Thread: Алексей Анатольевич Навальный (Blogger Alexei Navalny)

More Indications of the Depth of U.S. Involvement in the Russian Unrest
Earlier this week, I reported on Aleksei Navalny, and an NYT profile that dubbed him "The Man Behind the Russian Protests."
Given certain facts in the profile, I speculated Navalny might have CIA connections. Now comes further information that shows that Navalny is a recipient of US government funding. At LRC, Daniel McAdams reports:
Thanks to the intrepid and indefatigable Tony Cartalucci for digging deeper (as true journalists once did) into the bogus "Russia Blogger is Putin's worst nightmare" press orgy to discover that this brave Russian do-gooder coining the memorable "party of crooks and thieves" slogan to describe Prime Minister Putin's United Russia party is a long-time recipient of US government semi-covert largesse via its corrupt color revolution machine the National Endowment for Democracy (sic). "Democracy activist" Alexey Navalny, according to his "Yale World Fellow" profile, "is also co-founder of the Democratic Alternative movement and was vice-chairman of the Moscow branch of the political party YABLOKO," which received funding from the National Endowment for Democracy according to cables made public via the whistleblower website, Wikileaks.
Navalny's main collaborator, Ilya Yashin, is also a recipient of NED's Russia regime change funding as head of the Moscow branch of the People's Freedom Party and leading member of the "Strategy 31" campaign. Cartalucci points out that NED's own webpage advertises "Strategy 31" as a major recipient of US government funding.Bottom line, the many legged Empire is operating everywhere, except for possibly, central L.A. and certain parts of Auburn, Alabama.

EconomicPolicyJournal.com: More Indications of the Depth of U.S. Involvement in the Russian Unrest

And sorry, but I can't hold myself to post this:

Originally Posted by Basil77

And sorry, but I can't hold myself to post this:

Do you endorse that?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Do you endorse that?

Of course I am.
It's a shame that it's a fake.
P.S. I'm joking of course.

Unbelievable!!! Well, after reading Basil77's post, I see what you all mean.
I really want to give the US the benefit of the doubt and not be too "anti-American" but they are practically making it impossible.

I still think that somebody needs to stand up against corruption in Russia, but it should be somebody who really cares about the country, not some CIA implant!

The story I read was in a Swedish paper, but I saw the exact same story on the BBC website just now. Clerarly the story abut this "hero" is doing its round around the world.

Based on all this, I'd be quite tempted to throw him in prison myself, if I was Russian (I mean honestly, accepting money from the CIA!!) But that's probably exactly what the CIA psychological warfare experts want, because then he becomes a martyr...

Too bad Russia doesn't exile people to Siberia anymore. Otherwise he could be sent on a nice all-expenses-paid holiday & stay in a nice hotel (no need to mistreat people), and have his uprising in Omsk, or something.....

Originally Posted by Hanna

I still think that somebody needs to stand up against corruption in Russia, but it should be somebody who really cares about the country

precisely
you got the exact point
If one would analyse his actions one would ask a question to oneself: does he really fight against corruption or he's fighting against government and Russian values?

Originally Posted by Doomer

precisely
you got the exact point
If one would analyse his actions one would ask a question to oneself: does he really fight against corruption or he's fighting against government and Russian values?

I think it is universal opinion in Russia that corruption is equivalent of government .

Originally Posted by jnllll

I think it is universal opinion in Russia that corruption is equivalent of government .

it is not
it is an opinion of majority but not everyone
if everybody in government is corrupted then who's gonna fight corruption?
I personally think that things changing for good in Russia but very slowly

Originally Posted by Doomer

it is not
it is an opinion of majority but not everyone
if everybody in government is corrupted then who's gonna fight corruption?
I personally think that things changing for good in Russia but very slowly

Не берусь спорить...
Вообще, судить о том, что происходит в политике - это как судить о том, что происходит на дне грязного, непрозрачного пруда только лишь по расходящимся на его поверхности кругам, но и даже на эти круги смотря через мутные, искажающие очки прессы и телевидения.

Originally Posted by Doomer

If one would analyse his actions one would ask a question to oneself: does he really fight against corruption or he's fighting against government and Russian values?

I think he is fighting the government using its weakness, which is widespread corruption. And that is totally legitimate. He is definitely not fighting "Russian values" for the lack of this term. There's no such thing as national values. If you think I'm wrong, please name at least five Russian values and then five Chinese values. There are other national things, like national character, but no national values.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

There's no such thing as national values. If you think I'm wrong, please name at least five Russian values and then five Chinese values. There are other national things, like national character, but no national values.

If there is no such thing as national values then one would be more than enough, isn't it?
But I'll name two, easy ones
patriotism is first
culture will be second

Originally Posted by Doomer

If there is no such thing as national values then one would be more than enough, isn't it?
But I'll name two, easy ones
patriotism is first
culture will be second

So, based on what you just said, what are the Russian values? What Russian values does Navalniy fight?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

There's no such thing as national values.

Is that really true? I would point out that Americans tend to value individualism over loyalty to the extended family/clan, for example. So isn't that an "American value"? (Although not in the sense of being exclusively American and not found at all in other nations -- only in the sense that it is characteristic of America [and some other countries], but is far from being globally universal.)

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

Is that really true? I would point out that Americans tend to value individualism over loyalty to the extended family/clan, for example. So isn't that an "American value"? (Although not in the sense of being exclusively American and not found at all in other nations -- only in the sense that it is characteristic of America [and some other countries], but is far from being globally universal.)

Entrepreneurialism and a "money is king" attitude are American values, I think.

But Russia is really diverse and had a relatively extreme and unusual history over the last 100 years. Maybe because of all the changes they've been through, it's just hard for them to identify with a particular national value.

But for what it's worth I think Russians seem relatively romantic about relationships, really value poetry and literature, and try to help out their family members throughout their lifetimes. They think it's important to always "be there" for their friends, regardless what the friend needs. And I think they value education a lot.

I am comparing to other European countries, particularly in Northern Europe and thoaw things are what stand out to me.

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

Is that really true? I would point out that Americans tend to value individualism over loyalty to the extended family/clan, for example. So isn't that an "American value"? (Although not in the sense of being exclusively American and not found at all in other nations -- only in the sense that it is characteristic of America [and some other countries], but is far from being globally universal.)

I see your point. In my opinion, a value is a social property, not a national property. Like, a democratic society would value individualism and the society of slaveholders would value obedience. Using a raw approximation, at the same point in time the Northern Americans valued equality whilst the Southern Americans valued bourne supremacy. I think, a nation is too broad a term, which spans multiple societies, cultures and subcultures.

It appears, the thing is, anyone who dares to contradict the wisest commie (then united Russia) party in Russia automatically receives certain amounts of money from the CIA, and there's no way to fix it in any possible future. At the same time, receiving money from the U.S. and especially CIA is considered the heaviest crime one can ever commit on there. So, those of you guys who wish for a truly multi-party system, parliament and democracy can just find some other place to live around the world, coz anyone who begs to try any changes to implement this actually fails before the first try.

I read the article that Basil77 linked to and I actually believe the points they are making.
It is impossible to ignore the evidence - I've seen it in media almost daily and I have known people who have had internship (well paid!) with some of the organisations mentioned, in the 1990s. The scenario reads like a conspiracy theory, but it's actually not.

I wonder what normal Americans would think about their country meddling in this way overseas, while neglecting their own citizens at home. I am guessing 95% haven't got any idea of what's going on.

Originally Posted by http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/12/wall-street-vs-russia.html

Conclusion It is quite clear that the National Endowment for Democracy, Freedom House, the Foreign Policy Initiative, and even the US State Department whose new foreign affairs advisory board is full of think-tanks representing overt corporate-financier interests, are not interested in "democracy," "human rights," or "freedom" in Russia, but rather removing the Kremlin out of the way, and reestablishing the parasitic feeding on the Russian people and its economy they enjoyed after the fall of the Soviet Union.

When Russian ruling elite can't think of anything better - they can always resort to good old anti-americanism.

Originally Posted by nulle

When Russian ruling elite can't think of anything better - they can always resort to good old anti-americanism.

Well, the Americans are basically serving it to them on a platter, so can you blame the Russians? The US has meddled there for over a century.

If the US did not constantly meddle, there would be no reason for any anti-americanism.
For example, whoever heard of anti-Canadianism or anti-Brazil or even anti-China?

Those countries are large and important, but do not consider themselves by default justified to meddle in the affairs of countries around the world, or at least they wait until their input is sought.

Also, the outcome of the American meddling is usually not beneficial for the county in question, despite fluffy talk about freedom, democracy and human rights.

"By their fruits, ye shall know them... "
Look at the state of Middle East, Central America - classical American meddling grounds.

Russia would be a great deal wiser to solve its problems internally than accept any kind of help from the USA.

как я уже и говорил ранее: свободное мнение это всегда хорошо
если вы заметили я не стараюсь вас убедить что то что я говорю это истина, я лишь высказываю свое мнение
вы же постоянно требуете доказательств правоты моего мнения Если вы так уверены что правы вы, то зачем вам доказательства обратного?

I think I cannot be called patriot, I'll live with it. But I haven't created the video from the link I posted I just found it

Originally Posted by Doomer

как я уже и говорил ранее: свободное мнение это всегда хорошо
если вы заметили я не стараюсь вас убедить что то что я говорю это истина, я лишь высказываю свое мнение
вы же постоянно требуете доказательств правоты моего мнения Если вы так уверены что правы вы, то зачем вам доказательства обратного?

Because I hope we have a discussion. A sane discussion is different from the fanatics' slogans primarily in that each opinion should be logically [and otherwise] supported. Therefore, the point of the sane discussion is primarily to form an opinion and verify it. What if your opinion about Navalniy is totally right and mine is wrong? Whilst the dogmatic slogans exchange is more like: "I'm right and I don't listen to anybody, because I know I'm right. So, why are you asking me to support my opinion? I only want to express myself shouting out my slogans as loud as I can!" I mean, I don't think Navalniy is God, and, like I said, he managed to anger many people including myself. He had participated in a nationalistic Russian March thus aligning himself with the nationalists. And I'm not a nationalist, so I got angry of him. So, you're more than welcome to criticize my opinion (of course not using some dirty propaganda) and I am always happy to test my opinion for strength. And probably dump my opinion for yours.