Putin underestimates civil society

In his KGB-aberrated mind, #Putin underestimates civil society, believes #Maidan uprising could only be made real by foreign powers 1/2

1 Comment

  1. Beauregard

    Where are citations and references? Or is this just
    flapping the fingers on a keyboard?

    A statement like this would be best documented in
    some way so that it can be circulated, yes?

    After reading Walt’s citation, ammunition against the
    Putin acolytes would be helpful.

    Instead of ski trips to the Carpathians maybe a trip
    to a town along the Dnipro where comments are obtained
    from real Ukrainians would be a way.

    I guess fear assassination? Yes the FSB is out there.
    But I suspect they are in Lviv also?

    What is point of becoming Ukrainian Oligarch if you
    have to bow to Putin?

    Here is comment that I have posted before:

    Making right choices in gray areas difficult,
    by Bryan Crenshaw

    Decision making about right and wrong has always
    been difficult but never more so than in the complicated
    world of today. The problem is our choices are not always
    set in clear black and white, but often in varying shades of
    gray.

    On the broader level our nation faces options of which none
    seem tenable. In the military we want to downsize, but don’t
    touch “our” bases. We want to protect the environment but
    meet needs of industry. There is conflict in needs for public
    services and exercising responsibility in taxation.

    When we move to the personal level we find the same
    type of conflict. Every day we are called upon to make
    choices about the moral issues of life, about right and
    wrong. How do we make such choices

    Of course we have the classic guidelines — the Ten
    Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount, the Golden
    Rule. But even with these we sometimes find ourselves
    confused as we deal with gray areas, and have difficulty
    in decision making.

    Let me suggest a series of questions which might be helpful
    as we seek to make decisions about right and wrong.

    1. Ask first, “Does it have to be concealed?” Evil loves darkness,
    goodness loves light. When something is wrong it likes to
    slip around in dark corners. When something is good it can
    stand the scrutiny of broad daylight.

    2. A second question: “Where does it lead?” The person
    who chooses a path also chooses where that path comes out.
    Therefore, one needs to think not only about a specific act but
    the direction in which that act leads. If the direction is wrong
    the destination can never be right.

    Young people should be especially sensitive in this area. So
    many wrongs are lightly accepted by society, and it is easy
    to drift into situations which bring disaster.

    3. A third question: “How does this affect other people?”
    We like to think we live alone and what we do is our business
    and no one else’s. This is simply not true. Almost everything
    we do has an effect on many other people.

    Each of us can recall many instances where one person’s
    wrongdoing has brought disastrous consequences upon others –
    – effect which could have been easily foreseen if the person
    had stopped to think.

    4. The next question: “Would it be all right, and would the
    world be just as happy and well off if everyone did this; or
    am I trying to give myself special privilege?”

    We remember Immanual Kant’s Categorical Imperative which
    asked, “What would be the result if everyone did as I do?”
    And Paul’s admonition, “love does not purse selfish advantage.”

    To be aware of these questions is not enough. For them to be
    effective there needs to be three additional things.

    First, a moral sensitivity which remembers to ask the
    right questions at the right time.°

    Second, a moral decisiveness. To know what is good is not
    enough. There is a difference between waking up and getting
    up. There must be specific decision for the right.»

    Finally, there needs to be a moral stamina. To be sensitive
    and aware is good. To make proper decisions is better. But
    the way of victory is to maintain a stamina which continues.

    Making right choices in gray areas is difficult. To be aware
    of the dilemma is not enough. There needs to be a moral
    sensitivity which remembers to ask the right questions at
    the right time. To know what is good is not enough. There
    is a difference between waking up and getting up. There must
    be specific decision for the right. To be sensitive and aware is
    good. To make proper decisions is better. The way of victory
    is to maintain a moral stamina which continues.
    Paraphrase of Bryan Crenshaw

    Reply

Leave a Reply