What are you currently reading?

[Bachtoven]

This is shaping up to be quite a good thriller. Some of the dialogue is rather lame, though.

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

You: A Natural History. William B. Irvine.

[Florestan]

War and Peace

Just started re-reading it after 30 years.

[SimonNZ]

Started this some time back but had to put it aside for something else. Now getting into it properly.

and when wanting something lighter:



Which is a good story (though his regular opining on The Russian Mind now reads as Reagan-era paranoia), but could easily have been half the length if, especially, he wasn't so keen to describe every bit of tech in fetishistic detail.

[AnotherSpin]

[..]

Which is a good story (though his regular opining on The Russian Mind now reads as Reagan-era paranoia), but could easily have been half the length if, especially, he wasn't so keen to describe every bit of tech in fetishistic detail.

Considering what the Russians are doing now, the paranoia of the Reagan era seems like a lighthearted pastime.

[SimonNZ]

Considering what the Russians are doing now, the paranoia of the Reagan era seems like a lighthearted pastime.

Well actually no, the paranoias of the Reagan era were - even in the light of recent developments - far far worse.

[AnotherSpin]

Well actually no, the paranoias of the Reagan era were - even in the light of recent developments - far far worse.

One way or another, Reagan's America and other Western countries managed to bring about the collapse of the USSR. I hope the same happens to Putin's fake empire, and very soon.

But of course, you have a point. The Russians are such sweethearts, after all — they dance ballet, beat everyone at chess, and kill civilians in Ukraine. What's not to love or admire about that?

[Florestan]

One way or another, Reagan's America and other Western countries managed to bring about the collapse of the USSR. I hope the same happens to Putin's fake empire, and very soon.

Amen! Blessed be the souls of Reagan, Thatcher and Pope John Paul ÎI.

[Christo]

Amen! Blessed be the souls of Reagan, Thatcher and Pope John Paul ÎI.

Amen. Except that Thatcher -- may God have it anyway -- had no soul.

[Bachtoven]

I just started this. So far, it's very good.

[Spotted Horses]

One way or another, Reagan's America and other Western countries managed to bring about the collapse of the USSR. I hope the same happens to Putin's fake empire, and very soon.

Let's give credit where credit is due. It was Gorbachev who brought on the collapse of the СССР, through glasnost and perestroika. He had the naive idea that the sham democracy could become a real democracy through reform, except when controls were loosened no one want to do anything except get out.

[AnotherSpin]

Let's give credit where credit is due. It was Gorbachev who brought on the collapse of the СССР, through glasnost and perestroika. He had the naive idea that the sham democracy could become a real democracy through reform, except when controls were loosened no one want to do anything except get out.

I don't think so. Gorbachev wanted to reform the communist regime and never considered dissolving the USSR. On the contrary, he was a staunch opponent of the very idea. Before the referendum in Ukraine about leaving the Union, Gorbachev addressed Ukrainians on TV, pleading with them to vote against it. Interestingly, at the same time, George H. W. Bush gave a speech in Kyiv before the Rada (so-called Chicken Kiev speech), also urging Ukraine not to leave.

Gorbachev believed he had everything under control. But other party officials outmaneuvered him. First, Yeltsin came up with the idea of Russia seceding from the USSR, effectively rendering Gorbachev's position as the first and last President of the USSR meaningless. Then Ukraine and Belarus followed. The Baltic states and the Caucasus countries were already on their way out. Until the end of his life, Gorbachev expressed regret over the collapse of the empire and particularly remained opposed to Ukraine's independence.

[Spotted Horses]

I don't think so. Gorbachev wanted to reform the communist regime and never considered dissolving the USSR. On the contrary, he was a staunch opponent of the very idea. Before the referendum in Ukraine about leaving the Union, Gorbachev addressed Ukrainians on TV, pleading with them to vote against it. Interestingly, at the same time, George H. W. Bush gave a speech in Kyiv before the Rada (so-called Chicken Kiev speech), also urging Ukraine not to leave.

Gorbachev believed he had everything under control. But other party officials outmaneuvered him. First, Yeltsin came up with the idea of Russia seceding from the USSR, effectively rendering Gorbachev's position as the first and last President of the USSR meaningless. Then Ukraine and Belarus followed. The Baltic states and the Caucasus countries were already on their way out. Until the end of his life, Gorbachev expressed regret over the collapse of the empire and particularly remained opposed to Ukraine's independence.

You are repeating my comment. Gorbachev didn't want to dissolve the Soviet Union, he thought he could reform the it, but he didn't appreciate the level of cynicism and antipathy towards the regime. As soon as people saw an opening they abandoned it.

[Ganondorf]

Continuing Time Regained... Duchesse de Guermantes actually has some character development, grieving for Saint-Loup's death. At first she seemed a rather flat character. Definitely an interesting development.

Saint-Loup seemed for the longest time the only major male character in this work that seemed remotely likable... and then he starts to cheat on Gilberte.

[hopefullytrusting]

Inspired by Jerusalem: William Blake, Complete with Variants

[AnotherSpin]

You are repeating my comment. Gorbachev didn't want to dissolve the Soviet Union, he thought he could reform the it, but he didn't appreciate the level of cynicism and antipathy towards the regime. As soon as people saw an opening they abandoned it.

Perhaps the difference between what you said and what I said lies in nuances, but in any case, the credit for the collapse of the USSR does not belong to Gorbachev, but to those people, both inside and outside, who fought to make it happen — some at the cost of their lives.

[SimonNZ]

Perhaps the difference between what you said and what I said lies in nuances, but in any case, the credit for the collapse of the USSR does not belong to Gorbachev, but to those people, both inside and outside, who fought to make it happen — some at the cost of their lives.

Tony Judt gives the better part of a chapter in Postwar detailing how Gorbachev could have rolled the tanks out at any part of the process but chose not to. He finds Reagan's role in the fall of the Soviet Union to be negligible, and Thatchers not at all.

(And, lest we forget, Reagan and Thatcher were friends and supporters of plenty of murderous autocrats and regimes)

[AnotherSpin]

Tony Judt gives the better part of a chapter in Postwar detailing how Gorbachev could have rolled the tanks out at any part of the process but chose not to. He finds Reagan's role in the fall of the Soviet Union to be negligible, and Thatchers not at all.

(And, lest we forget, Reagan and Thatcher were friends and supporters of plenty of murderous autocrats and regimes)

I do not want to claim that my understanding of the processes that took place at that time is final and unquestionable. Nevertheless, I will note that I know what happened not from books. It seems to me that there were several reasons, and they were different, maybe even contradictory. Among other things, the arms race that Reagan took to a new level economically drained the communist regime and brought it to the brink of bankruptcy. I didn't mention Thatcher  

And Gorbachev was rolling in tanks. In Vilnius, Tbilisi, Baku, etc.

[Artem]

One of the best books I've read this year. Quite illuminating. A must have for fans of Francis Bacon and modern art.

[DavidW]

Started this some time back but had to put it aside for something else. Now getting into it properly.

and when wanting something lighter:



Which is a good story (though his regular opining on The Russian Mind now reads as Reagan-era paranoia), but could easily have been half the length if, especially, he wasn't so keen to describe every bit of tech in fetishistic detail.

That is why I liked Without Remorse so much. High octane action without endless technology.