2023 puzzles, 2024 answers

2023 was a puzzling year. It defied expectations on a number of fronts.

In Ukraine/Russia, there were expectations that the war's staggering casualties and unclear aims for the Russian side would have demoralised its soldiers sufficiently so that with the first strong Ukrainian offensive, the front would crumble.

In the US, there were expectations that charging DJT on 91 counts, including financial fraud, passing around government secrets, and insurrection to overthrow the constitutional order, was serious enough to turn voters away from this stinking blob of bile.

It seems that in these two particular instances at least, the masses no longer behave as expected by some members of the highly educated liberal elites. These instances might turn out to be symptoms of a more fundamental process - the approaching end of liberal democracy/free market economy/capitalism.

The way societies have organised their economic and political order throughout history has not been independent of technology. The reproductive chances and thus success of various institutions and power structures have proven to be very different in hunter-gatherer, agrarian, industrial, and post-industrial societies. Take, for example, slavery or feudal ties of peasants to land - largely unnecessary in nomadic societies, essential in ancient, medieval, and pre-industial agrarian societies, and an impediment to power accumulation in industrial and post-industrial societies where labour has to be mobile and to some extent creative. 

Technological innovations have been major drivers of change in the social order. The discovery of new ways to produce metals, cultivate the land, mechanise labour, reproduce information, changed not only the productivity of specific workers - it changed how societies organised their economies, fought wars, thought about ethics and morals, and set their structures of political power. 

Consider the invention of the printing press in 1440. A few decades later, discontent with practices tolerated and encouraged by the leadership of the Church swept a large section of its congregation, leading to bloody wars and conflicts, lasting for decades and claiming victims for centuries to come. The new doctrine of Protestantism that emerged from this process fundamentally changed the power relations in the economy and society, enabling the creation of the liberal/market-economy/capitalist institutions that took hold later on. But without the printing press, the rumblings of a disgruntled member of the clergy, rather than receive the mass distribution that they did by being printed and posted on church doors across the land, would most probably have had the fate of similar ramblings of countless predecessors.

Is social media the new printing press that is transforming how we produce, spread, and consume information, and ultimately how we think about the surrounding world? Are drones and automated weapons the new iron that would determine who will dominate on the battlefields and thus in the geopolitical arena? Is AI the new steam engine that will determine what jobs but also what type of labour relations will prevail in the future?

2024 will provide a lot more data that would shed light on the path to finding answers to these puzzles.

It is highly likely that in the first half of the year, millions of people will vote with conviction for DJT in the Republican primaries and for VVP in the March presidential plebiscite. What happens in the second half of the year is less certain and much more consequential.

If DJT loses, the MAGA wave might swiftly die down. Fundamental tensions in the US society may not be resolved so easily, but with economic growth and appropriate social policies, they may be ironed out until the next major crisis. With the West not collapsing (yet?) and continuing to assist Ukraine, VVP's deadly grip on the levers of power may loosen sufficiently for the war front (or the empire itself) to start to crumble on the edges, leading eventually to a regime change.

By contrast, if the proud deplorables are numerous enough in the few places that matter to bring DJT back in the White House, despite likely criminal convictions - if the mobniks continue to march en masse to their slaughter, without much of a protest - this will reveal that in a world of information overload, social media bubbles, and epistemological confusion, there is no need for mass repression/suppression of dissenting voices for totalitarian/authoritarian institutions to prevail.

Time (the year 2024 in particular) will tell whether DJT and VVP are just temporary glitches on a path of social progress or harbingers of a dystopian future. 

Age of Extremism

A new Age of Extremes is upon us.

Extremists have taken over the world affairs. They are steering the wheel, pressing the gas, frantically screaming as they head into the nearest precipice, with the rest of us thrown around as limp cargo at the back. 

Extremists have turned the Earth's most densely populated 365 square km into a launchpad for horrendous terror attacks and almost daily rocket launches.

Extremists have buried the peace process, convincing the Israeli public that oppression and disrespect for the human condition of millions can sustain in perpetuity a safe and prosperous existence for the remaining population.

Extremists have turned a large area, a little bit further NorthEast, home to some of the world's oldest cultural traditions, into a training ground for terrorists, a supplier to aggressors, a violent suppressor of women and descending voices.

Extremists in charge of the largest landmass on earth have started a bloody war against a neighbouring country, with no end in sight, threatening the world with a nuclear armageddon if their geopolitical wet dreams do not materialise.

Extremists in what used to be the most populous country in the world are ramping up their military fast, also dreaming of imperial expansion.

Extremists in what is now the most populous country in the world are eroding the country's democratic institutions and traditions, dreaming of ethnic purity along religious lines.

Extremists in the world's top economy are holding hostage the country's legislative branch, readying to have another go at destroying the country's democracy, which withstood a four-year attack from the very top.

Extremists in what used to be the world's major power before that managed to convince its population that it should abandon the world's most promising experiment at building a democratic, peaceful, and prosperous coexistence, despite differences in language, culture, and history, over what used to be the world's bloodiest continent.

Extremists in my neck of the woods almost achieved the same, but at the last moment, reason prevailed.

The extremists are winning, but they haven't won yet. 

The extremists grow and feed on each other's extremism. They need strong extremists in their opposition in order to draw power and support. If there are none, the extremists will invent them. But the extremists stand little chance of success against an organised, determined, resolute non-extremist majority. 

Extremists have a strong sway of the narrative, a large chunk of the information space, and even some major levers of power. But in most places, they remain a minority.

The extremists have created a polarised world where it is impossible not to pick sides. Even if you try to stay away from tragic choices, the extremists will decide for you which side to put you on and then punish you accordingly. 

In this polarised world, the most important strategy choice is where to draw the lines of bifurcation. If you side with an extremist, you become an extremist, and extremism thus gains further ground.

So, what could identify and unite an anti-extremist pole?

First, absolute respect of basic human rights. No matter how hideous a terror attack or an aggression, no matter how excruciating the pain, the sorrow, the grief are, there is no justification for committing or tolerating war crimes or ethnic cleansing, nor is there for turning away refugees.

Second, freedom of speech and a prevalence of empirical facts over emotive narratives, conspiracy theories, and propaganda. All opinions have the right to be heard, but the truth is not a matter of opinion. There are standards for establishing facts that should be adhered to. This is a point both for keeping good information hygiene at the personal level and for holding media and institutions accountable for maintaining solid standards on facts at the collective level.

Third and last, the rule of law and non-violence. There are many wrongs in the world, but they should be righted only through due process. If there is no resolution available through courts and votes, campaigning, strikes, peaceful resistance, civil disobedience take precedence over armed struggle. Violence is only permitted in defence, in response to aggression, and only to the extent that it causes less suffering than the evil it prevents (here and now, in the material world and not in metaphysical constructs).

All other issues come secondary in the age of extremes.

Political competition is the cornerstone of liberal democracies. We can and should continue to disagree and argue about taxation, welfare, the role of the state, the best policies for achieving goals, the best people in charge of setting policies and goals, etc., etc. However, we should no longer tolerate coalitions, coexistence on the same political platform, or geopolitical alliances with individuals, groups, or leaders that do not respect the above three minimum standards of anti-extremism.

We can still avoid a total catastrophe, but we are running out of time.

15% hope

The coming week will mark one year since the start of the nightmare in Ukraine.

The Russian invasion took me by surprise. One year ago, it was totally unbelievable to me that a war of such scale could take place between Russia and Ukraine - two segments of my own heritage. 

Yes, there was fighting in Donbas in 2014-2015, with some exchange of fire taking place since then, but nothing comparable to what's happening since last February, with more than 200,000 deaths so far and a meat grinder of about 1000 souls per day at the current rate.

My reaction to the invasion, perhaps not very wisely, was to rediscover my connection with Donbas and more generally with my Russian and Ukrainian heritage. 

I looked for and found on the map the village where my mother was born (on the frontline, on the side controlled by the Ukrainian forces, currently under heavy Russian attack). I looked for and found on the map the town where she grew up as a teenager and where my (Ukrainian) grandmother and (Russian) grandfather are buried (on the frontline, on the side controlled since 2014 by the pro-Kremlin forces). 

Since last February, a number of Russian and Ukrainian telegram channels and podcasts have made it into my daily routine. I've learned a lot more than I knew before about the history and politics of Russia, Ukraine, and the wider region. I dare say that my Russian is now in much better shape than it was a year ago, while Duolingo informs me that I can boast of having mastered 604 Ukrainian words so far.

One year is a long time for a nightmare. The human psyche is not fit to deal with such horrors over such a long time. The mind finds mechanisms to cope.

For those like me living far from the frontline, without having to constantly dread the fate of friends and close relatives that fight or live on the frontline, coping is not that hard. The war appears from time to time on the newsreel, but it is not that hard to put it on the back burner and concentrate on more immediate concerns. 

For those more directly involved, coping is harder, but not impossible. 

On the Ukrainian side, the most common psychological coping mechanism is fairly straightforward. An invading force has come to get you - you need to take care of your physical survival. The enemy is pure evil. They shoot at you, torture you, rape you. Dealing with this is very hard, very painful, but psychologically, philosophically, it is rather straightforward - you fight or you die (or surrender, which in some cases may be an even worse outcome).

On the Russian side, a large section of society also seems to cope successfully with this nightmare. For them, it is not entirely clear why there is a special military operation for a whole year in Ukraine, but the 8-year limbo of Donbas had to end somehow. They believe there is a horrible ruling class in Ukraine, puppets of the evil West who, with the help of extremists, nationalistic propaganda, and money from the West, suppress and brainwash their fellow men and women. Some people die in the special military operation, but defending the pride of the nation comes at a price. The glorious history of Russia is built on the sacrifice of national heroes. No room for whining during historic times.

There is, however, a small section of Russian society that has no coping mechanism available - people holding western, liberal, humanitarian, scientific, materialistic outlook. A section that has to live with a never-ending, never quieting cognitive dissonance. A section that in some sociological studies is estimated to correspond to about 15% of society within the country and perhaps a larger portion of its diaspora.

They see the horrible crimes committed by their fellow countrymen, by watching, reading or listening to banned or suppressed sources, and they don't attribute these crimes to propaganda staged by the West. They see whole towns and cities raised to the ground by the artillery of their own army, towns and cities largely inhabited by people speaking the same language as theirs. People who lived for decades in the same country as them, with the same or similar cultural code as them. People who may be distant or even close relatives of theirs.

They cannot dismiss the perpetrators of these crimes as being genetically or culturally evil. They recognise that this whole tragedy is brought upon by their own kind, their own neighbours, their own family. They realise that they are genetically, culturally destined to be seen on the side of evil. For as long as they live, the crimes of their countrymen will tarnish their own reputation too. And they feel completely helpless to change that. The few that tried are rotting away, somewhere far away, in the cold, harsh colonies of the Russian penal system. 

This nightmare cannot end as aspired by the various cognitively settled archetypes described above. It will not end with Putin taking poison hours before the allied forces break into his bunker in Moscow. It will not end with Russia restoring its sphere of influence from the Soviet era. 

The nightmare will not end by fizzling out, slowly dropping off the newsreel until we all forget about it. Russia is too big, too close to Europe, to become a North Korea, a slightly annoying but largely harmless oddity. 

The crimes the Russian troops committed, the nuclear threats the country's leadership levied, have been too numerous, too odious to be forgotten. Russia slipping silently back into the world economy is also not a realistic scenario. 

The only non-apocalyptic end to this nightmare, in my humble opinion, is for that 15% of Russians with cognitive dissonance to become 16%, then 17%, then 20%, then enough percent so that it fights off, cuts off the cancerous monstrosity, the death cult that has taken over the country's leadership and the minds of the majority in their country.

15% is not much, but this 15% is our only hope.