- Joined
- Sep 2, 2017
- Messages
- 33,607
- Reaction score
- 5,193
- Location
- GDL/Sweden
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
"Let us begin with this evident fact: "Russia" (Muscovy) does not belong at all to Europe, but to Asia. It follows that judging "Russia" (Muscovy) and the "Russians" (Muscovites) by our European standards is a mistake to be avoided."—gonzague de reynold, 19501
In methodological terms, one should de-Europeanise any analysis of "Russian" (Muscovy ) policy.— thomas gomart, 20062
I am reading this book right now, and I want to share with your board members parlors from this book, in order to better understand the character of the second cold war and end the endless discussions around very nature of Moscow empire . the major problem with analysis of Moscow aggression against us" de-Europeanise any analysis of Muscovite policy" , " Muscovy doesn´t belong at all to Europe, but to Asia. It follows that judging Moscow and the Muscovites by our European standards is a mistake to be avoided."
" The superficial resemblance of Russia to a Western country, and of the majority (not all) of its people to white Europeans and North Americans, presents an obstacle to objective understanding of the country because it takes an effort of mind to grasp and remember the underlying differences. An assumption based on appearances that Russians are not so different, and that they see the world and react to events in the same way as Western-ers, has obstructed understanding of those ideals, values, prejudices, hopes, fears, and motivations that are shared by many Russians but are distinctive or alien to the West. This misconception has real and important implications for managing the relationship with Russia as a country. The assumptions and preconcep-tions of its leadership are so much at odds with what is taken for granted as common ground in the Euro-Atlantic community that a false impression of similarity provides fertile ground for misunderstandings, miscommunica-tion, and miscalculation. ....
Russia borrows Western terms to describe its own system—“president,” “parliament,” “elections,” “Liberal Democratic Party”—but none of these terms means quite what it implies in a Western context, and any assumption that it does, though on the face of it reasonable, only leads to further confusion for the unwary. "
In methodological terms, one should de-Europeanise any analysis of "Russian" (Muscovy ) policy.— thomas gomart, 20062
I am reading this book right now, and I want to share with your board members parlors from this book, in order to better understand the character of the second cold war and end the endless discussions around very nature of Moscow empire . the major problem with analysis of Moscow aggression against us" de-Europeanise any analysis of Muscovite policy" , " Muscovy doesn´t belong at all to Europe, but to Asia. It follows that judging Moscow and the Muscovites by our European standards is a mistake to be avoided."
" The superficial resemblance of Russia to a Western country, and of the majority (not all) of its people to white Europeans and North Americans, presents an obstacle to objective understanding of the country because it takes an effort of mind to grasp and remember the underlying differences. An assumption based on appearances that Russians are not so different, and that they see the world and react to events in the same way as Western-ers, has obstructed understanding of those ideals, values, prejudices, hopes, fears, and motivations that are shared by many Russians but are distinctive or alien to the West. This misconception has real and important implications for managing the relationship with Russia as a country. The assumptions and preconcep-tions of its leadership are so much at odds with what is taken for granted as common ground in the Euro-Atlantic community that a false impression of similarity provides fertile ground for misunderstandings, miscommunica-tion, and miscalculation. ....
Russia borrows Western terms to describe its own system—“president,” “parliament,” “elections,” “Liberal Democratic Party”—but none of these terms means quite what it implies in a Western context, and any assumption that it does, though on the face of it reasonable, only leads to further confusion for the unwary. "
