

How to Punish Putin - lipnitsk
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/20/opinion/how-to-punish-putin.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=1

======
ilaksh
How much worse are Putin and Russia than the United States, really?

Its going to be difficult for people to comprehend this, but I think its a
matter of just a few degrees. Sure seems to me that he is a dictator who will
kill you if you get too powerful and cross him.

However, in the terms of military action, Russia's activities have been
relatively benign in comparison to the United State's recent actions.

The United States and allies certainly have played a hand in recent violent
political activities in Ukraine, although most likely through covert means.

Whereas Russia has come out in the open to assert its own influence over
nearby borders.

On the other hand, are we quite sure that there haven't been any anti-
establishment American figures who have been assassinated (by the
establishment)? Certainly there have been. Most people can't accept that
reality.

What is accepted is that the United States will readily assassinate leaders in
other countries for geopolitical purposes.

What is accepted is that the United States will readily invade other countries
under false pretenses in order to advance its own territorial or resource
desires. And the United States has taken this policy to great length recently.

There is nothing ethical about any of these activities which involve deadly
force.

The nation-state is an ancient concept that is fundamentally based on
violence. Its just an extremely official and well-respected Mafia. But still
founded on the same criminal and unethical principles of coercion by threat of
death or imprisonment.

~~~
dragonwriter
> The nation-state is an ancient concept

Actually, its not. The alignment of "nation" and "state" which it represents
is an extremely recent thing. I suspect that, among other potential errors,
you are confusing the idea of the nation-state with the idea of the state; the
two are not equivalent, in much the same way that "automobile" and "wheeled
vehicle" are not equivalent.

~~~
ilaksh
You imply that my comments should be dismissed on the basis that nation-state
is not an ancient concept. And you're wording implies that I am confused.

You did not attempt to address any of the substance of my remarks or even to
approach them. I believe this is because it challenges your world view.

What, practically speaking, is the difference between a nation-state and
state, in the context of my remarks? Should that definition or history change
my opinion of the United States or Russia, given the actual behaviors of those
countries? Should that conception change my judgement of the nation-state
given the actual activities engaged in by nation-states?

