#chernobyl hbo truth

[margarita-life]

There was nothing sane about CHERNOBYL.

link: https://youtu.be/_2OuF9cFrhY

“What is the cost of lies? It's not that we will mistake them for the truth. The real danger is that, if we hear enough lies, then we no longer recognize the truth at all”

38 years since the Chernobyl disaster. Well, humanity does not learn anything. Every day, Ukraine is exposed to new nuclear disasters due to missile attacks from russia. Every day can be the last. Every day can be worse than the previous one. Do not forget why the Chernobyl disaster happened. And finally, let's draw some conclusions.

#Chernobyl #Чорнобиль #chernobylhbo

[daincrediblegg]

Every time a bell* rings*, an angel* gets their wings*.

*a new user **gets into HBO Chernobyl tag and finds and reblogs my edits and fics ***I ****giggle and squeal and kick my feet with delight

[animentality]

durgetash isn't just "love is forbidden."

it's "you can deny your own humanity as much as you like, lie to yourself about the nature of your pain, pretend you don't need anyone and you aren't lonely, but in the words of prestige television show Chernobyl HBO, every lie told incurs a debt to the truth and sooner or later that debt is paid."

you can lie about how much you truly care about the only person who understands you, you can pretend you don't need love or validation or acceptance, but your refusal to acknowledge your own feelings will be your undoing. it's not a weakness to have feelings, it's a weakness not to acknowledge and accept and deal with them. it's a weakness that will be exploited.

when Enver thought he could trust the dark urge because he cared about them before and he can't look into their eyes without remembering all of the time they spent together (as they plan to betray and kill him).

when the dark urge spent their entire life on a pedestal, with no friends or lovers, out of subconscious fear of destroying someone they love again, and they let their guard down, their alliance with the chosen of Bane directly leading to their downfall, whether you believe Orin used Gortash's form to take them off guard or simply targeted them for getting too close to him.

they both paid the price for that weakness.

also the fallout from durgetash was fucking radioactive.

kinda put a nuclear cloud over baldur's gate.

[halogenwarrior]

Ok I've promised this before... Chernobyl HBO retrospective

Well I mentioned before that I wanted to eventually delve into this, so here is my retrospective on the HBO Chernobyl show. Why it was my favorite work of art ever, why it is still irredeemable trash that the world would be better without due to inaccuracies and misleading claims, why most of the criticism of it completely misses why this was (or just says things that are downright unfair to it), and how it ruined my mental health.

            If you ever see this show discussed on the internet, it’s usually a bunch of people praising it and calling it the best show ever, a person or two saying it’s just typical manipulative Hollywood tripe lying about history and science for propaganda/making things more dramatic, and the original people dogpiling said dissenter with downvotes. And… neither of these sides are really right, or at least the latter is very much misattributing the motives behind the problems with the show. 

            The thing is that, it’s clear from listening to the supplementary podcasts and discussions that Mazin was not trying to lie for clout, and was genuinely deeply thoughtful (unlike a lot of people making “based on a true story” works) about representing the truth, and about carefully considering before adding anything inaccurate into the story, and if he did he would always justify it with it being necessary to convey a greater truth within the limits of 5 hours of television, rather than for coolness or tropes or drama or making nuclear power look bad (the latter of which he is explicitly against). He made a clear attempt to read multiple sources rather than basing everything on one source and getting into trouble for that (Hamilton looking at you). The common criticism trope that gets leveled is that the show is hypocritical for being about the danger of lies and misinformation but peddling lies and misinformation itself, but he was fully aware for the potential for hypocrisy in the show’s premise and made the podcasts where he would give an honest breakdown of all of his decisions specifically to avoid such hypocrisy. And thus people who have listened to said podcasts are often the show’s loudest defenders, because of that uncommon thoughtfulness it shows making it seem very unfair to lump it in with Hollywood’s typical crass and mercenary manipulation of truth. He even explicitly went with the least dramatic story whenever there was a contradiction between sources.

            Except the problem is that all of that care… wasn’t enough. Like wasn’t even nearly enough. Not only the things he admits to changing but half of the things he cites as being “ok this one is shocking but real” actually still turned out not to be true. In some ways it’s not a surprise why. He mentions reading 20 sources that said the three people who went into the reactor to drain the water died before reading one correct report that they survived, and it’s not hard to believe that these other cases were ones where he never found that one correct one. My read on it is that the problem is that, as sincere as he was, he is not a historian with the ability to not just read a huge number of sources but locate the most important and reliable ones and prioritize them over the less so. 

            But in the end, it doesn’t really matter, does it? From a death of the author perspective – if you are sincere and careful but the end result is completely indistinguishable for manipulative tripe and/or propaganda, who cares what your intentions are, it’s still trash! All that knowing the motivations behind it does is make you mad, because rather than being something you can dismiss, it’s something where the creator made an effort to know the truth they were based on the story on, played their hand brilliantly at, within the constraints of the format and fact, making a powerful and haunting story, a masterpiece, and none of it matters in the end anyway. Which brings me into why it was executed so brilliantly…

            Besides being very well done, Chernobyl captivated me because it perfectly appealed to things I had always wanted to see but never really got to. I had always dreamed of a reinvention of the disaster movie genre that could touch at the heart of the tragedy and horror and awe of disaster for the ones living in it and dying from it; not merely a cheap excuse to have fun thrills at the death of nameless victims or (as seems to be the fashion everyone is begging for in disaster/apocalyptic types of things now) narratively bypass that people died, that something happened that cannot be reversed, altogether to focus on the hopeful fantasy of being a survivor. And this seemed exactly what I was looking for. And then there was the amazing way it incorporated complex scientific explanations in its finale, something that excited me so much as a Chemistry major in college at the time who really wanted to devote myself to science. At last, a work that didn’t treat its audience as dumb, that incorporated an intricate and fascinating explanation (with an actual nuclear physicist hired as a consultant) in a way that added to the story rather than ever dragging it! Nothing has ever really compared to that; any time I see a movie where science is an aspect of the plot I find myself disappointed in comparison with how there is no real science in it. Come on, I want to see the real fascinating complexities of the world explained with the excitement people devote to their fictional magic systems. This show had spoiled me forever on that to the point where I was just watching the Oppenheimer movie complaining that they never actually explain the science at all, let alone in an amazing and riveting way. The atmosphere was well-executed and uniquely executed, and it was like I was there in the long days, the deserted nature, the machinery and the dread of the radiation that permeated everything.

            And then the characters… wow, they were well done, I had never been this invested in characters that had such a short time to be built up, and I have very rarely been this invested in characters period. Legasov was amazing, I will talk more about him later, and Shcherbina was, well… my ultimate blorbo from my shows who I thought of all the time and, if I was on Tumblr then, probably would have been posting analysis posts of nonstop. The way he was the harsh and practical bureaucrat and provider of materials but subtly, in a way I picked up before with his genuine excitement over things like the moon rovers but had big payoff in his final scene, a sort of lapsed idealist who sometimes betrayed a genuine excitement for making things work. Someone for with all his bluster of having power, was fundamentally helpless, a cog in the system who knew it and tried to shut and deny everything away like everyone in the show. And the beautiful irony of how only when he’s thrust away from normal life and into this twisted, haunting, as some reviewers had said cosmic-horror like/small scale apocalyptic realm where the life he had built and future he had hoped for is forfeit, where he is nothing more than a ghost and he’s walked into a trap from which there is no return, but within this realm has power that he can grab onto and fight for something with, then he’s able to live up the idea of the benevolent authority figure he had tried to in the past and gotten crushed for. That’s when he’s able to show all of his cleverness and drive and an honesty that the supposedly more “innocent” Legasov struggles with, a cold and frightening honesty that both sees the ridiculousness of Soviet ideals of sacrifice that got them into this situation in the first place and knows that is still exactly what is necessary in this time and place and is willing to follow it to the bitter end, enacting exactly the heroic ideal he had once thought he could be. One criticism I have seen of this show is that it romanticizes the ideals of sacrifice too much to be anything but a lukewarm criticism of the system it purports to criticize, but that part, particularly in relation to this character, was really impactful for me. Not an easy and unquestioned lauding of those values, not solely a detached cynicism either, but a knowledge it was cruel and ironic and partly the fault of these ideals in the first place that it had come to this, that there was (as Mazin said in the podcast) no beautiful realm to sacrifice oneself for and just more bitterness, but there was still something noble and meaningful in what now had to be done, and in a way that made it hit harder than a more straightforward story. 

            And that wasn’t the only case I noticed where a common criticism seemed to “miss the point”, there are two other big examples of that. One is the argument that the show distorts history by making Dyatlov and co. into the sole villains who were individually responsible for everything, ignoring the reality of the government and system as a whole being responsible. This seems to betray a lack of comprehension of a lot that was not only implied, but sometimes outright stated in the text. The starting framing device sets up the explicit expectation that Dyatlov did bad things and isn’t going to be a likable character, but he’s still fundamentally a scapegoat whose individual failings are used to obscure the greater problems within the whole system, and the finale follows up on that. Using the explicit framing device of Legasov starting off by telling the part of the story that is true but not the whole truth, only the part his audience wants to here because it focuses on the failings of a few individual people, only to go off-script at the end and reveal the problems go far deeper. The same goes for another big criticism I’ve seen, that the show lacks understanding of the psychology and experience of people living under an oppressive government for how Legasov somehow remains innocent and sheltered and just shocked that people would lie like that. To me it seemed pretty clear that said character was portrayed brilliantly as someone who, by nature of his high rank in such a system, has to know the politics and make cynical moves and lies all the time just by virtue of existing there, but keeps that part of him as an instinct rather than something he consciously makes part of his identity so his self-concept can be one of nobly truth-seeking innocence. He can’t do politics when he tries to to it “consciously”, and refers to himself as someone who must not understand how horrible people can be because he’s so sheltered, but when he needs to get people to die for his cause his first instinct is lies and bribes, and the more we know about him the more it becomes clear that he has done plenty of bad, cynical moves to keep his position of power and esteem and avoid the horrible consequences that would come with defying those with greater power, it’s just that he does it on autopilot and separates it from the part of his identity that he acknowledges and gives him internal moral justification for existing. His character arc is about being forced to confront this contradiction in himself in the most horrific of circumstances and actually, hesitantly, very humanly, become what he believed himself to be, even if it destroys him, and I think that’s really brilliant character writing! 

            Now, a lot of the sources of criticism are from people who are knowledgeable about history or lived in the Soviet Union themselves, and so, if they had acknowledged these subtleties but said the show was not realistic or honest in these ways in spite of them, I would concede they knew more than I do about these topics and the criticisms were justified. Such as if they had said “Yes, I know the show is trying to point out that someone who is genuinely unlikeable and did bad things can still be a cynically used scapegoat to hide systemic problems, but the real person wasn’t that unlikeable and bad in the first place” or “Yes, I know there is a very specific reason with regards to the framing device that the criticism of the government gets saved for the end of the last episode but giving it so little screen time still undersold how that was the main point”, or “Yes, I know Legasov’s character was significantly more nuanced than an innocent noble truth-teller but it still didn’t do enough to read as how a real person would act in the Soviet Union”, but it never seems to be that, it always seems to be the critics seeing the show as playing these tropes straight, unsubtly and unironically, which just seems to be bad comprehension to me. 

            So I’m just going to finish it off with why I care so much, which is the impact the show had on me. At the time it came out, I was going through a horrible time mentally, having constant obsessive thoughts devaluing anything I cared about or found meaning about in life, and I was just for the first time starting to get to a more stable point where I could actually find value in life. At the time I was in college doing an internship in a lab I really loved. And I know people will see me as a freak for finding any comfort in a show infamous for being a grueling an depressing exploration of a real-life disaster, but it made me feel real emotions for the first time in a while. Sadness and haunting awe and real suspense and fear that no supernatural horror thing could ever dream of striking in me (the roof scene was just wow…). But also a kind of bitter hope and sense of purpose that I alluded to earlier. What has always compelled me most in media, in terms of making me feel enthusiastic just to live, is not the things that get labeled as “optimistic tm”, but the things that throw you against a wall and twist everything and then there is still a hope and value in it that exists purely, beyond words or any pretensions. 

            And the more I looked into the show and the various criticisms of it, the more I began to suspect that none of the value, none of the thoughts and feelings I had, even mattered. It didn’t matter the creator’s honesty and scruples and good intentions, or how it was just about the perfect work of art that I loved more than anything. Because fundamentally this was a story about truth, one in which the horror and meaning of it relied on it being real, and if enough of the plot points and key emotional beats weren’t really real, then that’s an irreparably failed work, in fact one that can do harm in the real world, and nothing else it does right even matters. Sure the sequence where the danger to all of Europe of a second explosion is outlined is an immensely well-crafted scene in an immensely well-crafted episode, and it made me feel more strongly than anything had made me feel in perhaps two years, but it didn’t really happen so the whole thing is a farce and I’m wrong to feel that way. Mazin believed it was real, he clearly got it from real sources due to people believing at the time and some sources still perpetuating it rather than making it up for the sake of drama, but accidental manipulation is still manipulation. I’m still not an expert so I may be wrong on this, but one can easily read both the supposed drama and the supposed meaningful actions, actions that mattered, that appealed to me as someone who wanted to find a purpose as a scientist, as a farce rather than a tragedy; the drama was all from people at the time thinking the situation was worse than it was (i.e in real life, they overestimated the likely deaths by a factor of 10 at the time), and all the actions that seemed to be meaningful were done on so little knowledge that they didn’t really make a difference. Probably Legasov saying that Shcherbina’s actions mattered in the end despite everything would be laughable in light of what really happened (I don’t know this for sure and this is just the sense I get from limited information, but I wouldn’t be surprised…) And really at the time, I had had enough of farces. Sometimes it seems like that’s all life was, and drama and tragedy would at least have some kind of meaning. I had gone so long obsessively punishing myself for liking and valuing anything. The more passionately I cared the more greatly I would punish myself, arguing that the flaws in whatever I cared for not only demanded a more nuanced view but completely erased anything good or valuable in whatever it was, making it objectively wrong to care. I would do this for anything from my favorite books to life itself. And the more I realized that my obsessive thoughts on this show, which I felt more intensely about than anything, were actually objectively right, that it really was irredeemable and none of the things it did right even mattered, the easier it was to believe that the same was true about all those other thoughts. I feel like, more than anything, this show ruined what would have been my recovery from my years of depression and made me like that for more years to come. And the worst thing was that I didn’t want to tell anyone about this, I felt horribly embarrassed that my view of the world could so depend on something so frivolous as a TV show, rather than be determined solely by grand philosophical questions about life itself. Honestly being on Tumblr has helped me be more comfortable with the part of me that can get very focused on fiction in this way, for how everyone else is willing to be that passionate, but at the time I didn’t have that. 

            In conclusion I would just want to note that I know it seems to be the fashion nowadays to say “well who cares about historical fiction/things based on a true story being accurate, it’s actually better the more ridiculous and disconnected from the truth it is and accuracy is just laziness”. But I’ve never felt that way, I have always felt there is value in telling a story with solemnity and compassion about true events, with the fictionalization allowing one to endow it with a technique and most of all humanity that can still be preserved without deviating from the important details. This has always been my personal white whale, because most creators don’t seem to care a bit about being faithful to the truth, or as much as they can within the constraints of the format, or they think the truth is boring (when actually the made-up details are inevitably far more cliché, weaker, and well, boring than the fascinating truth is). And then, when you have a one-in-a-million case where the creator is actually disciplined and honest, people are still idiots and probably I should give up on hoping anyone who isn’t a trained historian (and scientist) themselves will be able to conduct their research so as to not make so many mistakes it completely ruins the whole project. But still, they had the resources of a TV show, they actually hired experts, it is still mind-boggling how something done with such good intentions and care could go so wrong? Probably I will never be satisfied. But I will still wish for something that as amazingly tackles real events as this show does with the events as its creator believed were real, as something that in a different world I would have easily named as my favorite work of art ever. In the end, though, that’s probably another false hope.

[teeth--thief]

Well, you know damn well we need to hear more about that comic.

-R

Alright, let's get into Chernobyl: the Fall of Atomgrad by Matyáš Namai, now that you've bribed me with another pretty picture of yours...

Positives first!

I think that the way in which all the significant people are drawn is really good! They look like their real-life counterparts while remaining in the artist's style.

I really really enjoyed that some panels were very obviously based on more or less well-known photos or stills from videos from Pripyat itself, the later liquidation, the trial, and all else. I think it really adds to the experience when you're familiar with these.

The color palette of the blue and yellow is a great choice - not only because it's the Ukrainian flag but also because the colors make for a great combo - contrasting, but at the same fitting together really nicely. And also make a cool green :)

Negatives:

The biggest offender is the actual factual information this graphic novel depicts. It's nothing new by any means, nothing we haven't seen or heard before. Some stuff is pretty minor, I didn't get into this believing it'll get every single thing right, but some are... they are. An interesting oversight is that the AZ-5 is shown as a... switch. It wasn't a switch then. It was a button, and that's where quite a handful of theories stem from. It was later changed to a switch, yes, but it wasn't a switch then. And, obviously, we have the myth of everyone scrambling to press said AZ-5 button because yes, the power definitely sky-rocketed right before the PLANNED shut down, as HBO and a few other sources would like us to believe. Also, Legasov's... stunt that was the Vienna conference is described as follows: "He didn't lie. He just didn't tell the whole truth." Aw man...

Weirdly nitpick-y, perhaps, but: Tregub, whose name is mentioned just once, is spelled as... Treburg? Which I've never seen before, I've seen many operators' names spelt weirdly, but this one is new. Also, his "design", if you will, doesn't actually seem to have been inspired by the real guy. It's not a big deal, he appears a whole lot of... two times or so, but still... you know who he is but not what he looks like? A bit lame if you'd ask me... but don't ask me, I am weirdly fixated on knowing how everyone looked.

On the same note: Yuvchenko's name is once - just once - spelt as Yushchenko. Odd.

Also, the SIUR is seated in the wrong spot in the control room. If we're looking at it from above, the SIUR's spot is on the far left and not in the middle, as this novel seems to insinuate, that would be the SIUB's spot. No biggie, but it's always something to keep in mind. But hey, you can't have everything - at least Toptunov isn't a blonde twink in this one...

I think it may be just me, but I feel like there's some... filler stuff in there. A bit too much of insignificant things, and too little of the things that actually matter. But they are the things that matter to me, so... a very objective judgement made by me. Another one of very much opinion based complaints is that it's called "The Fall of Atomgrad" - for some reason, the fact that it's neither "an Atomgrad" or "the Atomgrad" is incredibly annoying to me... dunno.

My conclusion is this: if you want to buy it for something, don't buy it for the information - buy it for the art.

[landrysg]

The lesson of the Chernobyl may be interpreted as warning against the dangers of nuclear power. And while we must be wary of hubris when we manipulate the environment, the real lesson of Chernobyl is the danger of persistent lies in a society that refuses to acknowledge truth and conform itself to reality. ... It would be a grave error not to take stock of our own tendencies toward deceit in our lives and work, or to see the increasing mendacity and abusive language in our society as something radically different from the deceit that underpinned the Soviet Union. ... If we do not or cannot tell the truth now in the face of current pressure, why do we think we will be able to resist when the stakes are higher? How often do we think of Nazi Germany and wonder how it could have happened? How often do we think we would have stood up for the Jews and others sent to concentration camps? But think of all the times we are reticent to tell even simple truths about a problem at the office because we don’t want to hurt our career or rock the boat? Why do we think we would have resisted when the result would have been a prison camp? Lies seem harmless or at least convenient, the easy path. But they come at a price. In what could be an homage to Solzhenitsyn and the many who gave their lives both at Chernobyl and in resistance to Soviet totalitarianism, Chernobyl ends with a warning from the main character Valery Legasov worth remembering in all aspects of our personal, professional, and political lives: “Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid.”

[mariacallous]

Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny has reportedly died in a penal colony in the Arctic Circle, according to the Russian prison service. Navalny was serving a 19-year prison sentence in the penal colony on a range of charges that were widely regarded to be politically motivated. He was 47 years old. 

In a short statement, the Yamalo-Nenets prison service said that Navalny felt unwell after a walk at the “Polar Wolf” penal colony and almost immediately lost consciousness. The cause of his death was not immediately clear. Navalny survived a previous attempt on his life in 2020, when he was poisoned with the potent Novichok nerve agent  by operatives from the Russian security services. His death is likely to be seen as a political assassination, coming as it does just a month before Russian presidential elections are set to take place. 

Navalny’s colleagues have yet to confirm his death. In a statement on X, his press secretary, Kira Yarmash, said that the opposition leader’s lawyer was en route to the prison.

Charismatic, controversial, and unquestionably brave, Navalny and his team doggedly exposed corruption among the country’s political elite, including by Russian President Vladimir Putin himself. Navalny had a unique ability to speak to the concerns of Russians across the country and to mobilize them to take to the streets. 

Hours after news of his death broke, Navalny’s wife Yulia Navalnaya took to the stage at the Munich Security Conference in Germany to offer brief, unscheduled remarks. 

“Upon hearing the horrible news, I didn’t know if I should have immediately flown to my family or speak out. But then I thought—‘what would Alexei do’ and I’m sure he would be here,” said a somber Navalnaya.

“We cannot believe Putin’s government. They are lying constantly. But if this is the truth, I want Putin and all of those around him, his government, his friends, I want them to know that they will be punished for what they have done with our country, with my family and with my husband, they will be brought to justice,” she said. 

For many, Navalny presented the most credible alternative to Putin, with his hopes of turning Russia into a “normal country,” as he once put it in an interview with ABC News. It was a vision that the Kremlin worked to ensure could never become a reality by steadily extinguishing dissent—and, it seems, eventually Navalny himself. 

By all accounts, Navalny had an ordinary Soviet childhood. He was born in 1976 in a small town outside of Moscow, though accounts diverge on where exactly. His mother, Lyudmila, was an economist, and his father, Anatoly, was an officer in the Red Army. His mother has described the young Navalny as a strong-willed child. “It was impossible to discipline him,” she said in an interview with the Russian news site the New Times in 2013. “I remember once that his teacher scolded him for something, and the next day he refused to go to school. ‘I don’t want to be forced to study,’” she recalled him saying. 

Summers were spent with his paternal grandparents in the small village of Zalyssia, Ukraine. But his idyllic childhood summers of swimming in the nearby Uzh River came to an abrupt end in 1986, when the nearby Chernobyl nuclear plant melted down, rendering Zalyssia and the wider area uninhabitable and sickening countless of its residents in the process. 

The disaster—which the Soviet authorities initially attempted to cover up—was a formative moment for the young Navalny and countless other Soviet citizens, serving as a wake-up call about the very real cost of corruption and incompetence bred by the Soviet regime. He later recalled in an HBO documentary that his family began to discuss politics much more frequently in the wake of the disaster. 

Navalny graduated high school in 1993 as the Soviet Union was rapidly collapsing in on itself. He studied law at the People’s Friendship University of Russia in Moscow, before studying for a master’s degree in finance, graduating in 2001.

As the turbulence of the so-called wild 90s cleared, the rapid economic growth of the 2000s propelled millions of Russians into the middle class and helped cement the popularity of the new president, Vladimir Putin. Despite a long-standing interest in politics, it was Navalny’s foray into the Russian stock market that marked the beginning of his journey to becoming Putin’s most formidable foe. 

Navalny invested in some of the country’s largest banks and energy companies, but when his much-anticipated dividends failed to materialize, he began to realize that something was amiss, as he explained in an interview to the Russian newspaper Kommersant in 2009.  

Fluent in law and finance, Navalny used his position as a minority shareholder to investigate and expose corruption in some of the country’s largest companies—often embarrassing their executives in the process. Combating corruption was an easy point of consensus that bridged class and ideological divides among Russians, and the young and energetic Navalny quickly stood out among the country’s fragmented opposition. 

Well educated and intelligent, Navalny was nevertheless not part of the intelligentsia, a fact which only helped broaden his appeal. A skilled political strategist who had an unmatched ability to bring the public out onto the streets, he wasted no time on political philosophy. He could “only disappoint those who expect from him a modicum of theoretical construction: he is a doer, not a thinker,” wrote Russian nationalism expert Marlene Laurelle, as cited the academics Jan Matti Dollbaum, Morvan Lallouet, and Ben Noble’s 2021 biography of Navalny. 

Living in a three-bedroom apartment in southern Moscow with his photogenic wife Yulia and their two children, Dariya and Zakhar, he cut a familiar figure, indistinguishable from the millions of other middle-class Muscovites. 

In 2011, Navalny founded the Anti-Corruption Foundation, which would become the principal vehicle for his investigations until 2021, when the Russian authorities branded it an extremist organization and forced it to close. The foundation’s work borrowed from the tradition of investigative journalism as it exposed the staggering corruption of top Russian officials in slick video reports. But unconfined by the impartiality requirements sacred to journalists, Navalny harnessed the outrage generated by his work to mobilize Russians to take to the streets. 

In the summer of 2017, tens of thousands of young Russians took to the streets after the foundation published a video investigation into the luxury property empire of then-Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. The protests spread to almost 200 towns across the country and into the Russian heartland—long thought to be a stronghold of Putin’s support.

Unsurprisingly for a figure as extremely online as he was, Navalny was most popular among young Russians, according to independent polling from early 2021, cited in Dolbaum, Lallouet, and Noble’s biography. But to the envy of politicians worldwide, the research showed that Navalny enjoyed a similar degree of support from those with and without a college education, as well as from those living in both urban and rural areas. “What population surveys clearly show, therefore, is that Navalny is not just a phenomenon of urban centres in Russia,” Dolbuam and colleagues write. 

Cocky and sometimes crude with a puckish sense of humor, Navaly reveled in the absurdism inherent to authoritarian regimes. He regularly called on his fellow Russians to not be afraid. He revealed powerful Russian officials to be corrupt, but also fallible and therefore mortal. His foundation’s damning investigation into Medvedev began with the former president’s online shopping habit and a pair of garish Nike sneakers that he had delivered to one of his undeclared luxury properties. 

“This investigation, which took us many months, began with an absurd trivial detail—a pair of sneakers and shirt,” Navalny said in a video report of the investigation. 

Having spent much of the 1990s in school, Navalny was untainted by the turbulent politics of the period, which is remembered as one of deep trauma by many Russians. While previous generations of Russian liberals embraced the West, neoliberalism, and the Washington consensus, said Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia, Navalny was very much a Russian patriot who once claimed he could never be sent into exile because he would miss Russian black bread.

Amid Kremlin efforts to brand him as a supplicant of Washington, Navalny turned down invitations to meet with the U.S. ambassador, McFaul recalled, out of concern that it would only fuel speculation about his relationship with the United States. 

The question of whether his patriotism veered into harmful nationalism has been the subject of significant debate. 

In 2007, he was ejected from the liberal Yabloko party for attending the Russian March, an annual demonstration of far-right and ultranationalist groups. Briefly establishing his own party, Narod (“people”), Navalny released YouTube videos in which he likened Islamic militants to cockroaches, called for the deportation of immigrant workers, and vowed to defend the rights of ethnic Russians in Russia.

While calls for greater immigration controls remained part of his platform, Navalny’s use of more extreme rhetoric seems to have peaked in the late 2000s. More charitable interpretations have suggested that as liberal parties struggled to gain ground, Navalny looked to nationalism as a mobilizing force. As later noted by Al Jazeera, his remarks came as nationalist sentiment was surging in Russia—and so too were hate crimes, with more than 100 people killed in racially motivated attacks in 2008. 

His overtures toward nationalism haunted him for the remainder of his career—causing Amnesty International to revoke his “prisoner of conscience” status in 2021. At the same time, Navalny did little to disavow his past remarks. “My idea is that you have to communicate with nationalists and educate them,” he told the Polish journalist Adam Michnik in 2015.

One thing that can be said conclusively about Navalny is that he was astonishingly courageous. Mortality is no abstract concept for Russian journalists and opposition figures; dozens, if not hundreds, have been murdered since the end of the Cold War. As he rose to prominence, so too did the authorities’ efforts to silence him through spurious legal claims; the imprisonment of his brother, Oleg; an attempted poisoning; and finally, a lengthy sentence in a penal colony. 

Before he was poisoned with the potentially lethal nerve agent Novichok in 2020, Navalny and many observers of the Russian system came to believe that his fame offered him some protection. “Some years ago I was told that Navalny’s murder was seen in the Kremlin as a kind of nightmare scenario—one that would be seen only as a dangerous kind of provocation that would spark protests,” analyst Tatiyana Stanovaya wrote on the social messaging app Telegram shortly after Navalny was poisoned in August 2020. 

A tightly constrained opposition and occasional street protests were long seen as an important pressure valve for the Kremlin, through which its frustrated subjects could let off steam. Navalny’s poisoning, which was traced back to the Russian security services by investigative journalists at Bellingcat, heralded the beginning of a terrifying new era as the country slid deeper into authoritarianism and international isolation. 

After collapsing on a flight to Moscow, writhing in pain, Navalny was airlifted from the Siberian city of Omsk to Berlin for treatment. He spent months in the small village of Ibach in Germany’s Black Forest, regaining his strength and plotting his return to Russia. Navalny and his team also began working on an extensive investigation into the wealth of the Russian president himself, crossing Navalny’s previous self-imposed red line. 

“Alexei used to say that when we write about Putin, it will be our last investigation,” one of Navalny’s unnamed close associates is quoted as saying in his biography. 

Navalny returned to Russia in January 2021 to the near-certain prospect of imprisonment. Surrounded by journalists and news crews, Navalny and his wife Yulia spent the flight watching the cartoon Rick and Morty on a laptop, sharing a set of earbuds. 

“I’ve really missed you guys,” he said as he arrived at passport control at Sheremetyevo International Airport, before a cluster of police officers arrived to detain him. 

Convicted on a range of charges widely regarded as politically motivated, including one for extremism, Navalny was sentenced to nearly two decades in the Russian penal system. He would never emerge. 

At the end of Daniel Roher’s Oscar-winning documentary about Navalny, he asks what message Navalny has for the Russian people in the event that he is killed. “You are not allowed to give up. If they decide to kill me, it means that we are incredibly strong,” he said, looking directly into the camera. “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing. So don’t be inactive,” he added, before giving a wry smile.

[amichandsaini]

HBO Max's Best: The Top 10 Shows You Have to Stream

In the vast sea of streaming platforms, HBO Max stands out as a treasure trove of premium content, boasting a library filled with acclaimed series spanning various genres. With a lineup that caters to diverse tastes, choosing what to watch can be daunting. Fear not, as we embark on a journey to unlock HBO Max's best, presenting the top 10 shows you simply have to stream.

Game of Thrones:

Let's start with the juggernaut that redefined television fantasy. "Game of Thrones" transcended the small screen to become a cultural phenomenon. Adapted from George R.R. Martin's epic fantasy series, this show offers a sprawling narrative filled with political intrigue, epic battles, and unforgettable characters. Whether you're drawn to the power struggles of Westeros or the intricate plotting of its noble houses, "Game of Thrones" delivers an immersive experience like no other.

Station Eleven:

Adapted from Emily St. John Mandel's novel, "Station Eleven" is a post-apocalyptic drama that follows a group of survivors navigating a world ravaged by a devastating pandemic. As they struggle to rebuild civilization and preserve art and culture, they grapple with loss, hope, and the enduring power of human connection. With its poignant storytelling and resonant themes, "Station Eleven" offers a poignant reflection on the fragility of life and the resilience of the human spirit. Fans eagerly anticipate Station Eleven Season 2 to continue the captivating journey of these characters in a world forever changed by catastrophe.

The Sopranos:

Widely regarded as one of the greatest television series of all time, "The Sopranos" is a groundbreaking drama that explores the life of mob boss Tony Soprano. With its complex characters, moral dilemmas, and dark humour, this show paved the way for the golden age of television we enjoy today. Dive into the world of organised crime as Tony juggles the demands of his family, business, and therapy sessions in this compelling and often unpredictable series.

The Wire:

A masterclass in storytelling, "The Wire" offers a gritty and realistic portrayal of life in Baltimore, Maryland. Through its exploration of the city's institutions – from law enforcement to schools to the drug trade – this series paints a nuanced picture of urban America. With its sprawling ensemble cast and social commentary, "The Wire" challenges viewers to confront difficult truths about society while delivering riveting drama.

Chernobyl:

A hauntingly powerful miniseries, "Chernobyl" chronicles the events surrounding the 1986 nuclear disaster in Soviet Ukraine. With its meticulous attention to detail and harrowing portrayal of the human cost of negligence, this show is as educational as it is emotionally resonant. Witness the bravery of those who risked their lives to contain the fallout and the devastating impact of a catastrophic failure in this gripping historical drama.

Succession:

Mixing family drama with corporate intrigue, "Succession" follows the dysfunctional Roy family as they vie for control of their media conglomerate. Sharp writing, brilliant performances, and biting satire make this series a must-watch. Whether you're fascinated by the cutthroat world of business or drawn to the complexities of familial relationships, "Succession" offers plenty of twists and turns to keep you hooked.

Westworld:

Delving into the intersection of artificial intelligence and morality, "Westworld" is a mind-bending sci-fi thriller set in a futuristic amusement park populated by lifelike robots. As the lines between human and machine blur, questions of identity, consciousness, and free will take centre stage. With its stunning visuals, philosophical themes, and labyrinthine plot, "Westworld" is sure to stimulate both the intellect and the imagination.

Watchmen:

A bold and provocative reimagining of the iconic graphic novel, "Watchmen" tackles issues of race, power, and justice in America. Set in an alternate history where superheroes are real and vigilantes are outlawed, this series offers a timely exploration of systemic racism and the legacy of trauma. With its thought-provoking narrative and stellar cast, "Watchmen" is as relevant as it is riveting.

Big Little Lies:

Based on the novel by Liane Moriarty, "Big Little Lies" is a gripping drama that delves into the secrets and scandals lurking beneath the surface of a picturesque California town. With its powerhouse cast led by Reese Witherspoon, Nicole Kidman, and Shailene Woodley, this series offers a compelling mix of mystery, intrigue, and social commentary. Dive into the lives of these complex women as they navigate friendship, motherhood, and betrayal.

Mare of Easttown:

Rounding out our list is "Mare of Easttown," a gripping crime drama set in a small Pennsylvania town. Kate Winslet delivers a tour-de-force performance as Mare Sheehan, a troubled detective investigating a murder while grappling with personal demons. With its atmospheric setting, richly drawn characters, and compelling mystery, "Mare of Easttown" is a must-watch for fans of gripping storytelling and top-notch acting.

Conclusion

HBO Max is home to some of the most compelling and critically acclaimed television shows ever made. Whether you're a fan of fantasy epics, gritty dramas, or thought-provoking sci-fi, there's something for everyone to enjoy. So grab your remote, settle in, and prepare to be entertained by the best that HBO Max has to offer.

[monriatitans]

Ta-Da! List: Monday, May 27th

The image was made in Canva; check it out at the [referral] link here!

I share my “Ta-Da! List” every day so everyone gets a daily update and I have a reminder of what I’ve accomplished.

To learn more about “Ta-Da! Lists”, and other ADHD life hacks, check out @adhdjesse’s book Extra Focus: The Quick Start Guide to Adult ADHD.

Abbreviations

- MT: MonriaTitans - O&T: Opinions & Truth Blog - NRL: The Neverending Reading List - WGS: The Weekend Game Show - ASO: Artist Shout-Out - IG: Instagram - BMAC: Buy Me a Coffee - TDL: Ta-Da! List

Ta-Da! List

✧ May 26th: - chores and miscellaneous: started, then unloaded the dishwasher ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ✧ throughout the day: - kept emails manageable - loaded the dishwasher - filled out today’s TDL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ✧ on the mobile phone: - Hive: shared today’s ASO - IG/Threads/Hive: shared the NRL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ✧ on the bedroom setup: - Movies: watched “The Nightmare Before Christmas” - O&T: shared yesterday’s and today’s TDL to various social media ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ✧ on the office setup: - WGS: gave a human artist, Max Cimato, a shout-out on O&T, Tumblr, and other social media - O&T: rearranged links in the Site Menu; shared the NRL, “Third Generation R&D”, by Philip A. Roussel, Kamal N. Saad, & Tamara J. Erickson, on social media - Branding: in Canva, found a graphic to represent sharing an NRL for the TDLs - MT Carrd: added the link to Rumble and Bluesky to the “Icons Section” at the bottom - Gaming: played “Final Fantasy XIV” - YouTube: watched and/or listened to: 1. Tina Huang’s videos “Making My New Self Study Plan” and “How To Learn Things FAST” 2. Philosophy Tube’s videos “Beauty in Ugly Times”, “The Trouble with the Video Game Industry”, “Logic”, “HBO’s Chernobyl & Personal Responsibility”, “Witchcraft, Gender, & Marxism”, “YouTube: Art or Reality?”, “Transphobia: An Analysis”, “Data”, “Suic!de and Ment@l He@lth”, and “Men. Abuse. Trauma.” 3. Jim Sterling’s video “Blizzard Is Pathetic (The Jimquisition)” 4. ContraPoints’ videos “Autogynephilia” and “Incels” 5. The Book Leo’s video video “is tiktok ruining reading? & the desire to be ‘a reader’” ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ✧ chores and miscellaneous: - Food: had coffee and chocolate croissants for breakfast; had leftover pizza and family dinner for lunch; partner cooked CookingLight’s “Lazy Lasagna Soup” for dinner - Chores: dusted the apartment

—

Well, these are all the updates I had for today! Thank you for reading!

May every decision you make be *in the spirit of fairness* and may the rest of your day *NOT go to $#!7*!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Enjoy what I do? Please consider supporting via Buy Me a Coffee (BMAC)! Like what you see and want to know when there’s more? Click here to subscribe for updates and/or hit the Follow button! This post contains affiliate links.

Watch MonriaTitans on Twitch, YouTube, and Rumble! For more about MonriaTitans, click here!

[lunaprincipessa]

ENTRY 107

Comfort Shows:

Many different people enjoy many different kinds of shows, but there is one thing all comfort shows have in common, and that is the ability to take viewers away from reality.

They (comfort shows) are said to ease the symptoms of stress utilizing plots and characters that appeal to viewers. Of course, the people creating these shows don't always have the element of comfort in mind, but that's certainly how many of their viewers respond.

Psychologists weighed in and said there is absolutely nothing wrong with a person having a comfort show, as long as it's a positive distraction that offers a nice break, and not a negative distraction which may keep us from our responsibilities for any elongated period of time. In other words, watch all ya want but get your shit done.

Moving on, the criteria for these shows to meet in order to be considered "comforting" is to have low-stake situations and fun characters that can bring the viewers a sense of familiarity and calm. Basically, something gentle on the nervous system.

Not my comfort show.

My comfort show is Chernobyl.

Chernobyl is an HBO miniseries and historical drama that was released in 2019. It gives an inside look at the Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine in 1986. I was a 4-year-old girl growing up in the U.S. at the time. Those older than myself told me many people were concerned or scared that the radiation may have had the potential to reach us despite the distance.

It's like the Titanic, we all know the story. On April 26th, 1986, a sudden surge of power created by irresponsible employees during a reactor systems test caused an explosion. This explosion destroyed a Chernobyl nuclear power station unit (#4), releasing a massive amount of radiation into the environment directly affecting Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus. It is said that to this day, there are people still living with health defects caused by that disaster.

The show reveals what happened behind closed doors: how the nuclear employees responded (the majority of them dying in attempts to save each other), how the townspeople responded (the majority getting sick/being evacuated etc), how the doctors and scientists responded (the majority threatened with demotion or jail time for telling the truth), and how the government responded (willing to sacrifice human life to keep secrets).

Then there's the story of Lyudmilla Ignatenko, who lost her newborn baby due to radiation poisoning. She received the radiation poisoning from caring for her husband, a firefighter and first-responder at Chernobyl dying of radiation poisioning himself. Unfortunately, the baby absorbed it all, saving Lyudmilla's life but passing away just four hours after birth.

Allow me to explain why it's a comfort show. It is not the suffering that I find comforting. For what it's worth, my heart goes out to everyone involved, like Lyudmilla Ignatenko, who is alive and well, or Valery Khodemchuk, who is presumed to be permanently entombed under the remnants of the circulation pumps (his body was never found). The suffering is no comfort to me at all, I cannot emphasize on that point enough.

What comforts me is the reality of this show. There is no superhero that flies in and fixes everything. There is no prince or king that rides in and fixes everything. No, this is real life. You see unfiltered, raw tragedy and then you see people doing the best they can to make it through. That comforts me because it's real. Average people working together with the odds stacked against them. That comforts me because it's real.

True, this story lacks a happy ending, but so does many of our real life adventures. We just pick up the broken pieces and move on without any cheering or any fun music playing. We just do the best with what we've got, with what we've been given in this life.

I watch that show for comfort because even in the midst of battling a deadly and invisible enemy, in the midst of fighting to heal under an apathetic government, the people still did what they could to pull through. It's a reminder to keep going no matter what, no matter what the odds are or who is against you. That's the best way I can explain it. Words escape me tonight.

More thoughts later.

[the-daily-tizzy]

What is the cost of lies? It's not that we'll mistake them for the truth. The real danger is that if we hear enough lies, then we no longer recognize the truth at all.

~ Opening monologue to HBO's Chernobyl || Written by Craig Mazin August 15, 2018

Copyright© 2018 Home Box Office, Inc

[scrolldrollfeed]

One of the top rated TV Series across the internet and social media, Chernobyl is based on the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in the then, Soviet Union. The mini-series has received tremendous response with widespread critical acclamation, several nominations and awards. The dialogues and quotes from Chernobyl have also become popular amongst online audiences. They are a powerful take on the human cost of state censorship.

Read More:

[teeth--thief]

I'm becoming quite interested in Chernobyl myself. Your Drive folder will be read with much adoration and appreciation. If you want an excuse to infodump, or otherwise tell a (likely less educated) person about Chernobyl, please take this as such. I would love to learn more, even if simply anecdotally. I'm sure it will spur research of my own. Apologies for stilted English.

Hi hi hello!! First of all: I'm so glad you're enjoying my Google Drive! It's being compiled with a lot of love and care, I'm very happy it'll be of use to you ♡

If you ever have any questions about specific things related to Chernobyl - don't be afraid to ask! If I don't know something already, I'll make sure to educate myself and get back to you ☆

I would LOVE to use this opportunity to tell you all about my favourite operator but I'm not going to - not unless I'll get asked about him specifically (Lyonya Toptunov did nothing wrong in his life, ever - source: me. Not even the "punching his tutor in college" bit. And that's because it's not even true. He's my special boy, case closed). I am mostly interested in the human side of things though, and will always look at things from that angle. But let's go with something more useful and interesting for most and let's keep it short and sweet today:

1. Which few books in my folder are the most important/best and which you should be careful to believe! Not every book I have in there is a good book. But every book is a Chernobyl book.

2. A little (speculative) something about the area surrounding the ChNPP

Must reads:

INSAG-7 - while it contains some mistakes, certainly less than INSAG-1, it's THE thing to read if you want to learn about the technical stuff.

How It Was - Dyatlov A.S. - but but but Hunter 🥺 wasn't Dyatlov The Big Bad? No. I'm sorry that the HBO's show and Medvedev's book hurt you in this way. I can get more into Dyatlov if anyone's interested but all in all, it's a solid book.

Chernobyl: A Documentary Story - Shcherbak I. - the most important stuff? Not in the English version. The translation is missing hundreds of pages of absolutely crucial witness statements... best course of action if you don't know Russian? Look up words/names in the original regarding things that interest you and throw them into Google Translate. It's unfortunate, I know, but it's better than nothing.

Midnight in Chernobyl - Higginbotham A. - everyone's favourite. Contains some mistakes - don't trust the technical parts, cites Medvedev (cardinal sin) but overall makes a great case for humanising the workers.

Be wary when reading these:

Chernobyl Notebook (aka The Truth about Chernobyl) - Medvedev G. - nobody from the nuclear field respects this dude. IIRC he got fired after working for a few months in ChNPP before it even started operation but went around claiming he was a worker at the plant. Go figure. Just makes up stuff. Doesn't have the technical knowledge to make half the claims he makes. Follows the (false) official government narrative (hmmmm I WONDER WHY).

Voices from Chernobyl - Alexievich S - too busy chasing her own biases to care about the people she interviewed, claiming they said things they never did or forcing their stories to fit her narrative. Yes, I know, everyone LOVES this one but it's really not that good.

Manual for Survival - Kate Brown - it's a good read, albeit the author takes a pretty anti-nuclear stance, repeating various myths about the nuclear power and radiation overall, seemingly for the purpose of fear mongering.

There are so so many more books worth recommending but I wanted to mention the most popular and important ones.

According to Kate Brown and her book "Manual for Survival", the area of Prypiat Marshes and wetlands was already mildly radioactive before the nuclear power plant wad even built. Apparently "the Soviet army tested strategic nuclear weapons, the small battlefield variety, in the Pripyat bombing range" which meant that radiactive isotopes where already present in the atmosphere, long before the disaster struck Pripyat.

While her evidence and sources for that are shakey, at best (I'm not a fan of the he said, they said stuff - show me a signed document and I'll believe you), it would certainly be awfully convenient to built a NPP close enough to the slightly radiated areas and call it a day. You could always say it was the plant that caused the unusual radiation spike and definitely not the tests they ran there years before the power plant was even in the building stage... but alas. It might not even be true, I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere else, if I remember correctly.

A third fun fact I'll throw in for free - I'm currently in the process of making a Chernobyl inspired shirt =D Maybe I'll show you guys, who knows...

[skarsgardedits]

CHERNOBYL (2019, HBO) — 1.03: “Open Wide, O Earth”

[stannisbaratheon]

CHERNOBYL (2019) 05. VICHNAYA PAMYAT

REWATCH MEME: FAVORITE QUOTES (4/10)

[aesahamyr-reblogs]

Can a person knowledgeable about Chernobyl help me ? (spoilers for episode 5)

If anyone has seen the HBO series Chernobyl and is knowledgeable about the IRL events, I have a question to ask: in episode 5, they explain that because of the delay, the test that was supposed to be run by the day shift was run by the night shift, who were not prepared for this.

How true is this? Did the test really take the night shift by surprise? Had Toptunov and Akimov really never done anything similar before, nor been prepared to that? And what about the manual with the crossed parts?

Also, about the graphite ends of the rods: it's always referenced to as a "design flaw", but in a youtube video I found, they said that it was a strategic decision (although still a bad one in the end), because when removing the rods to get more activity, water would replace that space, thus diminishing the impact (and therefore graphite was put there to keep things working). Was it really conceived this way or not?