• 7 Posts
  • 190 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 18th, 2023

help-circle



  • It’s not just me right: We’ve definitely seen a systematic fall in daily casualties from the ≈ 2000 we were seeing a little while back, right?

    I’m wondering what this means: Is russia slowing down the pace of attacks? They haven’t been making any gains that would suggest the defence is faltering as far as I can tell, and it’s not like they’re suddenly using more armour, so the only explanation I can see is that fewer people are dying because fewer are assaulting in the first place.


  • You keep saying this “power vacuums do not exist” line, and I’m wondering what you mean by it, because it’s used to refer to a phenomenon that we can observe everywhere, all the time.

    Do you mean that the situation in which no person or group has the power to control the people and resources in a region has never existed? Because that’s what a power vacuum is: When no person or group has the power to make and enforce a set of rules in a region.

    The first example that comes to mind of a power vacuum is when the substitute teacher leaves the fifth graders alone for fifteen minutes, and comes back to find the class playing “tag-but-the-floor-is-lava” on the tables. Of course, the fifth graders have an internal hierarchy, so they’ve already established some new norms and rules with some unofficial leaders to bout that have filled the power vacuum left by the teacher when they left the room. Regardless, this serves as a great illustration of the concept of a power vacuum: When the teacher is in the room, they are the centre of power. When they leave, the students take on the role of making and enforcing their own rules, thereby filling the power vacuum created by the absence of the teacher. The short in-between period from when the teacher has left until a new set of rules and enforcement mechanisms has been established is typically referred to as a “power vacuum”.


  • Saying “enforcement never prevents any crime” is just naive. Say what you want about the american justice system, but even over there, they’ve incarcerated repeat offenders of assault, robbery, etc. where the incarceration itself most definitely prevents them from harming more people.

    If you’re talking about actual prevention, just look to the programs enforced in several European countries that have provably been very effective in taking people who have been living off crime and turning them into productive citizens of society.

    Yes, it’s been shown several times that fear of punishment is extremely ineffective at preventing crime. That doesn’t mean law enforcement doesn’t prevent crime. Putting a person that abuses their family in jail most definitely prevents them from continuing to abuse their family.


  • You say they’re arguing against strawmen, but do nothing to refute the arguments or show why they’re strawmen. Let’s say you have what you want: Rules but no rulers, direct democracy, and government but no state (please explain the latter in more detail).

    The local hospital needs to decide how much money (read: resources) to spend on constructing a new wing, and who should do the job. A power line has to be built to replace the one that just fell down, and your direct democracy decided last week that you want to do something to incentivise the farmers to produce healthier and more sustainable food, rather than easy to produce and unhealthy food, but you haven’t ironed out the details yet. The next option you have to affect these decisions is later today, when you’ll have some kind of meeting or vote to decide on the matters. How you will find a time and place that allows everyone to have their say is an obvious issue, but I’ll leave it to you to explain how to overcome it.

    These decisions need to be made, and when everyone doesn’t agree, there needs to be a mechanism to get stuff done regardless. I haven’t even gotten started on how to deal with internal groups or outside forces that want to exploit the system or the society as a whole.

    Please explain how this is solved without some kind of hierarchical system where some people make decisions and enforce those decisions on behalf of the group as a whole. These are the roles we typically assign to “rulers” or “the state” (i.e. the bureaucracy).






  • Lots of good points here. I think it’s worth underscoring that even though all these deep strikes are done using Ukrainian drones, the supply of medium range missiles and fighter jets likely massively facilitates them, by forcing russia to concentrate air defences in regions exposed to those weapons.

    Hell, just the fact that an F16 could be in the area has a suppressing effect, as it makes the russians more careful in turning on AA radar, which is exposed to HARM’s.

    I think what we’re seeing is the Ukrainians taking maximum advantage of domestic weapons production and the AA dilemma russia is in. This is only going to get better.


  • This has to be the clearest indicator anyone could ask for that russia is running on fumes. I can’t think of any other reason they would be sending people on crutches into assaults.

    We’re seeing this more and more often lately, just the past couple days there have been videos of wounded being used to move supplies to the front line, and of wounded being discharged from the hospital before they’ve recovered in order to return to the front.

    No army that is working in a sustainable way and can replace its losses works like that.




  • A key mark of any effective organisation, and one of the advantages we’ve seen time and again that democratic nations militaries over authoritarian nations ones, is perfectly illustrated here: The willingness to criticise one’s own leadership and established procedures.

    By acknowledging what doesn’t work, it becomes possible to improve. Hopefully leadership is able to learn from this, and provide more effective training in the future. I seem to remember reading that basic training has been extended recently, that could help.




  • I dont know exactly what you mean by “collapse”, but they’re obviously spending far more money than what they can sustain.

    They’re spending a lot on keeping the looks good and suppressing information and protests, but you can only keep people who can’t afford food or a home suppressed for so long.

    Not saying that is the case now, but with an interest rate at > 20 %, and decreasing industrial output, they’re going to reach a breaking point sometime.

    Just think about the fact that in any democratic country, the current economic situation in Russia would have caused the government to be thrown out long ago- even without considering all the casualties from the war.

    I definitely think that Russia at some point will be unable to keep the people locked down, and that the current people in charge will be forced out of power. The resulting degree of fragmentation, power struggle, and “collapse” of the Russian Federation just depends on how far they are able to draw the string before it snaps.