"You think what you think, you say what they want you to say and you do what it takes to survive... " Thank you Prof Schulman for this lecture and all your efforts to be not only a silent witness but for analyses of those chronicles. And many thanks to the FreiburgInstitutee for hosting and publishing this wonderfull lecture! Science should go to mass! :)
Solche Gäste wie Ekaterina Michailowna sind immer interessant zu hören! Vielen Dank für die tolle Vorlesung von Ekaterina Schulmann! Russland sei frei!⚪️🔵⚪️
Смотрю Екатерину Михайловну в перерывах между парами, очень рад, что она стала выступать на разных площадках и аудиториях, в том числе, потому что объясняет в других странах специфику российского общества и политического режима)
Shulman is great as always! And I want to pay tribute to the facilitator - his introduction, preparation for the discussion, and facilitation were great! Looking forward to hear his discussion with Shulman, which was sadly skipped!
If only the BBC, the Times, the Telegraph etc etc were forced to spend time with Ekaterina Schulman. Then we might, one day, start to get a sense of how modern Russian minds work. Such clarity and single mindedness, I was genuinely concerned for her safety while she stayed in Russia, we should be glad she got out when she did, and it’s a bit shameful that her audience is still relatively small.
She was perfectly fine and even worked for Putin's council on human rights in Russia (ridiculous). She's not an opposition. Opposition either dead like Nemtsov or Politkovskaya or expelled or imprisoned. She's just an imperial opportunist
My complaint is Schulman & Co and Putin & Co are alike, they just differ by methods. Russian Imperialists are all alike. They don't mention that Ukraine is different, that war in Ukraine has a root cause - which is Russian Imperialism, they don't mention that Crimea is not Russia, they perfectly understand why Putin is doing what he's doing. The only thing they disagree with is the method. Shulman & Co, all these Russian opportunistic emigration agrees Ukraine must be occupied. Russian Imperialists just think that must be done WITHOUT WAR. They don't think Ukraine is an independent state. They do think Ukrainians are the people of second sort. They are imperialists. Schulman called Ukraine 'anocracy' which is sufficiently incorrect and degrading assessment and reflects her real view on Ukraine. I can name only 4 Russians that recognize Ukraine as equal to Russia and don't deeply crave Crimea to be Russian
What is your point that she's a scientist? She's not, she's a researcher in social studies. What is your point? My point is that she's Russian imperialist and opportunist and cannot be trusted and welcomed. That's my point. It is fair when you dig deeper through content analysis of her talks and speeches
11:56 - "когда вы знаете что за неправильный ответ можно получить 15 лет это поразительным образом консолидирует ОБЩЕСТВЕННОЕ МНЕНИЕ" -- ТАБЛИЦА отказов от опросов
Ахаха! Ну да, Шульман, которая находится в Германии и вообше никак не связана с политикой России, больше всех понимает, что творится в России :D Слушайте еще, она вам расскажет :D
Ekaterina, thanks for your lecture. 2 points of concern: 1. You should be on the lookout for the shorthands you use. As your current target audience is international, they are not privy to the same memes we internalized. E.g. "Crimea happened", "Then Georgia", "Turkey shot the plane", "They don't watch Irony of Fate", "Celebrate 9th of May" - these are not self-evident terms for people who don't keep a close look on Russia's history and culture. For comparison: imagine an expert talking like that about Indo-Pakistan conflicts in 2001-2021, which were crucial events for some of locals and the countries' foreign policies - but what do we know about them? Yeah. 2. After you've utilized the same half-translated slides for several lectures, I really, really think you should endeavor to translate them fully for future usage. Just imagining the struggles of people trying to understand the intricacies of our society from the similarly-colored lines on the screen based on your rapid verbal explanation - it's disheartening.
To be fair, I believe those who attend her lectures likely have a fundamental understanding of international conflicts, such as the Crimean occupation, the war with Georgia, the downing of the plane by Turkey, and the significance of May 9th to Russians. Admittedly, my knowledge of the events on the India-Pakistan border from 2001 to 2021 is limited at best. However, if I were to attend such a lecture, I would surely take the time to research it beforehand. Takes about 10 minutes of reading for a high school student, not a big deal. You are correct about the Soviet movie though, she could’ve used something else. And although I can read them, those bilingual slides also bothered me, particularly the one at 36:07. The use of green could have been interpreted as ‘in favor,’ while red could signify the opposite. There’s no standardized color palette for polling data results.
56:04 про потребительский оптимизм, мне кажется это в большей степени выводы в духе 'все не так плохо, как нам мажется могло быть" потолок не упал, банки работают, в магазинах не пустые полки"
Условно, ответ на вопрос "ожидаете ли вы умереть от голода/быть выселенным за долги в ближайшие пол года". Надо попробовать опрашивать как с уровнем тревожности про людей вокруг.
@Ekaterina_Schulmann I've almist missed this jewel of a lecture. Please open a separate youtube for you lectures in English to make your voice heard globally. Thanks ❤
it was the truth anyone younger than 45 thinks in russia tho, very few people have no influence from Soviet political system who grew up there. Hypocrite generation they are
My grandma has a lot of complaints about our government, but suggestion to do something about it is met with acusation of being a no good booticker of the west
"Should Russia continue the Ukraine special military operation or should it enter into peace talks?" It's no wonder people are against the idea of nonviolent resistance. They think it means entering into peace talks, which means making concessions to the other side. In fact, nonviolent resistance is the opposite. It means resisting without capitulating until you get what you want. It is used the same way as military action and can be used as a replacement or alongside military action or could replace military action after the military was initially used. It's more than hosting marches and rallies with signs though it can and often does include this.
I do agree whith what the professor said: (32 minute) people don't know what to think. They do agree with the war, but they would like to have some more money. Russians never trust their governments and they are right, although some of them think Putin was doing the right thing to invade Ukraine. I am Dutch (you might have noticed that I made some mistakes in my English) and I don't trust Putin either, in fact I don't think he has been a very good president. However he also had to manage with the circumstances. I have seen the Russian economy growing in the first ten years of the regime (2000 - 2010). After that it went the wrong way, but we must understand that the west didn't like it to see Russia growing, so the west started to undermine Russia. Last but not least: our governments are not to be trusted either. Anyone who trusts his government is a prisoner of his mind and his mind is a prisoner of the media.
we are not agree with war, we just know that they are not asking us about anything. So most of us just trying to accomodate ourself in the situation for we have no much things or people we can rely on. It's getting easier if you persuaded yourself that there is some sense in president's action. Otherwise your life is a horror
@@rybkabananka9695 this sounds like what a regular person from any country experiences (although the horrors do vary, but they seem consistent). Hopefully you find your strength
Weird that at 55:44 she called the optimism poll ‘schizophrenic’ because it’s countered by reduced spending. Seems there’s an underlying assumption in that observation, along the lines that consumerism delivers absolute contentment...?
Well, because it actually is internally contradicted - "the economy is doing great, i can't afford food". It's not about cutting spending on pointless consumerism, it's about eating less because you can't be sure you can afford it.
Графики интересные, но вся речь Екатерины, являющаяся комментарием к этим графикам, это только ее интерпретация. Интерпретация. В которой много личных и спорных суждений, ничем не подтверждаемых. Так что, это не объективный анализ, а субъективная оценка. Несколько слов, просто на заметку: протесты, например, 2021 - не поддерживал сам народ, но выразить свое несогласие с оппозицией было непросто - оппозиция была очень агрессивна. Далее, некоторую депрессивность после 2014-ого Екатерина связывает с "Крымским кейсом", но есть и другие причины, более скрытые, например, все более плотное распространение и утверждение Транснациональных Корпораций и их влияние ощущал уже даже простой обыватель - они влияли на рынок труда, на уровень заработной платы, на экономику, подавляя развитие малого и среднего бизнеса и на общую атмосферу, везде внедряя свои душные корпоративные стандарты. Они захватывали и подчиняли постепенно, но очень быстро - и политические структуры, и экономические, и социальные, обостряя при этом и общественные противоречия. Так что, графики это одно, а интерпретация их и связей между ними может опираться на очень различные факторы.
“VCIOM is a big factory. A lot of people work there….”😂😂😂 You’ll be astonished, but the whole staff of VCIOM (including subsidiaries such as MediaScope, Vox Populi, Ifors, NAFI and “Non-indifferent citizen” project) is less than 250 people…Very big factory :)))
Wikipedia says about 5000 employees conducting surveys. However, that article doesn't have sufficient number of authoritative sources. Where did you find out about 250 people? I'm wondering whether they counted only office workers, or what can be the reason of this difference.
@@VictoriaM0 250 people - all the combained full-time staff (and not only pollsters) of VCIOM and subsidiaries…Of course, pert-timers (like interviewers and supervisors - about 250 persons) as well as outsourcers (such as operators in call centres - about 300 persons) are not included…Believe me, I used to work there up to 2020.
At 23:10 - the war is explained as almost inevitable, as the only way to bring back high approval ratings, yet the start of the war on the 24th of February 2022 came as a big shock to Dr. Shulmann, in many interviews she has since been stressing that 'no sound person' would see it coming. Isn't that a contradiction?
It was not explained as almost inevitable. Rather it was implied that something had to be done by Putin, if he wanted to get his ratings back on track. It didn't have to be a war with Ukraine, it didn't have to be any other attempt at expantion/military invasion, there didn't have to be an attempt to hold on to power at all (retirement or investment in a successor was also an option). And she and many others did not expect them to go through with this not because they believed there are limits Putin wouldn't cross for his precious ratings, but because they believed this would be suicidal for Russia in many ways and expected the ones in power to have atleast some common sense and awareness of the real situation in the country, not the alternative picture they created themselves for the public.
Is there a contradiction? War wasn't the only mean to raise approval ratings. It could even be the real special military operation in DPR and LPR. But starting a full scale war with bombing civilian objects in all major Ukrainian cities - it was a sadistic maniac choice and it definitely is not the reliable strategy for rating improvement.
Wouldn't see it's coming and wouldn't want it to happen are different things, but sometimes one cannot see the difference:) As I remember, there was no signs of war in civilian public sphere. But there was military experts who claimed that war was coming. Dr. Shulmann's field is exclusively civilian, I can't blame her for this mistake. She herself also used to say that we at the present moment cannot say whether that just has happened should have happen inevitably or just by mistake. So, you can't believe anyone, no one can always predict future for sure.
At the beginning of the war rating were fine thanks to the fact that power to introduce all necessary pandemic-related prohibitions was transferred to the local governments. They were hated and compared to the putin was clean. Economical situation was not favorable, oil prices dropped, local businesses suffered from the pandemic. And war burns money. Military forces at the Ukrainian border is not something new. Just year before the war they were there too. And they were used (successfully) to kick start negotiations. No one said the war was impossible, it was considered improbable. As in, to start a full scale war was the most dumb idea at that particular moment. It was an all in bet.
Just by looking at the charts presented by Ekaterina, it's clear to me that a national awakening is essential for Russian society. Without it, how can we prevent this largely compliant society from falling prey to an even more harmful leader? Every citizen must feel the impact of their leaders' decisions. It's a tough but necessary pill to swallow. Unless every member of this society feels the weight of the decisions made by their leadership, Russia cannot be accepted back into the family of European countries.
Guess you are unable to compare the "findings" to the so-called European countries or the US itself! Similarities might surprise you and indeed scare you!
I totally disagree with the opinian of the man who says that we have a lack of information about the Russian society (first minutes). We (my wife and I) can find information everywhere. You just have to be able to speak and read Russian. We communicate in Russian with quite some people on the internet.
even we in Russia have the lack of information about us, we are afraid to be honest and talk to each other, there's no elections and open discussions. I can never guess who is next to me. So you know better?
Many things that the speaker said are probably somewhat right but note that she hasn't been living in Russia for more than a year and it's totally ok and her analysis doesn't lose its value entirely because of that but if you make any conclusions based on her speech you're quite likely to make a mistake in some of those conclusions. In fact public opinion in Russia right now is very unstable and if someone sincerely expresses their opinion today you can't rely on it being the same tomorrow.
@@ОлегЕршов-м3с well opinion polls are less stable than pre-war but there's huge problem with opinion polls - the opinion is created at the moment of measurement in a way especially in present day Russia where public discussion of many topics is additionally inhibited because of the war. So if we assume a responent who's not much afraid to be sincere with the pollster he still lacks experience in discussing social and political processes so he responds to questions from a very generic framework which basically mostly influenced by what he perceives as consensus, as what "makes sense" from a very generic standpoint. So when asked about their own life and plans etc they have some real opinion but with societal and political issues it's more like pseudo-opinion and many people actively avoid experiences that would make them form a real opinion on those issues - avoid out of fear. So when some events that go above that threshold of avoidance happen - like mobilization announcement - you can see huge changes in measured public opinion - because some real opinion on some select issues forms at those moments. So you can see that opinion polls' results are very hard to interpret because of the whole dimensions of opinion appearing and disappearing - the very structure of world view expressed in measured opinion changes. And for now we don't see any signs of this process stabilizing - quite the opposite I'd say.
If we look closely at the US, what is the level of Democracy that the Politicians appear to preach about? Who selects the names that appear on a Ballot? Who promotes the Candidates? What amount of Money is dedicated to promoting the image of democratic actions that appear to make Politicians seem more like they are Cars being advertised? Most cars now appear to be bland and demonstrate little difference. Politicians may offer to make social changes, but the balance of a Two Party System in the US, appears to maintain a balance that never allows any Bill that does not support profits for Investor Class Individuals to actually become enacted. The balance of power that an evenly divided Congress presents, will never allow any Partisan issues to advance out of Committee. Max Baucus made that issue clear when discussing single payer Health Insurance. Attempts to make Russia appear to be authoritarian, seem to simply divert attention from the corruption that a $15 billion Electoral Industry demonstrates.... This Woman could have saved her breath. The US attempts to exploit the planet for cheap resources, have run into Russia and China enabling the Nations that the US used to exploit.
You’re aware that there are other countries besides the United States yes? Why does every American, regardless of political persuasion, make every discussion on political economy and structures a discussion about themselves? It’s pathological at this point.
US exploit and Russia/China help other nations? That‘s naive to say the least. I prefer systems that at least have some democratic control over economic power. And if there is some additional intergovernmental cooperation, like in the EU, it‘s probably the best available option.
@@achenarmyst2156 Russians are allowed to vote. You appear to be the one who is unaware that Wealthy Folks appoint the names that appear on a ballot? Democracy was sold to George and Herman Brown in 1948, when they bought themselves a Senator. The cost has increased since then.
@@beane6426 do the Americans not have incredibly robust global propaganda? If so, then any unresolved widespread social issues create a large amount of pressure for citizens to reconcile why reality is different from the propaganda and why there is no real progress merely to discuss it. Unfortunately it is a pathology, but it's a symptom of a festering problem.
мне такой монолог был бы интересен, только если бы было развернутое сравнение с одним-двумя другими обществами (одно европейское, напр., немецкое, другое не европейское - японское какой-нибудь). А без сравнения - это бессмысленная банальная нудятина какая-то, интересная разве что для центра принятия решений в стране - президентской администрации, скорее всего.
The lecture sounds too sterile and some statements are questionable. When Ekaterina explained what forms people's opinions, I would say the same is true for western "democracies". The majority of people on both sides have a superfluous vision of the matters they are asked about. Actually, given the induced hysteria regarding Russia nourished by anglo-saxons in Europe, I would say that there is much more propaganda in the countries of the collective West than in Russia. One cannot explane the situation in Russia without refering to the behaviour of the outside actors And Ekaterina always state that she is not an expert on international politics.The lecture doesn't bring the understanding of what is really going on in Russia, though it is in line with tha propagandistic mainstream prevailing in the West
Cuando empiezas tu discurso enfatizando el aspecto autócrata de Putin, nos advierte sobre la calidad del cristal con que se observará la realidad a exponer.
Так, дуже.. ну дуже цікаво і пізнавально, але річ в тім, що я в цю секунду чую голосні вибухи в Києві, і на годиннику 3:25 ночі. За останні 40 діб, тільки 10 ночей були, відносно, тихими. І я розумію, що оцій пані і переважній більшості росіян, не знайоме почуття емпатії. І так, саме переважній більшості! Це в Німеччині, або в іншій країні Західного світу, їй будуть вірити, бо вони не мають іншої інформації. Але українці, які у 80% мають родичів/знайомих в Рф, (мали, бо 2014 року, а особливо після 24.02 -- у нас більше немає їх. Є вороги, які підтримують війну і повторюють ті чи інші тези путіна. )з упевненістю можуть говорити, про реальну підтримку війни громадянами Рф. Різного соц статусу, рівня забезпеченості, освіченості, географічного місця проживання -- усім притаманна імперська агресивна риторика! А Шульман, науковець, викладач, працівник просвіти, за всі роки в Рф не змогла своїм громадянам пояснити і навчити політичної і громадянської початкової грамоти. Чому? От і доводиться тепер, працювати на західну аудиторію, аби "відбілити" росіян, аби уникнути відповідальності громадян і країни вцілому. "Це все Путін!" -- такі норативи, зазвичай транслюють!
Она учёный, а не политик. Она и не должна доказывать свою точку зрения, она занимается своим предметом, а именно политикой и социологией России. Да и к тому же вы не можете знать, что у нее на душе
@@Аня-ч8т8щ у вас все не политики. И вы все «вне политики», и «политикой не интересуетесь» Что по вашему такое «политика..? Попробуйте самообразоваться в этом вопросе. Потом не будете писать такую чушт
Эеаучить можно только тех,кто хочет учиться, и посветить - только тех, кто хочет просвещаться. Ожидать от человека, что он(а) сможет просветить всю страну - это, мягко сказать, самонадеянно...
В английском the употребляется только со всякими составными названиями стран из нескольких слов, например, the United States. Ukraine к таким не относится, значит the не надо.
@@Carl-Gauss Языки так не работают. На самом деле носители говорят как и им нравится, а потом кто-то пытается найти в этом закономерности и придумать простые правила. Поэтому почти из каждого правила есть исключения. Украина до недавнего времени была таким исключением в английском языке - загуглите "in the Ukraine" и узнаете, что такое употребление "now deprecated" благодаря просьбам дипломатов, но еще недавно было стандартом. Ситуация очень похожая на "в/на Украине" в русском. Про это была моя шутка, которую вы не поняли.
@@magitrop5336 Да, но как я писал выше у любого правила есть исключения, например the Gambia, the Netherlands - никаких дополнительных слов, но есть определенный артикль. И Украина долгое время была таким же исключением и это было никак не связано с тем, что Украина бывшая советская республика, как говорили украинские дипломаты. Потому что другие республики исключениями не стали.
She's not a politician, she's a scientist. And Russian public won't tell you much, if they support the regime, they'll topenly ell you so, if not - they simply won't, too dangerous. People don't trust each other, too dangerous as well..
I'm glad so many people like Schulmann left the country, it proved who they really were - agents of foreign powers who acted against the interests of the country instigating social distrust and rebellion against the government. Good bye, Schulmann, you won't be missed
and who we gonna stay with? Dugin and Australin serfings hatred? Zorkin and 17th century maps? Volodin and 'English is dead'? whats wrong with you? why would you hate the country so much?
Keep in mind that failed runaway politicians might have never been able to understand their subject properly. Not to mention the personal interest in misleading their audience.
Great excuse for Russia, right? I wonder why this excuse did not work for Germany in 1946, because the German people are also not to blame for anything.
@@ОлегЕршов-м3с немецкий народ прошел долгий планомерный процес денацификации (настоящей лол), который начался 1945-46 и занял много лет (можно сказать что идёт до сих пор), несмотря на то, что все они, как и россияне сейчас говорили одни и те же слова: "мы ничего не могли сделать", "мы ничего не знали", "мы не интересовались политикой". Народы советского союза были не наказаны, а подвержены геноциду. Помощь Германии во время войны была неоправданным предлогом для геноцида, потому что наказать за какие-либо военные преступления может только военный трибунал и то, не весь народ (не мог каждый человек участвовать в войне), а определенные персоны которые непосредственно совершали приступление, в котором обвиняют.
@@Leon-desu впервые вижу, чтоб человек спизданул какую-то невероятную хуйню, а потом начал говорить как здравомыслящая и владеющая корректной информацией личность. Good for you.
Вы ратуете за отъезд лучших представителей страны. если бы Ваше 'проклятье' осуществилось, мы бы остались с Дугиным, Силантьевым и Патрушевым. за что Вы так с Россией? неужели не хватило опыта начала 20 века?
@@ИльясГаллиулин-ы4к Вы чушь пишете. 1) Екатерина Михайловна ученый и преподаватель, а не чиновник. у нее нет и не было допуска к гос тайнам. как в России, так и в Германии она пользуется открытыми доступными данными. 2) какую разведку? она читает публичную лекцию, выложенную в ютубе. разведка как-то не так работает. в чем претензия Ваша?
@@ИльясГаллиулин-ы4к что конкретно Вы предлагаете 'искать и обрести'? говорите прямо, если есть что сказать - за Ваше мнение Вам статья не грозит, только грамота если повезёт.
"You think what you think, you say what they want you to say and you do what it takes to survive... " Thank you Prof Schulman for this lecture and all your efforts to be not only a silent witness but for analyses of those chronicles. And many thanks to the FreiburgInstitutee for hosting and publishing this wonderfull lecture! Science should go to mass! :)
...and how does anything she said differ from the state of being in the so-called Western societies?
1:18:03 So chilling delivery
@kirsch-qj9bgIHS
I will go to every university's channel to see every guest lecture of Dr. Schulmann. m'lady🎩
Thank you, Freiburg Institute, for inviting Ekaterina Mikhailovna! It was an immensely informative lecture
Solche Gäste wie Ekaterina Michailowna sind immer interessant zu hören! Vielen Dank für die tolle Vorlesung von Ekaterina Schulmann! Russland sei frei!⚪️🔵⚪️
Thanks
Ekaterina Schulman! Thanks for this. Brilliant work, fantastic speaker.
need to be more heard! thank you for uploading!
Thank you so much for inviting such a wonderful lecturer! We greatly admire Dr Schulmann!
Such a brilliant lecture! Thank you so much for sharing!
Thank you so much for inviting this brilliant speaker!
Смотрю Екатерину Михайловну в перерывах между парами, очень рад, что она стала выступать на разных площадках и аудиториях, в том числе, потому что объясняет в других странах специфику российского общества и политического режима)
Shulman is great as always! And I want to pay tribute to the facilitator - his introduction, preparation for the discussion, and facilitation were great! Looking forward to hear his discussion with Shulman, which was sadly skipped!
If only the BBC, the Times, the Telegraph etc etc were forced to spend time with Ekaterina Schulman. Then we might, one day, start to get a sense of how modern Russian minds work. Such clarity and single mindedness, I was genuinely concerned for her safety while she stayed in Russia, we should be glad she got out when she did, and it’s a bit shameful that her audience is still relatively small.
She was perfectly fine and even worked for Putin's council on human rights in Russia (ridiculous). She's not an opposition. Opposition either dead like Nemtsov or Politkovskaya or expelled or imprisoned. She's just an imperial opportunist
@@andriyandriychuk real opposition is dead or imprisoned? Ok what is your complaint anyway?
My complaint is Schulman & Co and Putin & Co are alike, they just differ by methods. Russian Imperialists are all alike. They don't mention that Ukraine is different, that war in Ukraine has a root cause - which is Russian Imperialism, they don't mention that Crimea is not Russia, they perfectly understand why Putin is doing what he's doing. The only thing they disagree with is the method. Shulman & Co, all these Russian opportunistic emigration agrees Ukraine must be occupied. Russian Imperialists just think that must be done WITHOUT WAR. They don't think Ukraine is an independent state. They do think Ukrainians are the people of second sort. They are imperialists. Schulman called Ukraine 'anocracy' which is sufficiently incorrect and degrading assessment and reflects her real view on Ukraine. I can name only 4 Russians that recognize Ukraine as equal to Russia and don't deeply crave Crimea to be Russian
@@andriyandriychuk She is not a politician nor an investigator - she is a scientist.
what's your point?
What is your point that she's a scientist? She's not, she's a researcher in social studies. What is your point? My point is that she's Russian imperialist and opportunist and cannot be trusted and welcomed. That's my point. It is fair when you dig deeper through content analysis of her talks and speeches
11:56 - "когда вы знаете что за неправильный ответ можно получить 15 лет это поразительным образом консолидирует ОБЩЕСТВЕННОЕ МНЕНИЕ" -- ТАБЛИЦА отказов от опросов
Она прямо сказала когда переключила слайд, что это отказы
Very interesting and informative talk, Thank you. I especially liked the Q&A segment at the end.
Much love to professor Schulmann!❤
Wonderful introduction! And a great lecture, as always :)
Loved it! Huge thanks to the university, it’s a pleasure to listen EMSh in English once in a while
Очень интересно и познавательно слушать, спасибо что на английском, что помогает большему количеству людей понять что твориться в России!
тся
тся
оо, полиция не дремлет, особенно, грамматическая полиция.
Ахаха! Ну да, Шульман, которая находится в Германии и вообше никак не связана с политикой России, больше всех понимает, что творится в России :D Слушайте еще, она вам расскажет :D
@@秋-e9u вы никому не интересны)
Thanks for the lecture!
Ekaterina, thanks for your lecture. 2 points of concern:
1. You should be on the lookout for the shorthands you use. As your current target audience is international, they are not privy to the same memes we internalized. E.g. "Crimea happened", "Then Georgia", "Turkey shot the plane", "They don't watch Irony of Fate", "Celebrate 9th of May" - these are not self-evident terms for people who don't keep a close look on Russia's history and culture. For comparison: imagine an expert talking like that about Indo-Pakistan conflicts in 2001-2021, which were crucial events for some of locals and the countries' foreign policies - but what do we know about them? Yeah.
2. After you've utilized the same half-translated slides for several lectures, I really, really think you should endeavor to translate them fully for future usage. Just imagining the struggles of people trying to understand the intricacies of our society from the similarly-colored lines on the screen based on your rapid verbal explanation - it's disheartening.
Valid points. And fixable. I hope Ekaterina Mikhaylovna will notice this message.
To be fair, I believe those who attend her lectures likely have a fundamental understanding of international conflicts, such as the Crimean occupation, the war with Georgia, the downing of the plane by Turkey, and the significance of May 9th to Russians. Admittedly, my knowledge of the events on the India-Pakistan border from 2001 to 2021 is limited at best. However, if I were to attend such a lecture, I would surely take the time to research it beforehand. Takes about 10 minutes of reading for a high school student, not a big deal.
You are correct about the Soviet movie though, she could’ve used something else. And although I can read them, those bilingual slides also bothered me, particularly the one at 36:07. The use of green could have been interpreted as ‘in favor,’ while red could signify the opposite. There’s no standardized color palette for polling data results.
Спасибо что пригласили Екатерину, голос разума моего и других поколений
Ekaterina Schulman, our beloved lecturer 🥰
56:04 про потребительский оптимизм, мне кажется это в большей степени выводы в духе 'все не так плохо, как нам мажется могло быть" потолок не упал, банки работают, в магазинах не пустые полки"
Условно, ответ на вопрос "ожидаете ли вы умереть от голода/быть выселенным за долги в ближайшие пол года".
Надо попробовать опрашивать как с уровнем тревожности про людей вокруг.
Thank you so much for the very interesting lecture! 🙏🏻👌🏻
Thanks for posting it.
Grate speaker! ❤
Thank you ❤
A great lecture, many thanks.
Thank you for this lecture ❤
Exelent 🎉..1K...what a Lecture 💪✌👌🙏❤ Explains a Lot....
Oh! How wonderful ❤❤❤❤
Thank you, Freiburg Institute 🙏
Thank you for having our beloved Ekaterina Mikhailovna!
Наконец-то Екатерину Михайловну на публичном выступлении представили как подобает! Всегда бы так!
Выступление Екатерины Михайловны - праздник для души и сердца ❤
so happy and proud of our dear Ekaterina Schoulmann as if she was my family))))))
I wish she could have taken comments from the audience but thank you for letting the lady speak.
Yet another awesome lecture with our science rock star!🌠
@Ekaterina_Schulmann
I've almist missed this jewel of a lecture.
Please open a separate youtube for you lectures in English to make your voice heard globally.
Thanks ❤
I love this beautiful Person! This is the best pill for a liberal person who stayed in Russia during this difficult time! 💚
A wonderful intro speech!
Боже, вы посмотрите, она сидит как ангел и как скульптор ангела at the same moment
Комментарий в поддержку канала
Ekaterina for president ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Забирайте! Дарим! Не благодарите!
An amazing lecture for non-Russian speaking people who want to know what the hell is happening in the Russians' heads
ЕМ ван лав ❤
Danke, thanks, спасибо!🔥
5:50 начало речи Екатерины Михайловны
Danke schön!
Even though it felt wrong to hear value judgment about the whole generation in the middle of the lecture.
it was the truth anyone younger than 45 thinks in russia tho, very few people have no influence from Soviet political system who grew up there. Hypocrite generation they are
It is so good, that opposition's speakers are welcome here]
My grandma has a lot of complaints about our government, but suggestion to do something about it is met with acusation of being a no good booticker of the west
Schulmann is SO engaging, so helpful compared to the mlre popular commentariat.
Why should the authorities publish such a low response rate in an autocracy?
Great favorite
She should have translated her complete slides, not just the headlines. This lacks some academic respect.
Вижу лайк, ставлю Шульман!
Is this comment is a strange translation or Russian humor? I don't know, but I like it!
Nice to see
Brilliant and funny.
Спасибо за возможность послушать Екатерину Михайловну
❤❤❤
"Should Russia continue the Ukraine special military operation or should it enter into peace talks?"
It's no wonder people are against the idea of nonviolent resistance. They think it means entering into peace talks, which means making concessions to the other side. In fact, nonviolent resistance is the opposite. It means resisting without capitulating until you get what you want. It is used the same way as military action and can be used as a replacement or alongside military action or could replace military action after the military was initially used. It's more than hosting marches and rallies with signs though it can and often does include this.
"hasta derramar la última gota de sangre ucraniana"???
I do agree whith what the professor said: (32 minute) people don't know what to think. They do agree with the war, but they would like to have some more money. Russians never trust their governments and they are right, although some of them think Putin was doing the right thing to invade Ukraine.
I am Dutch (you might have noticed that I made some mistakes in my English) and I don't trust Putin either, in fact I don't think he has been a very good president. However he also had to manage with the circumstances. I have seen the Russian economy growing in the first ten years of the regime (2000 - 2010). After that it went the wrong way, but we must understand that the west didn't like it to see Russia growing, so the west started to undermine Russia.
Last but not least: our governments are not to be trusted either. Anyone who trusts his government is a prisoner of his mind and his mind is a prisoner of the media.
we are not agree with war, we just know that they are not asking us about anything. So most of us just trying to accomodate ourself in the situation for we have no much things or people we can rely on. It's getting easier if you persuaded yourself that there is some sense in president's action. Otherwise your life is a horror
@@rybkabananka9695 this sounds like what a regular person from any country experiences (although the horrors do vary, but they seem consistent).
Hopefully you find your strength
Anything in particular that Putin has done poorly? Is it distinct to Putin (or Russia), or common to world leaders?
Dear Ekaterina,
Great speech, except most of Rus people do not too much watch tv ))
Why I do lough when EM is joking, and the audience doesn't?
Russian intelligence services turned down the volume!
Хорошие субтитры
Weird that at 55:44 she called the optimism poll ‘schizophrenic’ because it’s countered by reduced spending. Seems there’s an underlying assumption in that observation, along the lines that consumerism delivers absolute contentment...?
Well, because it actually is internally contradicted - "the economy is doing great, i can't afford food". It's not about cutting spending on pointless consumerism, it's about eating less because you can't be sure you can afford it.
Bonjur
Учим английский с ЕМ
Harsh punishment is
the tool that all Russian dictators and kings have used to rule Russia.
Now let's get back to the politics of the Us shall we..
Графики интересные, но вся речь Екатерины, являющаяся комментарием к этим графикам, это только ее интерпретация. Интерпретация. В которой много личных и спорных суждений, ничем не подтверждаемых. Так что, это не объективный анализ, а субъективная оценка.
Несколько слов, просто на заметку: протесты, например, 2021 - не поддерживал сам народ, но выразить свое несогласие с оппозицией было непросто - оппозиция была очень агрессивна.
Далее, некоторую депрессивность после 2014-ого Екатерина связывает с "Крымским кейсом", но есть и другие причины, более скрытые, например, все более плотное распространение и утверждение Транснациональных Корпораций и их влияние ощущал уже даже простой обыватель - они влияли на рынок труда, на уровень заработной платы, на экономику, подавляя развитие малого и среднего бизнеса и на общую атмосферу, везде внедряя свои душные корпоративные стандарты. Они захватывали и подчиняли постепенно, но очень быстро - и политические структуры, и экономические, и социальные, обостряя при этом и общественные противоречия.
Так что, графики это одно, а интерпретация их и связей между ними может опираться на очень различные факторы.
Цветаева-Центр?
“VCIOM is a big factory. A lot of people work there….”😂😂😂 You’ll be astonished, but the whole staff of VCIOM (including subsidiaries such as MediaScope, Vox Populi, Ifors, NAFI and “Non-indifferent citizen” project) is less than 250 people…Very big factory :)))
Wikipedia says about 5000 employees conducting surveys. However, that article doesn't have sufficient number of authoritative sources. Where did you find out about 250 people? I'm wondering whether they counted only office workers, or what can be the reason of this difference.
250 человек включая тех, кто непосредственно проводит опросы? Действительно смешно, что кто-то может поверить в эти цифры
@@VictoriaM0 250 people - all the combained full-time staff (and not only pollsters) of VCIOM and subsidiaries…Of course, pert-timers (like interviewers and supervisors - about 250 persons) as well as outsourcers (such as operators in call centres - about 300 persons) are not included…Believe me, I used to work there up to 2020.
250 people is could be considered as a big factory for such an institution.
At 23:10 - the war is explained as almost inevitable, as the only way to bring back high approval ratings, yet the start of the war on the 24th of February 2022 came as a big shock to Dr. Shulmann, in many interviews she has since been stressing that 'no sound person' would see it coming. Isn't that a contradiction?
It was not explained as almost inevitable. Rather it was implied that something had to be done by Putin, if he wanted to get his ratings back on track. It didn't have to be a war with Ukraine, it didn't have to be any other attempt at expantion/military invasion, there didn't have to be an attempt to hold on to power at all (retirement or investment in a successor was also an option). And she and many others did not expect them to go through with this not because they believed there are limits Putin wouldn't cross for his precious ratings, but because they believed this would be suicidal for Russia in many ways and expected the ones in power to have atleast some common sense and awareness of the real situation in the country, not the alternative picture they created themselves for the public.
Is there a contradiction? War wasn't the only mean to raise approval ratings. It could even be the real special military operation in DPR and LPR. But starting a full scale war with bombing civilian objects in all major Ukrainian cities - it was a sadistic maniac choice and it definitely is not the reliable strategy for rating improvement.
Wouldn't see it's coming and wouldn't want it to happen are different things, but sometimes one cannot see the difference:)
As I remember, there was no signs of war in civilian public sphere. But there was military experts who claimed that war was coming. Dr. Shulmann's field is exclusively civilian, I can't blame her for this mistake.
She herself also used to say that we at the present moment cannot say whether that just has happened should have happen inevitably or just by mistake.
So, you can't believe anyone, no one can always predict future for sure.
At the beginning of the war rating were fine thanks to the fact that power to introduce all necessary pandemic-related prohibitions was transferred to the local governments. They were hated and compared to the putin was clean.
Economical situation was not favorable, oil prices dropped, local businesses suffered from the pandemic. And war burns money.
Military forces at the Ukrainian border is not something new. Just year before the war they were there too. And they were used (successfully) to kick start negotiations.
No one said the war was impossible, it was considered improbable. As in, to start a full scale war was the most dumb idea at that particular moment.
It was an all in bet.
The Crimea happened without a war. "A foreign policy adventure", as Shulman describes it, could be a lot of things.
How does Russia allowed to have a Human Rights think tank?
Just by looking at the charts presented by Ekaterina, it's clear to me that a national awakening is essential for Russian society. Without it, how can we prevent this largely compliant society from falling prey to an even more harmful leader?
Every citizen must feel the impact of their leaders' decisions. It's a tough but necessary pill to swallow. Unless every member of this society feels the weight of the decisions made by their leadership, Russia cannot be accepted back into the family of European countries.
Guess you are unable to compare the "findings" to the so-called European countries or the US itself! Similarities might surprise you and indeed scare you!
Я на английском её понимаю лучше, чем на русском, она так не тараторит, когда говорит по-английски
I totally disagree with the opinian of the man who says that we have a lack of information about the Russian society (first minutes). We (my wife and I) can find information everywhere. You just have to be able to speak and read Russian. We communicate in Russian with quite some people on the internet.
even we in Russia have the lack of information about us, we are afraid to be honest and talk to each other, there's no elections and open discussions. I can never guess who is next to me. So you know better?
Пиздато. Наконец чиселки подъехали с подтверждениями. А то работы научные лень читать а тут разжевали все
Many things that the speaker said are probably somewhat right but note that she hasn't been living in Russia for more than a year and it's totally ok and her analysis doesn't lose its value entirely because of that but if you make any conclusions based on her speech you're quite likely to make a mistake in some of those conclusions. In fact public opinion in Russia right now is very unstable and if someone sincerely expresses their opinion today you can't rely on it being the same tomorrow.
Isn't it one of the points she literally made? About the opinion polls looking like a heart attack diagnosis?
@@ОлегЕршов-м3с well opinion polls are less stable than pre-war but there's huge problem with opinion polls - the opinion is created at the moment of measurement in a way especially in present day Russia where public discussion of many topics is additionally inhibited because of the war. So if we assume a responent who's not much afraid to be sincere with the pollster he still lacks experience in discussing social and political processes so he responds to questions from a very generic framework which basically mostly influenced by what he perceives as consensus, as what "makes sense" from a very generic standpoint. So when asked about their own life and plans etc they have some real opinion but with societal and political issues it's more like pseudo-opinion and many people actively avoid experiences that would make them form a real opinion on those issues - avoid out of fear. So when some events that go above that threshold of avoidance happen - like mobilization announcement - you can see huge changes in measured public opinion - because some real opinion on some select issues forms at those moments. So you can see that opinion polls' results are very hard to interpret because of the whole dimensions of opinion appearing and disappearing - the very structure of world view expressed in measured opinion changes. And for now we don't see any signs of this process stabilizing - quite the opposite I'd say.
6 min intro. WTF
oh then, how we gonna cry
thanks
If we look closely at the US, what is the level of Democracy that the Politicians appear to preach about?
Who selects the names that appear on a Ballot?
Who promotes the Candidates?
What amount of Money is dedicated to promoting the image of democratic actions that appear to make Politicians seem more like they are Cars being advertised?
Most cars now appear to be bland and demonstrate little difference.
Politicians may offer to make social changes, but the balance of a Two Party System in the US, appears to maintain a balance that never allows any Bill that does not support profits for Investor Class Individuals to actually become enacted.
The balance of power that an evenly divided Congress presents, will never allow any Partisan issues to advance out of Committee.
Max Baucus made that issue clear when discussing single payer Health Insurance.
Attempts to make Russia appear to be authoritarian, seem to simply divert attention from the corruption that a $15 billion Electoral Industry demonstrates....
This Woman could have saved her breath.
The US attempts to exploit the planet for cheap resources, have run into Russia and China enabling the Nations that the US used to exploit.
You’re aware that there are other countries besides the United States yes? Why does every American, regardless of political persuasion, make every discussion on political economy and structures a discussion about themselves? It’s pathological at this point.
The existence of problems in US society doesn't eliminate the problem of fucked up Russian government.
US exploit and Russia/China help other nations? That‘s naive to say the least. I prefer systems that at least have some democratic control over economic power. And if there is some additional intergovernmental cooperation, like in the EU, it‘s probably the best available option.
@@achenarmyst2156 Russians are allowed to vote.
You appear to be the one who is unaware that Wealthy Folks appoint the names that appear on a ballot?
Democracy was sold to George and Herman Brown in 1948,
when they bought themselves a Senator.
The cost has increased since then.
@@beane6426 do the Americans not have incredibly robust global propaganda?
If so, then any unresolved widespread social issues create a large amount of pressure for citizens to reconcile why reality is different from the propaganda and why there is no real progress merely to discuss it.
Unfortunately it is a pathology, but it's a symptom of a festering problem.
Thought she was describing europe
мне такой монолог был бы интересен, только если бы было развернутое сравнение с одним-двумя другими обществами (одно европейское, напр., немецкое, другое не европейское - японское какой-нибудь). А без сравнения - это бессмысленная банальная нудятина какая-то, интересная разве что для центра принятия решений в стране - президентской администрации, скорее всего.
This seems harsh. But this was my first thought, too. Is the talk just a complaint? How much of these results are specific to today's Russia?
The lecture sounds too sterile and some statements are questionable. When Ekaterina explained what forms people's opinions, I would say the same is true for western "democracies". The majority of people on both sides have a superfluous vision of the matters they are asked about. Actually, given the induced hysteria regarding Russia nourished by anglo-saxons in Europe, I would say that there is much more propaganda in the countries of the collective West than in Russia. One cannot explane the situation in Russia without refering to the behaviour of the outside actors And Ekaterina always state that she is not an expert on international politics.The lecture doesn't bring the understanding of what is really going on in Russia, though it is in line with tha propagandistic mainstream prevailing in the West
You are not supposed to think this
Cuando empiezas tu discurso enfatizando el aspecto autócrata de Putin, nos advierte sobre la calidad del cristal con que se observará la realidad a exponer.
Так, дуже.. ну дуже цікаво і пізнавально, але річ в тім, що я в цю секунду чую голосні вибухи в Києві, і на годиннику 3:25 ночі. За останні 40 діб, тільки 10 ночей були, відносно, тихими. І я розумію, що оцій пані і переважній більшості росіян, не знайоме почуття емпатії. І так, саме переважній більшості! Це в Німеччині, або в іншій країні Західного світу, їй будуть вірити, бо вони не мають іншої інформації. Але українці, які у 80% мають родичів/знайомих в Рф, (мали, бо 2014 року, а особливо після 24.02 -- у нас більше немає їх. Є вороги, які підтримують війну і повторюють ті чи інші тези путіна. )з упевненістю можуть говорити, про реальну підтримку війни громадянами Рф. Різного соц статусу, рівня забезпеченості, освіченості, географічного місця проживання -- усім притаманна імперська агресивна риторика!
А Шульман, науковець, викладач, працівник просвіти, за всі роки в Рф не змогла своїм громадянам пояснити і навчити політичної і громадянської початкової грамоти. Чому?
От і доводиться тепер, працювати на західну аудиторію, аби "відбілити" росіян, аби уникнути відповідальності громадян і країни вцілому.
"Це все Путін!" -- такі норативи, зазвичай транслюють!
Странная такая позиция. "Мы знаем лучше, потому что у нас *БЫЛИ* контакты в РФ". Оно, как бы, мира вам и добра, конечно, но вы ангажированы.
То, что с вами происходит, бесспорно, ужасно. Но это не дает вам более объективного и подробного знания о настроениях россиян.
Она учёный, а не политик. Она и не должна доказывать свою точку зрения, она занимается своим предметом, а именно политикой и социологией России. Да и к тому же вы не можете знать, что у нее на душе
@@Аня-ч8т8щ у вас все не политики. И вы все «вне политики», и «политикой не интересуетесь»
Что по вашему такое «политика..?
Попробуйте самообразоваться в этом вопросе. Потом не будете писать такую чушт
Эеаучить можно только тех,кто хочет учиться, и посветить - только тех, кто хочет просвещаться. Ожидать от человека, что он(а) сможет просветить всю страну - это, мягко сказать, самонадеянно...
Как же она наслаждается собой.
Странно звучащая фраза, не могу не уточнить - что имеется в виду?
34:14 - Неправильно переведен русский заголовок слайда на английский. "на Украине" переводится как "In the Ukraine", а "в Украине" будет "in Ukraine".
В английском the употребляется только со всякими составными названиями стран из нескольких слов, например, the United States. Ukraine к таким не относится, значит the не надо.
@@Carl-Gauss Языки так не работают. На самом деле носители говорят как и им нравится, а потом кто-то пытается найти в этом закономерности и придумать простые правила. Поэтому почти из каждого правила есть исключения. Украина до недавнего времени была таким исключением в английском языке - загуглите "in the Ukraine" и узнаете, что такое употребление "now deprecated" благодаря просьбам дипломатов, но еще недавно было стандартом. Ситуация очень похожая на "в/на Украине" в русском. Про это была моя шутка, которую вы не поняли.
@@Carl-Gauss Другие исключения из вашего правила: the Netherlands, the Gambia.
@@Greamzih the употребляется с названиями стран, в которых есть слова республика, королевство и т.д.
@@magitrop5336 Да, но как я писал выше у любого правила есть исключения, например the Gambia, the Netherlands - никаких дополнительных слов, но есть определенный артикль. И Украина долгое время была таким же исключением и это было никак не связано с тем, что Украина бывшая советская республика, как говорили украинские дипломаты. Потому что другие республики исключениями не стали.
Basil Lisa
Lady on the right
1:11:00
Lol, just go to any Russian public and ask the Russians all these questions, and not the Russian politician.
She's not a politician, she's a scientist. And Russian public won't tell you much, if they support the regime, they'll topenly ell you so, if not - they simply won't, too dangerous. People don't trust each other, too dangerous as well..
@@engraver3248 Half of my friends before 2015 were Russians and I've heard enough from them.
Ни о чем.... столько воды и самооправдания. Розовая пони.
пропаганда
I'm glad so many people like Schulmann left the country, it proved who they really were - agents of foreign powers who acted against the interests of the country instigating social distrust and rebellion against the government. Good bye, Schulmann, you won't be missed
These "agents" were mostly forced to choose between imprisonment for telling the truth publicly or leaving the country.
this is ridiculous. Please have a look on boarder interviews to understand real composition, but not shiny TV opinion
Putin's interests are not the country's ones.
and who we gonna stay with?
Dugin and Australin serfings hatred?
Zorkin and 17th century maps?
Volodin and 'English is dead'?
whats wrong with you? why would you hate the country so much?
"the country instigating social distrust" - so true.
sulman
Keep in mind that failed runaway politicians might have never been able to understand their subject properly. Not to mention the personal interest in misleading their audience.
what in particular 'failed runaway politicians' are you talking about?
Ekaterina is - and has always been - a scientist.
Great excuse for Russia, right? I wonder why this excuse did not work for Germany in 1946, because the German people are also not to blame for anything.
Do you believe that all German people were punished in 1946? Like, say, some USSR nations by Stalin around the same time?
@@ОлегЕршов-м3с немецкий народ прошел долгий планомерный процес денацификации (настоящей лол), который начался 1945-46 и занял много лет (можно сказать что идёт до сих пор), несмотря на то, что все они, как и россияне сейчас говорили одни и те же слова: "мы ничего не могли сделать", "мы ничего не знали", "мы не интересовались политикой". Народы советского союза были не наказаны, а подвержены геноциду. Помощь Германии во время войны была неоправданным предлогом для геноцида, потому что наказать за какие-либо военные преступления может только военный трибунал и то, не весь народ (не мог каждый человек участвовать в войне), а определенные персоны которые непосредственно совершали приступление, в котором обвиняют.
@@Leon-desu впервые вижу, чтоб человек спизданул какую-то невероятную хуйню, а потом начал говорить как здравомыслящая и владеющая корректной информацией личность. Good for you.
Приятно видеть таких людей зарубежом. Пусть там и сидят.
Вы ратуете за отъезд лучших представителей страны.
если бы Ваше 'проклятье' осуществилось, мы бы остались с Дугиным, Силантьевым и Патрушевым.
за что Вы так с Россией? неужели не хватило опыта начала 20 века?
Каких "таких"? Грамотных и умеющих правильно написать "за рубежом"? Вам бы, конечно, было неприятно видеть таких рядом с вами.
не расслабляйтесь, нас тут тоже до фига
Какого хера мне шульманеллёз ытюб подсовывает
I always voted for Putin. No changes in my personal opinion!
Ekaterina IS A JEW
oh! nazi antisemites have joined us!
what a joy indeed!
@@simplydbesttt Yes indeed... Let's ask it To Go and play Russian Roulette until it wins 🎉❤
@@jsaintr.i.r4018 that would be delightful!
being as dumb as it is and with all the hatred it contains - it might agree)))
@@simplydbesttt Praised be....
@@simplydbesttt th-cam.com/video/DStVNtCRDqs/w-d-xo.html Explains a Lot...
🤡
о да, из Германии ведь виднее
говорить такое в России - статья. Вы не в курсе?
@@simplydbesttt а ещё в России статья это работать на разведку чужой страны, вы не в курсе?
@@ИльясГаллиулин-ы4к Вы чушь пишете.
1) Екатерина Михайловна ученый и преподаватель, а не чиновник. у нее нет и не было допуска к гос тайнам. как в России, так и в Германии она пользуется открытыми доступными данными.
2) какую разведку? она читает публичную лекцию, выложенную в ютубе. разведка как-то не так работает.
в чем претензия Ваша?
@@simplydbesttt cerca trova
@@ИльясГаллиулин-ы4к что конкретно Вы предлагаете 'искать и обрести'?
говорите прямо, если есть что сказать - за Ваше мнение Вам статья не грозит, только грамота если повезёт.