when he left office, he helped Putin get into power when he resigned. Putin himself was involved in corruption in the city level in St Petersburg with the help of the mayor. Putin in turn granted Yeltsin protection from prosecutions and also covered his tracks of the corruption he was involved in St Petersburg.
Strange. Last I checked the US arms many countries that share borders with friends. The Netherlands didn't seem to care when the US sold F-35s to Belgium.
I agree with the blunder part but only if he ends up failing to control ukraine. So long as he succeeds there, the russian people will lose big time but Putin will do just fine. But if he loses, I don't think he will leave peacefully but he will leave.
The morale is such that Russia imprisons people who call this a war and any reporting other than rehashing official PR statements is banned, all independent media has been shut down. In official statements, there's only a limited "special operation" against "Neo-Nazi drug addicts" in Ukraine and it's going well, while on the ground everything's falling apart and in some sectors they've deployed rear troops that shoot their own soldiers if they attempt to retreat. Some POWs have even described how their units executed own wounded soldiers to avoid having to deal with treating them.
All in all, thousands of Russian service members have died, but Russian representatives refuse to collect bodies from Ukrainian authorities for proper burial. Relatives are kept in the dark. Many will receive a letter months from now saying that their father/husband/son died in undefined military exercise. Those relatives who speak up get a visit from security service intimidating them into shutting up.
It's a total nightmare. There'd be a violent revolution the next day if Russian TV showed truth for one evening: orthodox churches burning, entire towns razed to ground, kids getting limbs blown off from cluster munitions dropped onto residential areas, all kinds of unimaginable suffering.
The scale of this is such that there's no way to conceal truth for an extended period of time. It will lead to implosion of Russian society just like the Afghan war did in the 1980s.
The truth is readily available in Russia. But just like everywhere else, truth and lies are rejected or embraced regardless of how flimsy or strong they are. Human bias and other psychology can be astounding.
The scary thing is that there's no TV or radio channel to tune to or a newspaper to buy that would offer an alternative, truthful take. Even foreign press suspended activities in Russia after the March 4th law that made independent reporting punishable by up to 15 years in prison.
Determined people may seek out independent online sources if they can digest that everything they've been told is a lie, but that's an insignificant fraction of the whole population and their activism is mercilessly crushed by security services. The critical majority remains unaware of what the whole world has seen on front pages for the past several weeks and instead lives in a parallel reality where the widely reported bombing of Mariupol's hospital didn't happen, or if it did, they were all Nazis and crisis actors. It's Alex Jones and InfoWars adopted as state religion. Insane.
The U.S. has a nominally free press. There is a wide spectrum. But you will find a significant population that believes Jan 6 was fake. And you will find some who believe it was jovial tailgaters responding to a personal invitation from the President.
People often believe what they want to believe. Repression of the press is not helpful. But it isn't hard to find the truth in Russia. You can find whatever truth you want to find.
They may pound the poor Ukrainians for months to come to some sort of despair and depression if the war continues that long but I agree that they’ll never fully control the Ukrainians without full destruction. The built up resentiment is hard to dissipate especially now after the war started.
I hope either that the Russians withdraw without a very bruised ego so they leave poor Ukrainians alone to rebuild their country or that they simply collapse altogether and start afresh without Putin. Would like to live to see Putin condemned and perhaps imprisoned or executed by his own people, that would completely vindicate the Russian people in my eyes but I very much doubt that.
Putin may as well consolide his power further should anyone express thier disatisfaction with him. Im talking about the power hierarchy he’s sitting atop of, not just the Russian populace who already have some significant percentace of dissatisfaction - the real number is unknown since voting is heavily rigged and manipulated and the electorate is heavily manipulated by obvious propaganda.
I don't really know anything about his personal goals - he's an old man who will probably be dead in around 10 years. But it's difficult to see how even a successful conquest of Ukraine is a positive result. Russia would have gained some territory of minimal value at the cost of crushing sanctions.
There's no rational benefit, it's just the bizarre thinking that a physical buffer between Moscow and NATO is somehow helpful in a world with thousands of ICBMs.
There really should not be a rational benefit, perhaps only a symbolic benefit (not letting an enemy alliance set up camp on your doorstep).
On the flip side, it's ridiculous that the US and NATO leaders are willing to risk nuclear war over something symbolic with miniscule strategic value. If WW3 is started over something as foolish as this when all we had to say was 'Ukraine will never join NATO'.
In a way it is hypercritical to say Russia is overreacting when the US was extremely close to escalating to all-out war over the missiles in Cuba.
So the West is to blame for Putin’s irrationality now? What kind of a double-standard is that? How can we possibly negotiate rationally with a madman? Should we have just given him anything he said he wanted? Of course not.
It was never about NATO, that was just a fig leaf to people with terminal “both sides” mentality. This has always been sold to Russia has returning to its rightful place as a glorious empire. That’s Putin’s personal motivations as well and he was damn clear about it in his invasion-eve speech.
This is about liberal democracy versus ruthless authoritarianism, and if you repeat Kremlin talking points, you’ve chosen the side of ruthless authoritarianism. Russia faked evidence and used it as pretext for their invasion. This is a war of aggression based on misinformation.
Putin seems quite rational in the interviews I've seen. A much more rational clear-thinker in fact than the last couple US presidents. I think it is fair to call him a power-hungry, aggressive, ruthless authoritarian.
Even if NATO is just a fig leaf, why give it to him? Why give him the chess piece that makes it easier to justify this war?
One of the great things about a liberal democracy is that we can openly criticize the strategic choices our government has made. I sure hope that we can continue to do that without labeling those dissenters as supporting ruthless authoritarianism.
There’s nothing rational about his Ukraine invasion. Russian gains absolutely bubkis from this, and NATO has become stronger than ever. From what perspective was the invasion rational? Elites in Russia are in absolute disbelief. Putin lost all his cards the minute he actually invaded. So much for being a rational player.
It’s great to be skeptical of our government. It’s not so great to repeat kremlin talking points nearly verbatim.
Are invasions and overthrow of governments somehow okay when they install a pro-democratic and/or US-friendly leader? What if it fails and that leader turns out to be worse than the previous one?
Keep in mind that the US/NATO has been closely involved in many of these overthrows: Libya, Yemeni, Syria, Iraq, Uganda, Somalia, Pakistan, Yugoslavia, Panama, Grenada. Pretty much all of these involved lots of civilian death and collateral damage.
These aren't kremlin talking points, this is history. It's important to try to break out of the filter bubble and consider alternative viewpoints. At least consider the possibility that NATO is abusing its power and taking actions that are far beyond its original charter/purpose.
I am not following your logic. Are you saying that the USA has done bad things in the past, therefore Russia should be allowed to indiscriminately murder Ukrainians? In my lifetime, I have never seen the USA do anything as evil as what Russia is doing right now.
I'm just saying it's quite rational to be concerned when a foreign nuclear missile alliance sets up shop on your doorstep. Putin has had many interviews where he has stated this is his primary concern and that the west isn't listening.
The US almost started WW3 over exactly that same thing in the not so distance past during the cuban missile crisis.
We get mad when Russia interferes with US-elections with a few online bots but the US directly funded and participated in the overthrow of the pro-Russia Ukrainian government in 2014. There was violence involved, why is it okay when the US murders Ukrainians to install a sympathetic government but not when Russia does it? It's hypocritical.
If it were up to me, I'd disband NATO entirely (too much polarizing history) and replace it with a new organization with a very similar charter, but open membership to Russia and China. The purpose of this organization should be to prevent world wars, not to decide local elections, especially when those elections/conflicts involve non-member countries.
If it were up to me, I’d disband Russia entirely (too much polarizing history). I’d charter it as a constitutional democracy but remove its right to a standing army. The purpose of Russia should be to increase the happiness of its citizens and protect their welfare, not keep them under the iron boot of some mafioso tyrant so he can pursue his mad dreams.
You may be right, I don't like autocratic rulers for life either, and I think a majority in the US and NATO agree with that very sentiment.
However note how aggressive a stance that is. NATO is supposed to be a defensive organization but with the charter/purpose you suggest, it is rational for Putin and Xi to fear US/NATO aggression and do whatever it takes to fight its expansion. It is very much a threat to their survival, and the existence of their countries as they know it.
Ukraine joining NATO has been in the works for over a decade now and it is already closely involved with and cooperating with NATO including joint military drills. It's done everything short of being an official member:
It couldn't join NATO until the war against Donetsk and the Dombass were over anyway. That mean recognition that this region seceded. Doesn't matter the formation/joint training, it wasn't legally possible for Ukraine to join.
There's absolutely no way Russia could occupy Ukraine for a prolonged period of time. Ukrainian morale and national unity are very high, and as was seen time and again ( Spain against Napoleon, Afghanistan against everyone, Yugoslav partisans against the Nazis) a determined population is impossible to control by a foreign occupier regardless of its strength.
There a way, unfortunately. Putin: 1. has no regard for human lives (including lives of Russian citizens) 2. is great admirer of Joseph Stalin.
His current plan likely: 1. destroy Ukrainian military and establish control over all major cities, roads and borders (russian losses to achieve this goal is no-brainier for him) 2. starve population (repeat Holodomor [1]) 3. sent millions to prison camps.
Well, we're about to find out whether or not McDonald's Peace Theory[1] is true or not.
> In Thomas L. Friedman's 1999 book The Lexus and the Olive Tree,[56] the following statement was presented: "No two countries that both had McDonald's had fought a war against each other since each got its McDonald's". He supported his belief, as a theory, by stating that when a country has reached an economic development where it has a middle class strong enough to support a McDonald's network, it would become a "McDonald's country", and will not be interested in fighting wars anymore.
Now hold on a minute. Let’s not assume it’s the theory that’s wrong. Isn’t it possible the entire war was invented by Burger King as anti McDonalds propaganda?
Oh yeah, some Russians have my utmost respect for putting up and being vocal about that brutal regime they’re under. I think it toughens you up after some point but from my outsider perspective I would be simply terrified to speak up.
I wonder how truthful such polls are in Russia. I've seen people use these numbers to claim that people in the country support the war, as if anti-war crackdowns don't have any chilling effects on poll responses.
BTW, there are more people protesting Russian invasion in occupied Ukrainian cities, at gunpoint, than there are people protesting the war in Moscow.
Here's from Kherson today: https://twitter.com/mrsorokaa/status/1502983453452734468
It’s not a brutal regime. That’s what the media wants you to believe. Have you lived there and been treated brutally? The US is a brutal regime. Check the incarceration rates.
>Gary Stephen Webb (August 31, 1955 – December 10, 2004) was an American investigative journalist.
>Webb was found dead in his Carmichael home on December 10, 2004, with two gunshot wounds to the head. His death was ruled a suicide by the Sacramento County coroner's office. According to a description of Webb's injuries in the Los Angeles Times, he shot himself with a .38 revolver, which he placed near his right ear. The first shot went through his face, and exited at his left cheek. The coroner's staff concluded that the second shot hit an artery.
>The Supreme Court declared last week that Americans have no right to learn the grisly details of CIA torture because the CIA has never formally confessed its crimes. The verdict symbolizes how the rule of law has become little more than a form of legal mumbo-jumbo to shroud official crimes. Why should anyone expect justice from a Supreme Court that covers up torture?
If you looked, you could find a full page of citations like this. The difference is who's propaganda bubble you are living inside of. This doesn't excuse Putin or statists anywhere.
Equally without evidence is my hypothesis that Russian schools focus too much on math and science which has led to Putin's public support being so high.
I sympathize with the tragic situation in both these countries for the common person. My curiousness arising out of this situation is forced me to try to understand it and it’s roots. What I found definitely changed my perspective on what to expect out of this. I went in thinking this is a pivotal moment and unsure what the future looks like. I came out sad that this is not a one off thing for the people of this land. If you look at this in the context of the last 150 years - almost every prominent leader in this land was a) never phased by the (sheer) human cost to be incurred as reason to not chase the outcome they wanted and b) the people of this land have never successfully risen up to counter the oppression they faced. Many died trying but they never had the critical mass they needed to overcome the oppression. I dot not claim to know the reason why. I am sure it’s complex but it has occurred multiple times and there is something there to be said for that.
Utterly sad and tragic. But I am no longer expecting spectacular revolt and a feel good ending. History suggests this going to go down the same way it has for a long time.
There won't be a critical mass of dissenters. Modern dictators have figured that if they boil the frog slowly, they'll keep revealing small slivers of latent dissenters and dealing with them is easy. From time to time a dictator needs to announce some ridiculuos law, with the only purpose: to see who is brave enough to dissent.
It is much more complicated than that. Read the Gulag Archipelago. You’ll find descriptions of True Believers who firmly believe everyone else but them is there for a very good reason. But with them, a mistake has been made. Hodorkovsky did not become a dissident before he was stripped of his glory as an oligarch. For, apparently, trying to buy the Duma at which Putin took personal offense. The media is full of folks who find Youtube and McD being closed as unjust but stay silent on or openly agree with the aggression in Ukraine. That attitude of “you muat die today so I van die tomorrow” is unfortunately very common. People generally agree, that sacrifices must be made for the glory of the homeland but change their minds once the axe reaches them.
You are mostly right, but mistaken in one significant way. Between the February and October revolutions of 1917, a nascent democracy was there. The monarchy has been overthrown and there had been reasonably open elections with diverse results to elect a body, that would decide the future of Russia. Alas, as bolševiks did not even come close to winning these elections, they disbanded the entire thing by force. But there is still hope. It could be done. One day I hope for a Russia that is not aggressive against its neighbors and cares about its people.
Russians generally support its countries’ imperialist activity. They supported the USSR, Afghan war (until it went terribly wrong), Chechen wars, war against Georgia, first land grab against Ukraine, and now, it seems, this one.
You can always argue, correctly, that it’s hard to know what’s going on in an autocratic country, but many of these polls were un controversial and simply not stating support for eg the annexation of Crimea wouldn’t be an offence.
I do feel sorry for how badly this is going to affect people in Russia, but equally Russians don’t seem to mind serving up hot hell to their neighbours. I don’t know how you can break this cycle without making Russians understand how badly they are hurting others.
Russia may not be a democracy but the state does rely on popular support for legitimacy, and has had it in the past 30-odd years.
Sadly it could actually be the reverse. The rest of the country is much poorer, so they consume less imported products... there's less to lose.
Also many (from my experience at least) generally just have lower expectations... the joke is "we never used to live well, no reason to start now" (никогда хорошо не жили, нечего и начинать).
145 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 147 ms ] threadAnd idk what you’re referring to regarding “vulnerable”? Vulnerable to addiction? Alcohol is addictive and bars are legal. Casinos are still heavily regulated, but beyond that people are allowed to make their own decisions and gamble if they wish.
Not OP but worked in the industry and enjoying a casino visit once in a while: People left so far behind by society that they see their only hope of escaping poverty in gambling. Or people with issues (poverty, domestic violence, PTSD, ...) who don't have access to other outlets for their frustrations. Lotteries and gambling are called "taxes on the poor and stupid" for a reason!
> Vulnerable to addiction? Alcohol is addictive and bars are legal.
Yes, but you usually can't drink away your life savings in one night out (expensive whisky, wine and strip club champagne aside). You'll pass out before being able to spend more than 200$ in most bars. With gambling, it's scary how fast you can win and especially lose a lot of money - I watched someone at a roulette wheel winning 35k $ in one round (bet a grand on a single number), and lose that and more the next ten minutes.
It feels like there's a certain style of "1980s mall", and another style of "2020s mall". The former is 2 stories of indoor corridors, primarily retail shops, with interspersed fully-enclosed restaurants and few areas to sit down. The latter is mixed-use, with condos, hotels, restaurants, and retail shops surrounding an open-air green space with lots of public seating and lawns. 1980s malls are dying fast, but 2020s malls are springing up in their place, and successfully drawing people to them.
https://www.newark.org/home/showpublisheddocument/7665/63758...
I remember arguing with my mom loudly in English in its halls, and kids would come up to us to practice their english and try to help us :)
At the Motorola store in GUM I bought an unlocked Motorola ROKR with Cyrillic T9 keys, for the equivalent of US$200.
Our tour guide smiled on how much GUM was such a social hub for Russians since the 1920s. I couldn't comment on how the haves and have-nots viewed the location, or what it stood for over the years or today, but it was obvious to me its social status.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUM_(department_store)
> Several times during the 1960s and 1970s, the Second Secretary of the Communist Party Mikhail Suslov, who hated the idea of having a Department store across the Mausoleum of Lenin, tried to convert GUM into a Exhibition hall and Museum showcasing the achievements of the Soviet Union and Communism, without the knowledge of General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev. Each time however, Brezhnev was tipped off and put a stop to such plans.[8]
I guess you had to be there.
It did take for a long time in other areas. (Long = approximately the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s.) But visits to malls across the US have been declining for some time.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retail_apocalypse (Not mall-specific.)
In fact, many are quite happy to visit the “Mall of Scandinavia”
And many / most smaller towns only have chains.
That Euro charm that so many romanticize is not evenly distributed.
Los Angeles probably has the most non-chain businesses in any of the cities I've lived in.
And in some areas like Eastern Europe that's exactly what did happen of course.
It also didn't leave a power vacuum in the country afterwards that allowed a worse enemy to grow (Like Isis in Iraq, the Taliban's return in Afghanistan). Civilian casualties were also an order of magnitude lower. The local population was better off with the intervention than if it hadn't taken place.
PS I don't despise Americans at all! Although I was opposed to the wars in Iraq (2003) and Afghanistan and my own country's involvement in them. However I don't blame the American people for it, same way I don't blame the Russian people for Ukraine.
These wars are orchestrated by interests so far above the heads of common people that they really have no control over it.
And after a certain period of suffering and unrest, people just want "stability" and that's when any well-intention-ed politician in a country with 5min of democracy experience don't stand a change against the quintessential competent strongman savior of the once-great empire.
The problems and solutions for Russia are inside, but I don't see how that society after 70 years + 20 under alternate realities can change to actually modern and democratic ( which is very different from being Americanized ).
Being geographically closer to the West probably also made a difference; after the fall of socialism, more people could take a trip across the iron curtain and observe how things worked on the other side.
Maybe these days, people living in Russia should be invited to visit Europe and see how people live there. Like, maybe as a part of "propaganda budget", EU should offer one month of fully paid vacation here to every citizen of Russia. To see that we are actually not a hellhole full of Nazis; to see how even the life standards in Eastern Europe are these days closer to the West than to Russia; to understand that they could do even better (because they could do whatever Eastern Europe did, plus they would still have the oil).
Generally, people should travel more, see the world more. So that they can later return to their country and ask: "How is it possible that other countries have X, but here at home we say that it is impossible?" (And this applies to everyone. Like, Americans would probably also benefit from seeing that universal healthcare is possible and actually considered normal in some places.)
All in all, thousands of Russian service members have died, but Russian representatives refuse to collect bodies from Ukrainian authorities for proper burial. Relatives are kept in the dark. Many will receive a letter months from now saying that their father/husband/son died in undefined military exercise. Those relatives who speak up get a visit from security service intimidating them into shutting up.
It's a total nightmare. There'd be a violent revolution the next day if Russian TV showed truth for one evening: orthodox churches burning, entire towns razed to ground, kids getting limbs blown off from cluster munitions dropped onto residential areas, all kinds of unimaginable suffering.
The scale of this is such that there's no way to conceal truth for an extended period of time. It will lead to implosion of Russian society just like the Afghan war did in the 1980s.
Determined people may seek out independent online sources if they can digest that everything they've been told is a lie, but that's an insignificant fraction of the whole population and their activism is mercilessly crushed by security services. The critical majority remains unaware of what the whole world has seen on front pages for the past several weeks and instead lives in a parallel reality where the widely reported bombing of Mariupol's hospital didn't happen, or if it did, they were all Nazis and crisis actors. It's Alex Jones and InfoWars adopted as state religion. Insane.
People often believe what they want to believe. Repression of the press is not helpful. But it isn't hard to find the truth in Russia. You can find whatever truth you want to find.
I hope either that the Russians withdraw without a very bruised ego so they leave poor Ukrainians alone to rebuild their country or that they simply collapse altogether and start afresh without Putin. Would like to live to see Putin condemned and perhaps imprisoned or executed by his own people, that would completely vindicate the Russian people in my eyes but I very much doubt that.
“Take over Ukraine!”
“Yes!” But nothing (?) about 1. very hard, 2. unprepared military, 3. external risks.
There's no rational benefit, it's just the bizarre thinking that a physical buffer between Moscow and NATO is somehow helpful in a world with thousands of ICBMs.
On the flip side, it's ridiculous that the US and NATO leaders are willing to risk nuclear war over something symbolic with miniscule strategic value. If WW3 is started over something as foolish as this when all we had to say was 'Ukraine will never join NATO'.
In a way it is hypercritical to say Russia is overreacting when the US was extremely close to escalating to all-out war over the missiles in Cuba.
It was never about NATO, that was just a fig leaf to people with terminal “both sides” mentality. This has always been sold to Russia has returning to its rightful place as a glorious empire. That’s Putin’s personal motivations as well and he was damn clear about it in his invasion-eve speech.
This is about liberal democracy versus ruthless authoritarianism, and if you repeat Kremlin talking points, you’ve chosen the side of ruthless authoritarianism. Russia faked evidence and used it as pretext for their invasion. This is a war of aggression based on misinformation.
Even if NATO is just a fig leaf, why give it to him? Why give him the chess piece that makes it easier to justify this war?
One of the great things about a liberal democracy is that we can openly criticize the strategic choices our government has made. I sure hope that we can continue to do that without labeling those dissenters as supporting ruthless authoritarianism.
It’s great to be skeptical of our government. It’s not so great to repeat kremlin talking points nearly verbatim.
Are invasions and overthrow of governments somehow okay when they install a pro-democratic and/or US-friendly leader? What if it fails and that leader turns out to be worse than the previous one?
Keep in mind that the US/NATO has been closely involved in many of these overthrows: Libya, Yemeni, Syria, Iraq, Uganda, Somalia, Pakistan, Yugoslavia, Panama, Grenada. Pretty much all of these involved lots of civilian death and collateral damage.
These aren't kremlin talking points, this is history. It's important to try to break out of the filter bubble and consider alternative viewpoints. At least consider the possibility that NATO is abusing its power and taking actions that are far beyond its original charter/purpose.
The US almost started WW3 over exactly that same thing in the not so distance past during the cuban missile crisis.
We get mad when Russia interferes with US-elections with a few online bots but the US directly funded and participated in the overthrow of the pro-Russia Ukrainian government in 2014. There was violence involved, why is it okay when the US murders Ukrainians to install a sympathetic government but not when Russia does it? It's hypocritical.
If it were up to me, I'd disband NATO entirely (too much polarizing history) and replace it with a new organization with a very similar charter, but open membership to Russia and China. The purpose of this organization should be to prevent world wars, not to decide local elections, especially when those elections/conflicts involve non-member countries.
However note how aggressive a stance that is. NATO is supposed to be a defensive organization but with the charter/purpose you suggest, it is rational for Putin and Xi to fear US/NATO aggression and do whatever it takes to fight its expansion. It is very much a threat to their survival, and the existence of their countries as they know it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations...
His current plan likely: 1. destroy Ukrainian military and establish control over all major cities, roads and borders (russian losses to achieve this goal is no-brainier for him) 2. starve population (repeat Holodomor [1]) 3. sent millions to prison camps.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
I'd argue the blunder is on the yes men surrounding him who now will lose their perks because they didn't think of dealing with the problem first
> In Thomas L. Friedman's 1999 book The Lexus and the Olive Tree,[56] the following statement was presented: "No two countries that both had McDonald's had fought a war against each other since each got its McDonald's". He supported his belief, as a theory, by stating that when a country has reached an economic development where it has a middle class strong enough to support a McDonald's network, it would become a "McDonald's country", and will not be interested in fighting wars anymore.
1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalist_peace
>Webb was found dead in his Carmichael home on December 10, 2004, with two gunshot wounds to the head. His death was ruled a suicide by the Sacramento County coroner's office. According to a description of Webb's injuries in the Los Angeles Times, he shot himself with a .38 revolver, which he placed near his right ear. The first shot went through his face, and exited at his left cheek. The coroner's staff concluded that the second shot hit an artery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb#Death
>The Supreme Court declared last week that Americans have no right to learn the grisly details of CIA torture because the CIA has never formally confessed its crimes. The verdict symbolizes how the rule of law has become little more than a form of legal mumbo-jumbo to shroud official crimes. Why should anyone expect justice from a Supreme Court that covers up torture?
https://mises.org/wire/supreme-court-uses-twisted-logic-prot...
If you looked, you could find a full page of citations like this. The difference is who's propaganda bubble you are living inside of. This doesn't excuse Putin or statists anywhere.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/human-rights-protection
There is nothing gutsy because it's nothing out of the ordinary.
So then not just those three subjects
Utterly sad and tragic. But I am no longer expecting spectacular revolt and a feel good ending. History suggests this going to go down the same way it has for a long time.
I really hope and want to be wrong on this one.
You can always argue, correctly, that it’s hard to know what’s going on in an autocratic country, but many of these polls were un controversial and simply not stating support for eg the annexation of Crimea wouldn’t be an offence.
I do feel sorry for how badly this is going to affect people in Russia, but equally Russians don’t seem to mind serving up hot hell to their neighbours. I don’t know how you can break this cycle without making Russians understand how badly they are hurting others.
Russia may not be a democracy but the state does rely on popular support for legitimacy, and has had it in the past 30-odd years.
I am pretty sure some of them understand, but if they try to tell their neighbors, they spend the next 15 years in prison.
Also many (from my experience at least) generally just have lower expectations... the joke is "we never used to live well, no reason to start now" (никогда хорошо не жили, нечего и начинать).
Nothing new there, this time it's just extremely compressed on the time scale.