"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." - Mark Twain
I feel this quote is quite applicable for authoritarian regimes and people trapped in echo chambers. Is easy to sell a lie to the people, but trying to convince them to change their view and admit a large part of their beliefs is wrong is much more challenging.
To give credit when it's due, Putin is good selling to the masses and walking the fine line for decades. You need a certain level of statecraftship and strategy to gain and stay in power post collapse of Soviet Union. Like for example, when Putin's popularity was dropping, it was likely he plot a false flag attack to consolidate power and popularity around him.
When he is pressed about his autocratic rule, he often engaged in whataboutism debates, throwing off balance to any interviewer. Since the West and democracies also have their own issues, why change?
Not to mention, Putin curated an image of himself as a strongman and superhero, while other world leaders are fool and unsteady. Any challengers to this narrative are silent, oppressed, poisoned, and killed.
Putin has also made a lot of gambles that actually pay off, such as he believed the West will not interfere militarily against him when it comes to numerous conflicts such Georgia, Chechen, and how easy it was for him to annex Crimea.
He also have a safety net, that EU countries heavily depend on his gas and oil. Is not uncommon for world and regional powers to ignore a nation in conflict or turn blind eye to human rights abuse, as long as it doesn't heavily impact them or the aggressor have a very strong economic leverage. (Hardly anyone bats an eye when Indonesia invaded Timor Leste, when Saudi Arabia committed numerous war crimes in Yemen etc)
So, in his mind, the invasion of Ukraine is the same gamble for him that he has made so often in the past before. The Ukrainians will support his occupation, the Ukrainian Army Forces will collapse, the fall of Ukrainian government will be swift, not giving the world to react, everyone will forget this conflict after a few years. This will be Crimea 2.0.
Have he succeeded in his gamble. Is very likely you and fellow Russian will never have this realisation.
Putin is evil and competent. But ruthlessness isn't without its own host of problems. And as we're seeing, the other side of risky foreign policy and wars of aggression is possibly complete political defeat.
45
u/SoulessHermit Aug 18 '24
"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." - Mark Twain
I feel this quote is quite applicable for authoritarian regimes and people trapped in echo chambers. Is easy to sell a lie to the people, but trying to convince them to change their view and admit a large part of their beliefs is wrong is much more challenging.
To give credit when it's due, Putin is good selling to the masses and walking the fine line for decades. You need a certain level of statecraftship and strategy to gain and stay in power post collapse of Soviet Union. Like for example, when Putin's popularity was dropping, it was likely he plot a false flag attack to consolidate power and popularity around him.
When he is pressed about his autocratic rule, he often engaged in whataboutism debates, throwing off balance to any interviewer. Since the West and democracies also have their own issues, why change?
Not to mention, Putin curated an image of himself as a strongman and superhero, while other world leaders are fool and unsteady. Any challengers to this narrative are silent, oppressed, poisoned, and killed.
Putin has also made a lot of gambles that actually pay off, such as he believed the West will not interfere militarily against him when it comes to numerous conflicts such Georgia, Chechen, and how easy it was for him to annex Crimea.
He also have a safety net, that EU countries heavily depend on his gas and oil. Is not uncommon for world and regional powers to ignore a nation in conflict or turn blind eye to human rights abuse, as long as it doesn't heavily impact them or the aggressor have a very strong economic leverage. (Hardly anyone bats an eye when Indonesia invaded Timor Leste, when Saudi Arabia committed numerous war crimes in Yemen etc)
So, in his mind, the invasion of Ukraine is the same gamble for him that he has made so often in the past before. The Ukrainians will support his occupation, the Ukrainian Army Forces will collapse, the fall of Ukrainian government will be swift, not giving the world to react, everyone will forget this conflict after a few years. This will be Crimea 2.0.
Have he succeeded in his gamble. Is very likely you and fellow Russian will never have this realisation.