"Jürgen R." <jurgenr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:g09sph$ufe$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> If its convincing you want, have you written extensively with anyone
from
>> the old SU? Or even know them?
>
> Well, since I was born there (in Tallinn) and since the place (Munich)
> where
> I am now is inhabited by thousands of recent emigrants from the former
> USSR
> I don't need to write to communicate with 'them'.
It was a question to learn your age and origin; thus ability to *****s
information at first hand, and by study.
Another Russian, Solzenhitsyn emigrated to where I am. I really don't
think
he made very much up about how it was in the SU. [and btw, also another
Russian friend was from Baku who was a chess partner for a time - he says
he
remembers young Garry, but was 'too old' to play him].
>>>> I shall call Bernd
>>>
>>> Needless to say, you must protect his privacy...
>>
>> Needless to say any physicist could identify him by his first name ;)
>> But truly needless to say anyone's surname to you - who doubt all,
>> anyway.
>
> These anecdotes are never traceable to the source. You surely
> wouldn't be betraying anyone by naming the apocryphal bathtub
> factory in Tchechoslovakia? The factories in these stories
> never do have a name, do they?
But Jurgen, what is the point of identifying anything to someone who
already
says 'apocryphal'. And do you think I remember names of defunct Czech
foundaries from the date the Wall came down? What happens for you if you
did
know the name? What exactly are you contesting here? That this is
atypical?
That market forces actually operated in the SU? If so, I would agree, but
that is what we call the black market, which operated in league with the
official system, tacitly permitted, otherwise everything would stop!
> Remember the radio factory that was given norms to fulfill by weight?
> And the 10kg bottom plates they put in the radios. That factory
> was also nameless.
Ah! So you make an inference of what is not explicit, that all which is
not
explicit, is untrue? It is propaganda you think, for me to cite a
situation
known /after/ the Wall came down? Why would I need to be creative with
facts
then?
>>
>>>>] worked in a photodiode semiconductor factory in East Berlin as its
>>>>head scientist,
>
> I see - the world famous photodiode scientist whose name
> everybody knows.
>
>>>> and his unit produced for the entire Soviet 'Aerospace' Industry -
but
>>>> that is natural - you don't need lots of electro-optical facilities
>>>> making silicon detectors.
>>>>
>>>> But he drove a Trabant car - a 'trabi', which was not the only car
>>>> produced behind the curtain, but the only one ordinary people could
>>>> get. The black market in trabi parts was enormous, and actually far
>>>> more expensive than the officially manufactured ones, which... you
are
>>>> guessing right... were in limitied supply, despite massive demand
from
>>>> Trabant owners ...
>>>
>>> Shall I tell you a story or two about 3 automobile manufacturers that
>>> operate
>>> from a formerly great U.S. city that now looks like Berlin did in 1945
>>> and has
>>> been abondoned by Whitey?
>>
>> I see!
>
> No, you don't see. You are missing the point: The
> Trabi was, indeed, a joke and became
> a symbol for East German industrial backwardness.
>
> The Chrysler Cor****ation, e.g., is also a joke, one that survives today
> only because the state bailed it out. Nor are the cars it makes
> much better than a Trabant. The point? Absurdities of this kind
> are easily found on both sides of the divide.
But do you really think that Chrysler cars are equivalent of Trabi's? How
fast could a Trabi go without bits falling off, 50k? OK - maybe a new one
could do 65k. But these American cars do 120k without bits coming off. I
drove a big Plymouth [same as Chrysler] for 120 years, and in fact it was
an
excellent car.
But sure, governments play in the market to control it - often with basis
of
'national interest.'
>> This is a competition. Things were not as I say in the SU because of
>> instances of Western failure. Where do you live, BTW? But if you must
>> believe things, let me quote you Russians instead:-
>
> I have no reason to believe anything you say, unless you
> can give a reliable source.
>
>>
>> Please put it in a bank... Please, let's put it in a foreign bank.
>>
>> //Vladimir Putin advising the relatives of those who died on the
>> nuclear submarine /Kursk/ on what to do with their compensation.
>
> Invariably the same game. Why do you misrepresent what
> is being said? What does it accomplish?
But here Jurgen, is where your game is bust. You see - this is not about
my
memory of an obscure bath foundry - you challenged me for specifics, but
when you have specifics provided to you, as here you don't even believe
Putin. Then you say 'misrepresent'. This is, I suggest, not a very
credible
polemic ;)
> Putin: "Please, put it in the bank. Banks are not safe. Please, put it
in
> a
> foreign bank. That doesn't mean you need to deposit this money
> outside the country. Here, in Russia. It is safe. And the bank will
> operate according to Russian law. And the money will be in Russia..."
And of course, you are not allowed to put the money 'outside the country,'
so that was never any implication of the statement.
> So the poor guy is thoroughly confused in the middle of an
> extremely emotional meeting.
But if this policy level decision is the basis of activity, are we not now
on the same side of things?
>> [hint; try Kommersant-Vlast, August 29, 2000]
>>
>> Surely The Leader can't be wrong?
>>
>> But maybe you can find this one by yourself:
>>
>> We wanted the best, but it turned out as always.
>>
>> //Victor Chernomyrdin,
>> //Russian prime minister, 1992-1998.
>>
>> But the main issues here are chessic ones - to the general degree that
>> the State leaned on Soviet-era players, and the degree to which
>> individuals complied with it. Did you have views on either of these
>> subjects?
>
> Yes, my view is that neither you nor Parr knows a thing about it, and
that
> there is no way that you can verify your conspiracy theories.
He lived in Bloc countries. I merely wrote thousands of e-mails with
Russian
chess people.
For myself, these 'misrepresentations' are the direct re****ts of people I
have written with, supplemented by broader reading of Russian authors and
other re****ts by people who seem to be otherwise respectable.
At the political level of chess in Bloc countries it is very hard for you,
I
think, to argue with Mark Taimanov's own re****t on it. But I suppose you
could do that - and then you could argue with his source, which was the
contents of his KGB dossier. Then maybe you could move on to Boris Gulko
who
also wrote a testimony of his treatment, and manipulations [being beaten
up,
his wife too, and other 'deselecting' activities from chess placed upon
him]
by KGB and not-so-good chess officials.
Did you ever read of these sorts of things? The Taimanov book is even in
Russian language! If you didn't read anything like this I excuse you as an
innocent. But if you chose not to read such things, then that is not
innocence, that is a wilful ignorance.
So when the question arises of 'influence' over chess by the SU, you may
be
tempted to forgive Larry Parr and myself, since what we represent is the
direct witness of Russians themselves. And given this as the background
context of chess in the SU, the questions are not 'if pressure existed?',
but rather to what degree did individual players go along with various
degrees of control over individuals within the system?
It is not for me, and after reading Larry Parr for 10 years, I do not
think
it is for him either, any dislike for Russian people. It is dislike for
that
horrible system and what it does to individual people.
Cordially, Phil Innes
>>
>>
>> Vykhod est! Phil Innes
>>
>
|
