text stringlengths 0 9.69k |
|---|
OO is trying to have a false statement. They say Putin can only be successful so long as [inaudible], we don’t know. To be fair, having all of us is a success. We're going to probably play what is actually what. But before that, some other points. What are the most likely in favor of this? Even if they present. Three r... |
The two reasons, one, propaganda, Putin has the ability to whatever out of the way. I got most of the current. Notice, that the amount of power that they say, is very limited. This is actually going well, so there is no reason to actually[inaudible], It is very hard for you to posit. You cannot do; Most likely the US h... |
<poi> |
This entire speech. Why maybe is the case this has gone well, what you need to explain is why the things that he would have done on the comparative Consolidated power are worse. |
</poi> |
No, no, because, okay, second, because of the prevention of US expansion. Why do the US have more power over this region? Two reasons, one, Ukraine has an active incentive to NATO. This is to prevent what happened right now. But secondly, the US is also expanding its influence in Ukraine. This is because of projects li... |
</lo> |
<dpm> |
Let me be very clear about what the counterfactual is in this debate, because it's important that even if opening opposition have some concerns about why it may be the case that it is unclear. Why, we think that the alternative world is better? There are a couple of things, there are five things. Firstly, you massively... |
Why does this matter in the debate? Because despite what opening opposition said, these individuals do care about being sanctioned. Why do we know they care about being sanctioned? We're talking about the same oligarchs who literally robbed their country in the 1990s amidst the chaos of the Soviet Union. We're talking ... |
And they're not going to be able to sustain this little bit more. Secondly, because they say the point, because Russia would have been able to more strategically, if they still continued in their current mindset because russia would have been able, for example, win certain mind strategy around the region solidify, bui... |
That's the stimulus to actually get in the real world, when it comes to all of that, they're doing. Thirdly, the environment around Russia is, they have more terrorists, for the same anxiety of the Soviet Union, and that is true. But we all hear that Sweden and Finland are joining NATO. I do not see alarm; it's obvious... |
Finally, I think we need to recognize that Russia has also invaded, and they are also related to the United states. What does all this mean? The first thing I want to point out is that regardless of whether or not Russia is able to sustain this. We give you comprehensive reasons why Russia's economy is on a trend of be... |
So in all of this, the Russian economy is going to have more extreme decisions, they are going to need more weapons, and they need to watch out for potential challenges. They have their own incentive to gain all the power that they have. None of this would happen if they could get away with it. |
</dpm> |
<dlo> |
Eleanor, stated when maduro was about to miss from Venezuela, he had huge temptation. there's a pattern, there's a clear pattern when oligarchs are about use power, where they stage huge crisis to be able to maintain power to be able to control what is happen but but most importantly, keep saying kind of, to show how t... |
important it's quite nor F but the thing why actually this kind of atrocities and people actually speaking out getting was the only way to actually maintain Ukraine under control first at on the they say look in 2022 we had power because was in control and because annexation I think these two |
illustrations are not structural enough to explain why2 you had mous power why they they said in the you were in your power this is not proven right I think2 like pu was choking and he was suffocating for four structural reasons one NATO already proposed UK you you |
have to add in remember that Ukraine was compaining that complic for not speak anything like the process of uking NATO also like laia and all the other like Lithuania all the other like B countries that are surrounding Russia in in thehere of inflence right so this |
means from the perspective of Russia pu was signicantly sof the moment that NATO was proposing Ukraine to spe the process to join is the moment that Putin was suffocating he was under the influence of fear of losing Capital two internally he was under huge critic right he was |
What does this mean? El will turn away. We're going to explain why actually the most important thing is to know what opening government say about this. There are a couple of things firstly; they say that now we'll be more reliant on all the oligarchs, and secondly, that elites might oppose Putin because one, they don't... |
Firstly, I want to explain why oligarchs are the most crucial thing for Putin holding power. That is to say, why are they in a position where they are able to resist Putin? The reason why oligarchs have such a powerful position in Russia is because they have a monopoly on state capacity. What does that mean? It means t... |
There are three important implications of this fact. Firstly, their cooperation is crucial in keeping the population complacent. That is to say, you need oligarchs that are going to spit out the propaganda; you need oligarchs that want to cooperate to the fullest extent. Secondly, the support of these oligarchs is nece... |
But that's not true. All you need to do is believe they're less likely to cooperate. That's less likely, for example, to loan billions of rubles to Putin in order to expand military operations to Africa. They're less likely to do all of these things and mobilize the capital that they have. So if people believe that Put... |
But thirdly, they do have the capacity to act against him. If you believe the analysis, they have billions and billions of dollars, and they have control of important stations, military, and police and security. I think they have the capacity to act against him. |
The second important gap is why is it the case that the oligarchs are less likely to cooperate with Putin? Opening government talks about why is it that they are less likely to cooperate. They say they are pissed off because of sanctions with generic material, and it doesn't reach the burden that opening set. There are... |
Secondly, it means that your corporations that you own are less likely to do well. Opening government says that now, for example, the EU is more likely to keep away from Russian oil and gas. The impact that they attach to that is bad for the economy in general. So people get upset. The actual impact you should reach is... |
That's extraordinarily important because the ruble is weak, and so if you, as a rich oligarch, want to participate in the global financial system to a large degree, you necessarily need to trade in US dollars or other currencies. But at the point where you're locked out of that financial system, it becomes extraordinar... |
Furthermore, the deterrence mechanism fails because they don't necessarily enjoy full-scale sanctions. My analysis shows that secondly, if all of them decide to oppose Putin, I already explained why they have the capacity to do that. Secondly, you say they don't care about finance and such, but they are oligarchs. They... |
Finally, nationalism is also contingent on this being a success. |
Firstly, we believe that the West will remain opposed. Therefore, leading to opening opposition by long-term consolidation and nationalist success. Firstly, the West needs to retain an image of strength in order for them to maintain the support of their allies, but also as a deterrence mechanism against future rogue st... |
</dlo> |
<mg> |
We're going to explain why actually the most important things know what opening government say about this. Firstly, he says that now we'll be more reliant on all dos and secondly, that Elites might suppose Putin because one, they don't think he's going to win and two, sanctions without any explanation of like why that ... |
<poi> |
oligarchs have active incentives such as mass solutions but more important, who keep out.[inaudible] |
</poi> |
one, the deterrence mechanism fails because one, they don't necessarily enjoy full scale as my analysis shows. |
secondly, if all of them decides to could,I already explain why they have the capacity to do that, secondly, you say they don't care about finance and such but they're fucking oligarchs, they like trample over other people to like, they're screw to duck right, they're like, sing in their little like gold buo because th... |
</mg> |
<mo> |
The Russian government announced that if they lose these territories in Ukraine, they will move to Berlin. I think it's really important for this to happen because it shows that the consensus within Russia is that the loss of these territories is the most important thing in the world. It matters, economics matter, Poli... |
We've heard loads of different things. He does care about retaining power, but let's talk about control a little bit. I want to flesh out what opening government talks about, what it actually means in reality. Because in reality, this looks like a slower approach; you're still trying to get assets in Ukraine. Some kind... |
But without the consent, they would seek to stay by them. In this way, it's worse for Russia. |
There are three reasons, it's less control about the approach, which is bad anyway. Secondly, you have the slowest approach, which generates great opposition from those oligarchs who don't view you as doing the thing you are paid to do because if the oligarchs care about all this money, you are not doing the thing of g... |
Thirdly, the West is very aware of these things now and has the capacity to control social media and deal with these things as well. The problem with this is that the Deputy Prime Minister made three ideas for why it's likely these things work. What is sanctions? I would say sanctions have actually favored Putin for th... |
Prior to 2014, viewed him as not getting enough done and was started to passest models between 2004 2008,we've seen there's a strong push from these people to bring in a somebody who was younger him as not getting enough done, and we have seen a strong push from these people to bring in someone who is younger. You didn... |
That mentality is what told you in a meaningful way and it also weighs the debate because it explains to you why protecting these territories matters more than the economic factors or the ability to expand. Unless, as the Prime Minister says, the oligarchs were not people through Russia; they were forced into alliance ... |
<poi> |
At the start of the war, he said he would take over Kyiv. |
</poi> |
Secondarily, that government did that, he wouldn’t be happy with some of it; he would only be happy to get the whole thing. The truth is that he is a rational person; he is a soldier. He makes battlefield adjustments in order to maximize strategic objectives. The consensus is, he can’t get everything now like he though... |
</mo> |
<gw> |
The first thing I want to deal with this explanation to gifts that basically these, all blow off everything because I think the reasons that christians are extremely dubious. the first thing they say is that these oligarchs have nothing because the ownership of these businesses has been lost. the reason that they give ... |
<poi> |
to most likely going get that over therefore, the incentive of nationalist is a point, is more important this outweighs most of the closing gov. |
</poi> |
oh my God, like, do you not care that much about nationalism like these are people who have like or business the90s which have like ruined Russia like, i’m sorry, like, obviously they care about nationalism to some extent but also like these are people who own massive amounts of businesses they care explain to you, you... |
First thing they say is that people in russia were criticizing him for being soft on us, I think being reality like able to take over country he Inc that he currently in oring which was brother I just don't think something that that the second thing they is that Ukraine something Happening wasn't prior people us and no... |
</gw> |
<ow> |
response to the push back to the government with. Explain how reception. All response to the sanctions and response to the government with. [inaudible] Push their away been away from them they're able to the they lose money fusing comparative point you have less. Second of all, being in the comparative end you are less... |
</ow> |
<pm> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.