Im gonna explain this by following your questions.

1, They keep voting for him because of stupidity. In the big cities most people are educated and woke, especially in our generation. However the villages ( and there are a lot of them) are filled with uneducated, old fools and they believe all kind of propaganda. These people are too far gone, orban can buy their votes with giving out potates( not a joke, they did that, and it succeeded).

2, no we don't want out of the EU, the people voting for him are so stupid , they can't even realize the gravity of the situation. Most of them probably don't know what the EU and Nato is .

3,Yes they absolutely believe the rethoric and he is a master manipulator, so...

4, Yes they are very conservative sadly. Most of these people grown up in communism and sadly u can't change them for the better. If they got trash food to eat and a toilet to s*** in, it's totally enough for them, to live in poverty fovever and glorify their god forever .

We, the young generation under 30 totally powerless here, best thing to do is grind our ass off, and when the ship sinks , just leave this s***hole.

Not quite the same bc in the Netherlands u never got an absolute majority ruling party really, the 2nd losing candidate got 35% of votes which is a lot more than the VVD even

But part of it is also that he has used his power to reorganize the political system in his favor and took control over a lot of the media directly thru the state and private media thru his cronies

this article made me sick this morning and I dont think im ready to discuss it without blacking out

im legit scared for my friends in russia who are sending me this not knowing what to do with themselves. not everybody can afford leaving russia and starting a new life somewhere else

you actually on point.
He took over nearly all the media and uses it for propaganda.
It's a wrap for the elderly here, because they watch television all day long and their brain is 100% dead now

didnt need me to tell you but it's not yours or their fault, im sorry to hear theyre in this situation

twitter.com/Veoloquecreo/status/1510095588259512322?t=sRQBMy1w5eeTF-tXeQ-KdA&s=19

I do have to mention that going thru this guy's contributions to ria he seems to be an absolute psycho gimp from pulp fiction type of guy who they let out every once in a while to, quite literally, own the libs

but its got like 200k+ views already so you know its not a weirdo posting on their blogspot but actually someone with an audience, or at least addressing a big audience with this garbage

i read the rest of his tweets and i just can't understand. how a leftist can be such in favor of the russian imperialism.

putin and his clan literally finance and support fascist and far right movements in europe. how can you defend them, when they see you as their ennemy. these guys in power in Russia aren't communists, even if they lament the fall of the USSR. they are some of the richest capitalists in the world. they are homophobic, racist far right militants.

just because america is a racist awful capitalist empire shouldn't mean you should side with the other racist awful capitalist empire

I'm just concerned about the 'nazi militia' in Ukraine and their way of doing things there, I've seen a lot of videos of people getting tied in public and tortured by other people, even police participating in that (?)

are they 'bad people' ? or are they treated like this because they are considered 'traitors' by the militia ? how can we fkin know?

I'm sorry I am only concerned that NATO is actively rooting for this right-wing behaviour and all the military and economic support from other countries goes to the side that kills their own people in order to put the blame on the other side and receive more and more support...(I'm not generalizing here, I know both sides are bad but I have a feeling the side everyone wants to defend is doing worse than the side everyone wants to hate)

Didn't read that guys tweets, but generally speaking when it comes to leftists who actually support the invasion, like many liberals, some unprincipled leftists can't think of world politics as something different than teamsports.

When there's a lot of ridiculous propaganda and hysteria, it's an easy trap for many that you go too far in the other direction.

It's the same reason why imo recently a lot more leftist are now looking at China as an actual communist country because they've been demonized in the media because of worsening relations with the West since they've more and more been threatening their power.

It's not as common as liberals are making it seem, they'll put many others in this box who don't deserve it as we've seen itt even, but there are some leftists who are just very dumb and think that anything the US hates is immediately good.

they were on the right side once 80 years ago so they must always be right and everyone they say is a nazi must be one and they can never be nazis themselves

Where else has this happened?

The difference of a massacre targeting civilians and genocide is very small tbh. Like "the intent to destroy" is very much open to interpretation, when does a massacre not come with the intent to destroy exactly?

It's terrible regardless tho and should absolutely be investigated.

yeah, i agree with your post.

i'm just salty about leftists on twitter treating present day Russia as an anti fascist resistant when this country is literally supporting fascists in my country

some people need to learn that the enemies of your enemies are not always your friends, especially when they're far right billionnaires, which russian elites are

I feel you

Some people just don't want to understand the nuance and context of a preventable proxy-war, easier to just say it's the good guys vs the bad guys

I think there’s a palpable difference in civilian casualties secondary to a drone or missile strike and ground execution of civilians by soldiers. Both certainly come with an intent to destroy but the latter has basically zero room for nuance.

But these types of massacres have happened a lot, they're rarely ever talked about as genocides.

For example during the war in Ethiopia the TPLF committed the Mai Kadra massacre and nobody calling that a massacre.

financialpost.com/news/economy/russia-sanctions-threaten-to-dilute-dominance-of-u-s-dollar-says-imf-official

The unprecedented financial sanctions imposed on Russia after its invasion of Ukraine threaten to gradually dilute the dominance of the US dollar and result in a more fragmented international monetary system, a top official at the IMF has warned.

Gita Gopinath, the IMF’s first deputy managing director, said the sweeping measures imposed by western countries following Russia’s invasion, including restrictions on its central bank, could encourage the emergence of small currency blocs based on trade between separate groups of countries.

To be honest, I don’t know much about that specific event but I’m also not resigned to the idea that Bucha meets the criteria for a “genocide” either. There is certainly some sort of ethical distinction in both of these events that set them apart from “civilian casualties of war”, even if its hard to find a good descriptive term.

There is certainly some sort of ethical distinction in both of these events that set them apart from civilian casualties or war, even if its hard to find a good descriptive term.

Completely agree with that. I don't know if I agree with how broadly the term genocide is used sometimes tbh, like I don't feel like what happened in Bucha or Mai Kadra for example should be put in the same category as the Rwandan genocide for example. Of course you could say there are "degrees" to genocide maybe, but it's not really talked about it like that.

Also according to the official defintion ethnic cleansing could be called genocide, ethnic cleansing is not even a seperate concept in international law.

interesting headline but the article wasn't really as hopeful of that result as the headline/tagline. I think on some level this is true though definitely, although realistically it's probably an indicator less of US financial dominance and rather just a good indicator of the ability of smaller countries to achieve some level of financial sovereignty easier than they would have before through currency negotiations. The dominance of the US financially doesn't really rely on the dollar intrinsically even if that sounds backwards to say.

With that said

The war would also spur the adoption of digital finance, from cryptocurrencies to stablecoins and central bank digital currencies, she added.

Sure is funny how we went from "cryptocurrency is important because it allows you to circumvent the state" to "cryptocurrency is actually important because it allows a state to preserve itself"

this whole Bucha tragedy will cause another escalation