92 Comments

User's avatar
fion's avatar

"telling my boss I had to resign because of “long Covid” in a deadpan parody of their neuroticism."

*Sigh*. I pushed through the earlier bait, thinking 'it's good for me to read things by people very different to me' but having spent months with crippling fatigue and years with merely very bad fatigue, I really can't be arsed with this attitude. I hope the rest of the review was good

Expand full comment
JC's avatar

Very sad

Expand full comment
frhrpr's avatar

Writing this on shrooms so coherence might be low: this saddens me. I share your policy of "it's good [...] to read things by people very different to me", and what I observe is mostly people escaping echochambers they've grown tired of — but not by doing something constructive you might hope for — but rather by swinging wildly into whatever echochamber is opposite. So from "my corpo is obsessed with Covid-adjecent bullshit" to "long Covid is not a thing and also let's mock people for funsies". I expect the comment section underneath this to be another manifestation. And it's a shame that people like you, who are presumably pretty close to the target demographic, are turned away. If even you can't pierce the echochamber, then what chances does the rest of society have?

(I am also saddened by the LLM induced persecution of em dashes, but that's a separate issue)

Expand full comment
AlexTFish's avatar

As someone with about three years of chronic fatigue that may or may not be Long COVID, I still smiled wryly at that point in the post. The OP had to tell his boss something, and I don't think the Long COVID virus will be annoyed to get the blame for one it didn't do like this.

Expand full comment
Louis Sweeney's avatar

For what it's worth Covid is never mentioned for the rest of the review after that exact point that you quite the piece.

Expand full comment
Wanda Tinasky's avatar

How dare anyone make a joke that offends you.

Expand full comment
frhrpr's avatar

I don't think they're communicating outrage — I don't see a "how dare you!" in there. But there is a lesson for writers (or anyone trying to communicate) in this: don't offend people if you wish them to be in your audience. It seems obvious, but all the time I see people be smug and mocking and alienating people who could benefit from a piece of writing or whatever, but the author prioritises getting a cheap shot at the outgroup instead (like here). It's wasteful if nothing else, and there's quite a bit of something else I think.

(to be clear I don't think the author of this post is the worst offender by any means, it just came up here)

Expand full comment
Wanda Tinasky's avatar

People need to have a sense of humor about themselves. Even if I'd had a genuinely horrible long-Covid experience, that wouldn't prevent me from acknowledging that long Covid correlates with trait neuroticism; at the very least that's the conventional wisdom. As someone who grew up Christian, for example, I was never offended by the Church Lady skit on SNL. That's because I recognized that there was a valid perception of Christianity as smugly moralistic. It's important to understand other people's perspectives even if they differ from yours. Humorlessness only does harm to the people it infests.

It'd be one thing if the entire essay was an exercise in dunking on long Covid, but it wasn't. It was a single throwaway joke and OP is doing nothing but letting their own fragile perspective needlessly limit their experience of the world, which ironically does nothing but reinforce the rhetorical point that they were attempting to undermine. Writing with the goal of avoiding all offense is the quickest way I know to destroy creativity.

Expand full comment
Linch's avatar
2hEdited

I don't think the insult mattered personally. It was more like a sign of poor epistemics/judgment. Like if somebody's epistemics are such that they won't entertain long covid as a thing, why should I believe they understand international relations or war?

Expand full comment
David's avatar

There is no indication that they don't think long covid isn't "a thing" or not real. There is seemingly an indication that they think that the prevalence and danger of it was exaggerated at his workplace, which may or may not be true, I have no idea since I have next to no idea what his workplace was like.

Expand full comment
Linch's avatar

Thanks, yeah I think I probably exaggerated this! I did see other signs of poor judgment in the review as well but it's probably not worth going into/too mean.

Expand full comment
David's avatar

Sure! Have a good day!

Expand full comment
Linch's avatar

You as well! Enjoy your weekend!

Expand full comment
David's avatar

Idk I think it's mostly a joke about the absurdity of some of the things that were done during covid, perhaps it's also a joke "against the outgroup" but even if it is it's a very light one, and perhaps was not intended to be one at all. But I agree with your broader point that if you want to be sure that people will be your audience you shouldn't write something that will alienate them.

If anything I think in the context of ACX, the place he submitted this essay to be read by ACX commentators, its more a joke against the ingroup than against the outgroup. I could be wrong but it seems like there's more covid "hawks" on average here compared to outside and less doves, but tbf probably more people with very specific/ detailed or extreme opinions on all sides of Covid. But anyway if I'm right about the overall general average/composition than it's a joke against the ingroup.

Expand full comment
Wormwood's avatar

> don't offend people if you wish them to be in your audience

That goes both ways. Don't act offended if you wish to be taken seriously.

Expand full comment
B K's avatar

Put this man in charge of the Democratic Party

Expand full comment
brian piercy's avatar

Incredible summary. Thanks so much for this.

Expand full comment
Matthew Jepsen's avatar

Very interesting account. Thanks!

Expand full comment
Mike G's avatar

Tremendous essay. I'd love the coda. "I was part of something real and dangerous." Yes; now what?

Expand full comment
Alexander Simonelis's avatar

Wow! This is gripping. Write a book, man. I would gladly buy it. And stay safe. Slava Ukraini!

Expand full comment
Cato Wayne's avatar

If you like this type of in depth look, I strongly recommend the similar accounts from the Civ Div YouTube channel of an American soldier in Ukraine the last few years: https://youtube.com/@CivDiv

Expand full comment
Richard Hanania's avatar

This was great. Thanks for writing it.

Expand full comment
beowulf888's avatar

Shit! I want to know more! It sounds like the author is no longer on the front lines. Did he get through his entire 3-year enlistment period serving on the front? Or did he move into some other role?

Expand full comment
Mark Neyer's avatar

Incredible. Thanks for writing!

Expand full comment
Klaas Haussteiner's avatar

"This whole experience made me think about the concept of the 'gang' as a natural grouping of men, and the extent to which further military development has been based on adjustments to this naturally occurring phenomenon."

This is an interesting point. I don't know how we went from feuds between foragers clans to organised states staging pitched battles, but this seems to evidence that military hierarchies naturally emerge as you add more men to a stressful situation. I'm reminded of the Nika riots in medieval Constantinople, where crowds went from being angry about cart racing to full-on-January-6th mode and a spontaneous revolution (that was quickly crushed).

Once you push otherwise civil men over some criticality threshold, they chimp out. I wonder if anyone has tried to model this quantitatively.

Expand full comment
Chris K's avatar

Amazing piece, a few questions for the author if they choose to respond:

>Before my experiences in Ukraine I used to desperately feel like I had to do something, without even necessarily knowing what it was.

So you stopped feeling that way presumably? Was there a specific turning point, or did it dwindle? A bit more elaboration on this part would be fascinating, I felt like the ending could have used more detail!

>First of all there are actually two completely separate military units called the International Legion, each under completely separate commands. This is for reasons I will not discuss

For OpSec reasons presumably?

Expand full comment
Shaked Koplewitz's avatar

I asked GPT, apparently there's just boring historical separation (one was originally a Georgian legion that expanded, the other one is a new one from 2022 directly under Ukrainian intelligence). Assuming GPT isn't hallucinating it sounds like this is less opsec and "boring org chart legacy reasons".

Expand full comment
Louis Sweeney's avatar

No I think it's just because it's just not very relevant to the essay or particularly interesting.

Expand full comment
Mark's avatar

Not the most polished writing. My favorite by far. While my bet would still be the massively liked "men" of the bay-area. Dakuju & PTN PNX

Expand full comment
Sir Osis of Thuliver's avatar

This poem, published the same day by another, might act as a foil:

https://delicioustacos.com/2025/09/26/dont-be-the-guy/

"Don’t be the guy. A lot of people out there saying someone’s gotta DO SOMETHING. About the left the right Zionists Hamas blacks whites troons Nazis etc. etc. etc. Don’t let it be you. You are gonna live a long life. A nice house. A nice dog. Not end up cold and alone in the woods on the run from big men putting knees on your neck. With everyone who said someone’s gotta do something saying you’re a piece of shit cuz you did something. Someone’s gotta do something. Never them. So not you. Live a long life."

Expand full comment
Louis Sweeney's avatar

I am a friend of the author and he has been living a very fulfilled life in every way you can imagine during and after the events of the post, in different ways. Everything indicates that he will live a long life as well.

Yes don't do this just because but there are plenty of people whose lives have meaningfully improved by volunteering to help people in dangerous situations, whether it be purely civilian or military as well, or doing both at different points as this author has.

But yes don't do something just to do something, I also think doing what the author did is in many circumstances a good and noble thing to do.

Expand full comment
Geran Kostecki's avatar

Yeah, I was wondering what the author does now. If he was feeling ennui before going to Ukraine, I feel like it's gotta be 1000 times worse after being there and going back to boring society

Expand full comment
Neurology For You's avatar

Then you move out to the woods.

Expand full comment
Wanda Tinasky's avatar

Did he mention what the dating situation was like there for American men?

Expand full comment
John Schilling's avatar

Ernst Junger lived to a hundred and two, as a renowned scientist, author, and occasional anti-Nazi activist as well as a husband and a father. I think that counts as a good life for a good man, and I don't think it would have turned out that way if he'd been hanging out in Switzerland from 1914-1918.

Great risks, properly calculated, can lead to great rewards. Let us hope that our anonymous author enjoys such a life.

Expand full comment
Cadence's avatar

This was very interesting to read, but I think it failed somewhat at being a good review. The takeaways portion felt too short and disconnected from the rest; it's difficult to see the connection between the story focusing on calmer times and the opinions centered around violence.

Expand full comment
David's avatar

Honestly I think it's more of a review than a solid majority of the finalists, many of which or even most don't even seem to review their subjects or attempt to review them at all. It's even the only review that actually gives its subject a rating.

Expand full comment
Firanx's avatar

There was a review of the world as a whole which did as well, I was surprised it didn't make it to the finalists.

Expand full comment
AlexTFish's avatar

It's very clearly just an autobiographical story rather than a "review". But it was very interesting as an autobiographical story. I generally don't find those interesting to read at all but I made it an the way through this one.

Expand full comment
Hormeze's avatar

Thanks for sharing so honestly. I would read more of your stuff, fwiw

Expand full comment
artifex0's avatar

Sincerely, thanks for the service to our ally, and for the review.

If anyone is interested in more of these kinds of Ukraine International Legion stories, Lindybeige has some fascinating multi-part interviews with British volunteers starting at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbD4WBqPg4&t=3225s and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LcUj47_7S4&t=182s . If I'm remembering correctly, the first guy started out digging trenches after surviving that Yavoriv recruitment center bombing, moved on to evacuating civilians from the front full-time, and then eventually worked his way up to being an FPV drone pilot.

Expand full comment
Mr. AC's avatar

I wonder if ISIS would have managed to take over so much territory and enlist so many westerners if the Ukraine war happened earlier. Perhaps an active conflict somewhere in the world is needed to satiate the latent demand of people like this to be part of "something real".

Expand full comment
David's avatar

I think the amount of territory would've been about the same, Westerner volunteers were not significant numerically or even that significant in the limited low tier leadership roles they mostly had to the degree they even rised to leadership at all.

Also it's worth noting that lot of the Western volunteers were disaffected Radical Islamist second generation kids of immigrants who were Muslim or from a Muslim background, and those kids clearly would never have volunteered to fight in a non-Islamic war like Russia vs Ukraine. Most of the others converted significantly before they decided to volunteer in Syria or Iraq.

Expand full comment
Matthew Kirtley's avatar

I find it odious to take part in a war that you have no stake in and to kill people, all because you have a fairly banal and commonplace need to seek "meaning" and camaraderie.

I'm sure all the widows and grieving mothers you've left behind aren't any more thrilled that their son was killed by some affluent American looking to dispel their bourgeois ennui, rather than a native Ukrainian.

Expand full comment
David's avatar

Personally I find your statement absurd. Do you support Ukraine's right as a state to exist and not be invaded and forcibly conquered against its will and for its culture to continue to exist? Then it is hypocritical of you to criticize those who are willing to do more for it. Frankly it's odious hypocritical if you think that your own country should be allowed to exist and to kill people who invade it. I have never fought in a war but I am grateful to those who have defended freedom from autocracy and their native or adopted lands against invaders.

Foreign volunteers and heroes have existed for thousands of years. Many are considered heroes, Lord Byron of England still has statues in Greece of him, he was an affluent Englishmen involved in a war very far from home.

Your last paragraph is particularly absurd, you refute yourself in that obviously the Russians aren't thrilled to be killed in their invasion whether it's a Ukrainian or an American or a Italian or a British man or whoever.

Expand full comment
Timothy's avatar

I'm not sure this is the problem the previous commenter has or if he is actually pro Russian, but the problem I had with the reviewer is that it does not seem to me like he has done the necessary epistemic work to be confident he is on the right side of history. A-priori the chance that you are fighting for the side that deserves to win is around 50%. There are many westerners that joined to fight for the Russian side, some of whom probably thought about it a bit and came to the conclusion that Russia is on side worth fighting for. I think you can only ethically kill people if you have done the requisite philosophy. And the review makes it sound like the author didn't do that.

To me it seems like he decided to kill a Nazi if a coin he flipped would come up heads, and a allied soldier if it comes up tails. Now it happened to come up on the right side, but this doesn't mean the process that lead to this result should be endorsed.

But this is just my first impression, I may underestimate just how much the reviewer has thought about pacifism and when it can be moral to kill someone, in which case (I think) I want to thank him for fighting the good fight.

Expand full comment
David's avatar

I'm pretty confident that in another world where it was possible for him to volunteer for Russia but impossible for him to volunteer for Ukraine in this same war that he would not join the Russian army.

Expand full comment
Ghatanathoah's avatar

The Russo-Ukraine war isn't so complicated that you need to do some complex epistemic work to figure out what the right side is. Unless you're being a contrarian edgelord, Russia is obviously in the wrong and Putin is blatantly evil. There have been few world conflicts that have been this cut and dry.

Expand full comment
artifex0's avatar

Whether fighting in a war is an act of heroism or savagery has nothing whatsoever to do with a person's individual stake in that conflict. A Nazi volunteer had a much greater personal stake in the Second World War than, for example, an American who chose to join the British Army before the US entered the war- but I would venture to call that American a hero and the Nazi a savage. In fact, I would say that the American's lack of personal stake in the conflict only increases their heroism.

What determines heroism is the degree to which a cause is just, and the defense of Ukraine is one of the most unambiguously just wars we've seen in a century. Here we have a despot attempting to rebuild a historically evil empire by invading the historic victim of that empire, a nascent European democracy. A man with Putin's stated ambitions will not settle into peace if appeased; war or tyranny are the only realistic options Ukraine has.

Few heroes are motivated entirely by ideology; most will also have personal motivations like a desire for meaning. But the OP chose to risk his life in a just war, and for that, he deserves to be lauded for his heroism.

Expand full comment
Louis Sweeney's avatar

I am a personal friend of the author, so let me get that bias out of the way. However I will say that the author has long had a personal stake in the war, he reads writes and speaks Ukrainian at an amazing level for somebody who learned it mostly as an adult, and has a deep love for Ukrainians, Ukrainian culture, their language, etc. And he knew much much more than the average person before he ever stood a foot in Ukraine. I assure you there's far more to it than your ill assumptions of his motivations.

He is also a deeply loving and generous person to his friends, family and strangers. He has personally hosted many people in Ukraine at no cost to them and been a great friend and host to Ukrainians and non-Ukrainians of all kinds alike.

Part of me wishes I could say more details but I will not now out of respect for my friend and will only say more about this particular issue if I talk to him first.

Expand full comment
Geran Kostecki's avatar

It's a fair point that it's probably not great to join a war just because you're bored. That got emphasized a lot more in this essay than Ukraine being a just cause. So I appreciate the additional information.

Expand full comment
Louis Sweeney's avatar

Yeah, I agree that he could definitely emphasize the personal aspect/ motivations/ ideological/ national determinations a bit more, but I think it's also kind of admirable in a way even if he probably significantly overdoes it here that he focuses a lot on the less "noble" motivations for wanting to join. It does open him up to easy assumptions and attacks though.

The more noble reasons etc. tend to be talked about a lot more elsewhere in mainstream publications and accounts so it certainly adds a uniqueness to the essay though. FWIW I think he'd be fine with me saying this, I think that he probably spent a lot less time on this essay polishing it then most other submitters if I had to guess based on what he told me about how he wrote it, though of course I couldn't know that for sure unless I talked to all of them.

Expand full comment
ruralfp's avatar
3hEdited

”I'm sure all the widows and grieving mothers you've left behind aren't any more thrilled that their son was killed by some affluent American looking to dispel their bourgeois ennui, rather than a native Ukrainian.”

Their loss is a tragedy to be laid at the feet of the Russian oligarchs who started this war, as much as the lives of any Ukrainians killed.

It’s also a loss to be laid somewhat at the feet of the Russian populace in general who traded their agency for temporary comfort and are now paying the price for their acquiescence.

Once they were committed to this invasion these sons and fathers needed to die for justice to prevail, killing them was a just and worthy act. To pretend otherwise is to act as a willing tool of despotism.

Expand full comment
Wanda Tinasky's avatar

I'm sure the grieving widows don't give two shits about the nationality of the person who killed their husbands. What about the families of the marginal Ukrainian who was spared because some American volunteer took the bullet that otherwise would've been meant for them? It's a bad look to criticize men who have more courage and character than you ever will. More often than not it comes across as a justification for cowardice.

Expand full comment
Georgelemental's avatar

> Years before I had read of the likes of Azov and its many foreign volunteers, and had even periodically fantasized about dropping everything and going to the Donetsk Airport.

In the end, did you get to “lead the white races of the world in a final crusade … against Semite-led Untermenschen”?

Expand full comment
David's avatar

The vast vast majority of Azov fighters aren't like this. And you will find in every military on earth some amount of antisemites and racists. Ukraine is actually one of the least antisemitic countries in the world based on opinion polls on citizens of different countries, not to mention how many countries that have less than 1% of its population being Jewish still have a Jewish leader? I'm guessing from your comment there's a decent chance you hate Zelensky though.

In fact you can find plenty of neonazis and racists in the Russian army, probably more. After all they have ethnically cleansed many parts of the Caucuses and are now attempting to effectively genocide Ukraine.

Expand full comment
Georgelemental's avatar

The quote I provided was from Azov’s founder, and the current commander of the Third Army Corps which was formed from former Azov units. So, not some fringe rando.

The vast majority Ukrainian fighters and people aren’t like him, I agree. But it’s not an insignificant portion. And the Nazis punch far above their weight in numbers, because they tend to be the most committed and effective fighters against the Russians, and they don’t hesitate to use violence against their domestic political enemies either. Their willingness to die for the cause makes them too valuable for the powerful to sideline—similar to how the US has covertly supported Islamic extremists at various times, hoping to direct them against our enemies.

> you hate Zelensky

I don’t. I think he is wildly out of his depth, not nearly sufficient to the impossible challenges before him. I reserve my hate for the architects of the Maidan coup who led Ukraine down its present path of suicide-by-Russian

Expand full comment
David's avatar

I did say "there's a decent chance you hate Zelensky", not that you hate him.

There are military units in Russia like the Rusich Group that have kolovorat Swastikas as their unit badges, they also punch far above their weight in numbers in the Russian Army.

Expand full comment
Atticus's avatar

A. The Azov Battalion members from 2014 (i.e. the ones that were fascists) were very quickly replaced by your typical NCO and officer corps when they were incorporated into the National Guard and official military command structure. It is deeply disingenuous to claim that the Ukrainians are somehow dependent on neo-Nazis for their military manpower when one of their first actions was to eliminate those same people from any leadership positions. And that is not even getting into the Russian ideology. B. Euromaidan was not a “coup”. The protesters themselves were entirely baffled when Yanukovych left because it was in the middle of the night and without any warning at all.

Expand full comment
Georgelemental's avatar

Andriy Biletsky (the “final crusade against Semite-led Untermenschen” guy) currently leads the Third Army Corps, commanding 20,000 men: https://www.thetimes.com/world/russia-ukraine-war/article/andriy-biletsky-azov-troops-tzfbj2v9p

Expand full comment
artifex0's avatar

If a woman's abusive ex-husband shows up at their door demanding that she come back, she drives him off by throwing cookery, and then he comes back and brutalizes her, we don't hate and blame the woman for having been attacked, even if the cookery was a tactical error.

In the case of Maidan, maybe that was an error, maybe it wasn't. I tend to think that an invasion by Putin was uncertain enough, and the difference in freedom and standard of living between becoming another Belarus and another Poland was great enough that it probably was not an error (though perhaps they should have gone through the full constitutional impeachment process rather than shortening it out of panic over the protests). Even if it was an error, however, the people of Ukraine have a moral right to separate from Russian influence; an error there should be met with sympathy, not hatred.

The moral violation in this conflict is on the part of Putin, and our hatred should therefore be reserved entirely for him.

Expand full comment
Georgelemental's avatar

Maidan wasn’t an organic upswelling of the true sentiments of the Ukrainian people for freedom, or whatever. Some Ukrainians wanted closer relations with the EU & USA, others wanted closer relations with Russia, yet others wanted to maintain a balance. Maidan was a violent, USA-instigated coup by one faction in the country against the others

Expand full comment
David's avatar
2hEdited

Even if we accepted all of your very dubious claims as true that doesn't mean it wasn't an organic upswelling of the true sentiments of 55% or (insert your own personal percent or number here or anyone else's) of the Ukrainian people who wanted closer relations with the US and EU

Russia obviously attempts to use its influence all the time to start coups or control countries, both now and historically. If they had been able to start a hypothetical coup that 70% or pick your number, doesn't matter, would disapprove of but make Russia a far more controlling and influential country than the US and EU have ever been in Ukraine they would do it.

If you're going to condemn the EU's and US's actions and examine them at every turn you also have to examine Russia's actions past and present and condemn them when appropriate. Russia is not above having coups and if it were more powerful it would be doing more and more of them, it's inability to coup Ukraine has little to nothing to do with morality and almost everything in its lack of power and ability to do it despite no lack of trying up to even mounting a gigantic war and invasion attempt.

By the way even if the US/EU put little to no pressure on Ukraine at all there would still be many millions/ tens of millions who would prefer the EU/US as a partner over Russia.

Expand full comment
Georgelemental's avatar

I have no love for Putin, but I speak more about the crimes of my own leaders, because they are supposed to represent me.

Expand full comment
David's avatar
2hEdited

Legitimate point enough but it's important to remember the other side too.

By the way if there was a button that would "magicly" make all sides accept an "Ending the war tomorrow with the present lines agreed to" including Russia occupying what they do now I would personally press that button, probably almost instantly.

While I do think Russia's actions are criminal and evil one still must be realistic, and while not impossible I think it is more probable than not that Ukraine will not recover Crimea or the Donbass anytime soon. Not impossible, but pretty unlikely.

Expand full comment
Georgelemental's avatar

> By the way if there was a button that would "magicly" make all sides accept an "Ending the war tomorrow with the present lines agreed to" including Russia occupying what they do now I would personally press that button, probably almost instantly.

Yeah. Unfortunately that is not likely, Putin knows he is winning and sees no reason to stop now. If only we hadn’t sent Boris Johnson to order Zelensky not to make a deal back in April 2022…

Expand full comment
artifex0's avatar

It absolutely was an organic upswelling of the true desire of a majority of the Ukrainian people for freedom. Just prior to the Euromaidan protests, Yanukovych was polling at 7.8% "trusted" and 65% "untrusted" (see https://archive.kyivpost.com/article/content/ukraine-politics/poll-klitschko-has-highest-trust-rating-among-ukrainian-voters-331837.html). During the protests, 73% of the Ukrainian parliament voted to remove him from office. Afterward, 56% of Ukrainians characterized the ousting of Yanukovych as a "popular revolution" and 34% as a coup.

It's true that both the US and Russia gave funding to activist groups calling for more European or Russian integration. Those groups also received most of their funding from domestic sources. As much as people like to attribute magical powers to the State Department's ability to influence foreign politics, obviously that kind of funding isn't going to produce strong majority support for a political movement out of thin air.

The whole "USA-instigated coup" line is pure Russian propaganda- I sincerely don't know how anyone could look at the data and come away with that impression in good faith.

Expand full comment
Georgelemental's avatar

Yanukovych was a corrupt gangster, yes. So was the rest of the Ukrainian political elite. Doesn’t imply that Ukrainian people were all on board with antagonizing Russia. (FWIW I agree with Boinu here: https://open.substack.com/pub/astralcodexten/p/your-review-the-russo-ukrainian-war?comments=true&commentId=160353873)

Expand full comment
artifex0's avatar

"All on board", no. "Majority on board", however- I think the polling supports that.

Expand full comment
Boinu's avatar

You're correct, though I'd dissent on Maidan being strictly engineered; as usual with these things, the core of the movement was genuine. It was merely cynically amplified and steered.

I hope the review contest has an understatement category award, because the following paragraph would be worthy of a nomination:

"The Ukrainian Insurgent Army has historically had a very controversial legacy even in Ukraine, being accused of pogroms and ethnic cleansing during its war. Consequently, before the 21st century Russo-Ukrainian War their legacy and symbolism was much marginal in Ukrainian society. Certain elements have always glorified them, but especially older generations often chafed at the harsh and militant repudiation of the Soviet past. This touches on the very core of the conflict: the question of Ukrainian national identity."

There were a number of directions in which post-dissolution Ukrainian national identity could have evolved. Not all Ukrainians active in WWII were members of UPA. Many fought bravely and well as part of the Red Army and helped build and govern the post-war Soviet Union, and many in the east even as late as 2014 spoke in surzhyk and saw themselves as vaguely supranational. Unfortunately, beginning under Yushchenko and especially under Poroshenko/Yatsenyuk, a deliberate effort was made to rehabilitate the Nazi-aligned leaders (Bandera and Melnyk most prominently, but also e.g. Petliura and Shukhevych).

The sad part is that Zelensky's election in 2019 represented something of a pushback against this version of Ukrainisation and against the harsh approach to the east. The only problem was that the Azov and aligned fighters had no interest in obeying his instructions, as in the famous clash in Zoloty, and he quickly reeled back the national reconciliation agenda.

Expand full comment
Anonymous's avatar

It's always felt very weird to me that so many recent generations were never drafted to fight in a major war. Our ancestors seemed to always be attacking or defending something, and all us Millennials could do was volunteer to fight in some middle east country we couldn't care less about? I'm sure it's for the best, every history class I ever took discussed how terrible war is, but it's also like we're missing an important part of human development. Like maybe people would stop caring about pronouns if they actually had an existential threat to strategize against? Or jobs would feel more meaningful if there's some big victory at stake?

It's also surprising in hindsight that technological advancement couldn't fill this void. Whole generations adapting to new tech as fast as it releases could have been a great substitute, and maybe it was for awhile, but everything plateaued hard after the iPhone released 18 years ago. No one on the planet needs to adapt and become an expert to use Twitch or 4K TVs or the latest phone app.

Expand full comment
TGGP's avatar

The United States went without mass conscription up until the Civil War, then we dropped it until WW1. Rather than being constant, Peter Turchin has the idea that there are generational cycles in which a generation will become averse to war as a result of experience with it, but later a different generation without that experience will be more eager for it.

Expand full comment
ruralfp's avatar

“It may be jarring for the reader to see me jump from preparing for war to writing a tourist guide, but it was also a surprise to me”

This was basically the first few hundred pages of Sherman’s memoirs to be fair

Expand full comment
Neurology For You's avatar

I certainly can’t verify anything in the story but it sure has the “no shit there we were” quality of a real army story.

Expand full comment
Louis Sweeney's avatar

Obviously almost no one can confirm what I'm saying is true but all I can say as someone who personally knows the author for many many years long before the events of this essay is that it's all true and that in a lot of ways you could even argue that he underplayed many aspects of what he talks about/experienced.

But there are obvious reasons to be careful about revealing too much information about something like this so I can not provide more substantial proof other than my words above. But it is entirely possible that the author will reveal more in the future, and perhaps a lot more the further into the future we go.

Expand full comment
James Rahner's avatar

well written, yes; insightful, yes, in its own way--but a review should be about truth-telling, and truth-telling about war has a kind of moral urgency that seems strangely lacking in this review. (And indeed, lacking in the reviewers' brothers-in-arms, judging from what he writes.) There seems to be a fundamental difference in worldview evinced here such that I certainly don't think I can vote for this!

Expand full comment
David's avatar

Tell the truth in what way exactly? Your truth?

If anything this review strikes me as extremely truth-telling in the sense that it tells many truths of the authors experience(and others seemingly) who have been directly involved in war that people in the West are almost always told the opposite. Namely that for many decades the overwhelming tendency in the West has been to everywhere and always for the most part emphasize that war is a necessary evil full of evils at every turn at best and almost always the worst kind of evil in almost every way at worst.

I'm sure if the author wrote a longer essay he could get deeper into the nuances on both sides about all the evils and goods that he has experienced in the war and in more general both the evils and the positive aspects of the war. But clearly in this short essay he's decided to emphasize the parts that go against the most commonly heard things about war in the West.

If you personally fought in a war and found the things that he said in this essay accurate or at least the vast majority of it accurate would it also be a strangely lacking of truth-telling by you to write an essay like it.

Truth spectacularly ugly, offensive, and unpopular sometimes. While I can't know with 100% certainty it seems that possibly you have encountered a truth that is painful, offensive, or ugly to you and that actually your comment has the reality reversed. It's just a possibility.

Expand full comment
David's avatar

By the way caveat that even if it's truthful in many senses (all senses?) obviously we don't have to agree with it 100%, I certainly don't agree with it 100%. Otherwise there'd be a higher chance I'd be in some military defending an invaded country.

Expand full comment
James Rahner's avatar

What would it mean for it to be truthful in all senses, but for you not to agree with it 100%?! I feel we are using the word "truth" in different ways.

Expand full comment
David's avatar

I had a question mark still in the "all senses", it was being a bit playful.

So ignore the "all senses?" part then, if you otherwise have a desire still to respond to the rest of my comment.

Expand full comment
lyomante's avatar

eh, kind of feels like he softpedals the experience of war a lot. Little bad seems to happen to him, to the point where I wonder about it.

i mean reading this i wouldn't be saying "war gives meaning" as opposed to "thank god, i fucking got lucky." No long period of getting sick, no telling us about the guy making the funny sign wound up getting shot one night while trying to take a shit, no nearly getting killed by your own side, etc.

Expand full comment
David Bahry's avatar

People who hate war do also say "War Is A Force That Gives Us Meaning" (describing the psychological experience, not saying the meaning is realer and more valid in a way that's lacking in the absence of war) (the title of a Chris Hedges book)

but yeah, I am noticing the lack of mention of arms blown off

Expand full comment
sourcreamus's avatar

Why were shotguns ineffective versus drones?

Expand full comment
Shaked Koplewitz's avatar

> I think our modern culture has built a very strong taboo around certain parts of the human experience, and I understand there are valid reasons for that taboo, but I can’t help but roll my eyes a little bit at the idea that there is nothing cool or ennobling about war. Really, nothing? Have you ever felt the rush of seeing an enemy tank destroyed? There is and I won’t pretend there isn’t.

This whole section reminded me a lot of Marltenez's What It's Like To Go To War, which balances both this side and the tragic side. I remember him talking about taking a ride in a chopper dropping napalm in Vietnam and going "hell yeah burn those assholes", and then reflecting how as an older men with children of his own that age, he'd still fight the same way, but he'd feel terrible grief about it instead. Maybe it's just something you naturally change about with age.

Expand full comment
Ira Bloomgarden's avatar

I've taught senior non coms at West Point and, also College courses in the literature of war. I'm long since retired, but I were still active I would absolutely teach this piece. From the aimless youth pre Ukraine, you've become an Adult and a fine writer.

Expand full comment
Vosmyorka's avatar

Слава Україні!!!!

Expand full comment
Steeven's avatar

This was an incredibly fun read and I hope the guy lives forever.

I think it's funny that there are so few major wars in the US that you have to go volunteer to fight somewhere random now if you want the honor and to sate your undying thirst for blood. Still, even normal war looks super boring by these standards. Like the only danger is that modern weapons vaporize you before you know what happened. You never actually fight anyone. It's pitiable that modern weapons reduce war to who has the better targeting system.

To his point about AI, humans will eventually need not apply at all. Suicide drones, as something like the saying goes, are the worst they'll ever be and seemed like a constant threat alongside mortars.

I bet this guy could have gotten a lot out of getting really into lifting or a sport, probably more than shitting in a hole that wasn't quite deep enough. At the end of his experience, he has to go home. He's still broke, still needs a job, still can't quite escape HR people, and based on the way he talked about meeting people from foreign countries, probably didn't come back to close friends at home.

Anyway, war is only 2/10, I wouldn't recommend it because you actually die in real life.

Expand full comment
Louis Sweeney's avatar

"He's still broke, still needs a job, still can't quite escape HR people, and based on the way he talked about meeting people from foreign countries, probably didn't come back to close friends at home"

Literally everything in this statement is wrong, especially the last point. Not only does he have close friends in the United States but many of them have personally gone through all the hurdles to visit him for months at a time in Ukraine, and at least one of them for well over a year (possibly 2+ years total in Ukraine going back and forth?). I know because I personally know all of them, and also visited him in Ukraine for over a month.

"I bet this guy could have gotten a lot out of getting really into lifting or a sport, " This parts only quasi right or half right, he already got a lot out of both before ever going to Ukraine and always has ever since including up to now.

Expand full comment
Sandeep's avatar

"...roll my eyes a little bit at the idea that there is nothing cool or ennobling about war. ... Have you ever felt the rush of seeing an enemy tank destroyed? There is and I won’t pretend there isn’t."

"Feeling the rush" is supposed to be cool and ennobling? Obviously, the author wants to imply that the "rush" in this case is tied to one's sense of meaning. But if addressing that sense of meaning is sufficiently "superior" in some way to addressing other forms of "feeling the rush", say with meaner or baser indulgences, the author hasn't made the remotest attempt to justify it. Almost certainly, almost all sides of almost all wars have people tying it to their sense of meaning, and the externalities are too significant for it to suffice to address them with just words like "nobility" and "honor" or a historical reference to koryos.

It seems that the author is content to set up a narrative about honor, and let resonance with his intended audience do the rest of the hard work, while making no more than a formal nod to the existence of the "modern perspective" in lieu of actually accounting for any of it.

Expand full comment
Wormwood's avatar

> But if addressing that sense of meaning is sufficiently "superior" in some way to addressing other forms of "feeling the rush", say with meaner or baser indulgences, the author hasn't made the remotest attempt to justify it.

Perhaps we should consider whether these other "indulgences" are so horrible, rather than just a natural part of being a man. I would hope the recent political shifts have been teaching people the costs of getting in the way of human nature...

Expand full comment
Knight of Gea's avatar

This is very 4chan-esque, in a good way, as if a frog went to war and then instead of greentexting about this he wrote this dry contemplation.

Please host more things which are so clearly outside of the bubble.

Expand full comment

Cookie Policy

We use cookies to improve your experience, for analytics, and for marketing. You can accept, reject, or manage your preferences. See our privacy policy.