I have no idea what his private views are but in public he plays a fence-sitter as far as the NATO-Russia conflict is concerned. Which may as well be anti-Russia because once you start to equivocate between the aggressor (NATO) and the defender (Russia), you have effectively sided with the aggressor.
all of this should be discussed in terms of critical support, not “anti-” or “pro-”
A Marxist understanding of capitalism leads to anti-imperialism. Anti-imperialism is understood by detractors as a simple rhetorical dressing over simplistic heuristics like “reflexive anti-americanism,” “history repeats itself,” and “the military-industrial complex needs contracts,” but all of these are reductive. Marxists understand that human political leadership in the imperial periphery, whether enlightened or tyrannical, will only be antagonized by empire for one single possible reason: it is getting in the way of market penetration. This is phrased succinctly by Kevin Dooley when criticizing Noam Chomsky’s support for a military alliance between the Kurds and the USA in Syria: “The difference between [Chomsky’s] position and a hard-line anti-imperialist position isn’t tactical. What he’s arguing is simply a violation of anti-imperialist principles based on a fundamentally different understanding of what can drive the empire to act in the world.” [16]
The accusation that anti-imperialists are unconcerned with human rights deserves a sharp rebuke. The USA was born of slavery and genocide, dropped atomic bombs as a matter of political brinkmanship, imported Nazi scientists and installed war criminals like Klaus Barbie and Nobusuke Kishi around the world to defend and advance anti-communist positions [17], and enthusiastically supports gruesome butcherers today. Simply put, Capital has destroyed innumerable countries and murdered hundreds of millions directly and indirectly. It is precisely a concern for the rights of humans that should make one immediately skeptical of any humanitarian posturing by Capital. Anti-imperialism not only means support for the important pro-social projects of states like Cuba, Vietnam, and China; it also means critical support for non-socialist states such as Iran and Russia. Critical support acknowledges that, though instituting various indefensible policies, enemies of empire are not being antagonized because of said policies. The only thing that can drive empire to act in the world is capital accumulation.
This article goes so hard every time
No, despite his videos on First Thought.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qIDOx-PnzoE: don’t bother reading the comments
Holy shit, distilled liberalism in the comments.
The first rule of YouTube is you do not read the comments on YouTube.
Someone tell @Kirbywithwhip1987@lemmygrad.ml
Outjerked, but have you ever considered despair tho?
Anti-Russia in what way? Against the people? No. Against Russian culture? No. Against policies of the Russian government? Yes.
The Russian Federation is a capitalist country, proudly admitted by President Putin. So its endeavors should be highly scrutinized the way we would with any capitalist nation like the US, etc. You should take into account history of the region, especially since the fall of the USSR, and the actions of outside meddlers like the US/NATO/EU. Ultimately though, we should be (as people “on the left”) against any wars that don’t advance the goals of the proletariat. So, for this reason, the principled stance is to call for an immediate end to hostilities in Ukraine/Russia and sign a peace agreement. It’s also important that people “on the left” oppose NATO expansion and any US meddling in Ukraine that led to this current war.
Waiting on Putin to shoulder-slam the Communism Button and remake the USSR like absurd liberals claim he is
(he never will)
Personally, I don’t think there’s anything to be opposed to, in regards to Russia’s current intervention in Ukraine and the policies around that. Time and time again, they have reiterated that they are open to negotiations, but not for a ceasefire where NATO can rearm the Nazis again, but for a permanent peace- and with no reason for trust towards the west or Ukraine, and with prior agreements and ceasefires being blatantly used to further arm Ukraine (now openly admitted by the prior guarantors of the Minsk accords, Merkel and Hollande) I can only agree with them.
I fully understand Russia’s viewpoint. NATO (just gonna use this generically as a filler for US/EU/NATO) is, in my view, fully the instigator and the cause of this war. Or most of the cause. Just as it would be silly, imo, to place blame on Kim and the socialists in the DPRK for “starting” the war in Korea, it would also be silly to place all the blame on Putin. People/countries all have breaking points. It’s just simple reality.
But resting heavily on my DPRK analogy, I would say that is a clearcut example of a time to uncritically support the North in the Korea war against the imperialist US and its puppets in South Korea. My reason why is pretty simple: the people of all of the Korean Peninsula wished to have a united socialist government and the US enlisted fascists in the south to end that dream of the people there. If Kim had succeeded in defeating the Americans and the southern government it would’ve been a huge advancement for socialism across the globe. Unfortunately, things didn’t quite go that way.
I laid out the above to show that I’m not ideologically opposed to war and conflict as long as it aligns with a greater socialist or leftist of some sort movement supported by the people.
Putin does not represent such a movement. He doesn’t seek to reinstate the USSR. He’s a capitalist who has enriched himself personally off the backs of his countrymen the same as many other leaders do worldwide. So although I understand from one point of view that NATO puts pressure on Russia and seeks to rob it further of its wealth and resources, which Putin and presumably all Russians are opposed to, I don’t see the war in Ukraine as advancing any sort of socialist movement. If Putin were a committed communist seeking to be like a second Stalin or something, I would absolutely support any and all actions to take the territory of Ukraine assuming the end goal would be annexation and then bringing it into a greater union. But as it stands, what do the people of Ukraine gain from this war? Will Putin bring any liberation to them? Will he improve their lives in any meaningful way?
None of this means I support Ukraine btw. In my personal opinion, after learning the history there in the past 100 years, Ukraine should never have been created and it is currently serving the purpose its designers always hoped it would. Being a reactionary thorn in Russia’s side. My problem is… as I’ve said, Putin sucks basically. He’s a reactionary himself. A different flavor, I suppose, but a reactionary is a reactionary in the end and a capitalist country is a capitalist country. I want the bloodshed to end there. I don’t want to hear or read about disabled men, young boys, or old men being forcefully sent as fodder to die in a struggle between these capitalist nations. I do understand the counterpoints that NATO will always seek to reopen this war even if a peace agreement is reached. The situation is bleak, and I can only rely on my own principles that I hold (hopefully explained clearly here) to guide me to what I see as the correct resolution at the moment.
But as it stands, what do the people of Ukraine gain from this war? Will Putin bring any liberation to them? Will he improve their lives in any meaningful way?
I mean, I’d argue that eastern Ukraine and the ethnic minorities of Ukraine gain a hell of a lot from the war, including liberation and an improvement in their livelihoods (mainly, by being allowed to live without persecution, as second-class citizens, and facing constant atrocities from the Banderite govt).
The Russian proletariat- as well as that of the global south, and even arguably (IMO accurately) those of the imperial cores- also stand to lose much, if NATO is allowed to neuter Russia and point a metaphorical gun point-blank to its head- in this sense, the conflict is not only existential for all Russians (as IMO the goal of all this, ultimately, was always to further loot, destroy, carve up, and enslave Russia and destroy domestic bourgeois resistance under Putin that had risen up post-collapse to avoid being completely colonized by the west), but it also comes very near being existential to all of humanity as well.
My problem is… as I’ve said, Putin sucks basically. He’s a reactionary himself. A different flavor, I suppose, but a reactionary is a reactionary in the end and a capitalist country is a capitalist country.
And honestly, while I get where you’re coming from- I can’t fully agree with this sentiment. You read Putin right, sure- but I would argue that neither all reactionaries, nor all capitalists, are equal.
Putin and the Russian state may be capitalist, but they are not imperialist (the highest form of capitalism, and the global system and imposition of it as such). And- largely because they are not imperialist, they do not act as the enforcers of imperialism, nor the proliferators of reactionary regression across the world; they aren’t the ones backing literal Nazis across Europe and fascists across the globe, they aren’t the ones supporting pretty much every anti-indigenous movement worldwide either, nor the ones spreading and supporting jihadi terrorism, tribalism, cartels, and missionaries.
They aren’t the ones trying to destroy AES and anti-imperialist (even if not socialist) resistance across the globe. And while they did certainly attempt to join the league of imperialists (in fairness, at least partially because that was probably the only “peaceful” option they saw left as NATO kept creeping nearer), ultimately they- like, increasingly, the rest of the world- found themselves forced into a common cause with AES and the anti-imperialist struggle all the same.
Putin and the current state of Russia should not be blindly trusted, sure. I’d argue no one should- but a reactionary capitalist with their track record deserves the extra scrutiny. But I don’t think they’re remotely akin to the forces of international reactionary-ism and capitalism; they are not imperialists, and they are not aspiring towards imperialism, nor feasibly able to pursue it.
You’ve probably made the most clear and concise argument against my stance (which I don’t claim is unique, just for the record).
I agree that Russia isn’t an imperialist nation. I was careful to not characterize them as such, and you’re correct to bring up the fact that the US is. This is actually why I place most of the blame on the US for the current state of things, of course the EU countries are not innocent, although they basically just march to the tune the US sets.
I’m open to being wrong about all of this, but I think the ultimate judgement won’t come for a long time. Maybe not in my lifetime even. I know one thing I’m absolutely not wrong about though, which everyone here agrees on I hope, the US/NATO need to totally get the fuck out of Russia and its neighboring countries. If this war does result in the US long term abandoning Ukraine and efforts there to stoke Nazism and general right wing nationalism/anti-Russian/Soviet sentiments, then I suppose I’ll have to accept that the end result is good even if I disagree with motivations and methods.
Personally I think there already is overwhelming amount of indisputable evidence to back up a judgement that only is Russia is not only wholly justified in this conflict, but acting with such an extreme level of patience and diligence to the rules of war that they should even be commended (not too much though- Putin’s, and the Russian state’s liberal, comprador roots and their resulting hopes for peace and acceptance into the imperialist bloc are why it took so long for Russia to wake up to and act decisively against this threat)- even as the west and Ukraine continue terrorizing civilians in eastern Ukraine and former Ukraine, and engaging in acts of terrorism against Russian civilians within the internationally recognized territories of Russia as well.
As in- seriously, aside from that Putin waited too long (as he himself has publicly admitted- he was naive)- amazingly I can’t think of a single thing to condemn otherwise, in regards to their handling of this war. The stark difference between Ukraine and any of the US/NATO’s wars and interventions over even just the past decade is clear for anyone to see, as is the clear threat- not just to Putin, or to the rest of the domestic bourgeois of Russia, but to the entire Russian nation and (multiethnic) people, which necessitated such a intervention.
im truly sorry to put it this bluntly, but this kind of “both sides are equally bad”-sentiment is typical of western liberalism. i am certain that russian civilians in the ukraine, who have been enduring mass rape, murder, and other atrocities on the level of germany by ukronazi units for an entire decade by now, would strongly disagree with your statement that the smo provides no liberation. yes, putin is a reactionary, and a terrible one at that. however, during the great patriotic war, us communists also had to make deals with entities as shady as the british empire or the kuomintang. only total denazification and demilitarization should be regarded as viable ends to the conflict.
I don’t believe both sides are equally bad.
I think I made the point, but let me state it more clearly:
The United States of America is the most evil country on earth, probably in history, and its global empire has resulted in the suffering and death of millions if not billions of people at this point. NATO is an instrument of US empire and the European Union/Western European nations are loyal dogs to the US empire, happily participating in the oppression and violence while attempting to maintain clean reputations.
In comparison, Russia and even the old USSR cannot begin to stack up if you seriously analyze the crimes and bad actions.
All of that can be true, it can be true that Ukraine was brutalizing and unfairly treating ethnic Russians, and I can still remain adamant that war is not going to better the situation.
But here, let me do a bit of reframing and maybe you can accept this better.
I respect your outlook but if I am a liberal then socialists do not exist in the west. And maybe that is true. I only get mad when fellow Yankoids call me a liberal. If people elsewhere wish to view me as such, well, maybe I am to them.
With the above in mind, from my western perspective, I see clearly who benefits from this ongoing war in my own country/allied countries. The capitalist class, specifically those invested in the US military industrial complex. From purely that standpoint, I mostly see the war as an exchange of life for money. So, regardless of Putin’s motivations, regardless of basically anything else, I wish for my country, the US, to immediately stop funding the war and immediately stop meddling in the region (and the entire world, but focusing on Ukraine here). This has been my stance all along for over two years now (and of course before that I wanted the US to stop fucking around over there because clearly this type of scenario was inevitable).
And of course I support elimination of Nazi elements within Ukraine. I think the biggest positive step towards that goal would be the US fucking off since the US (CIA) loves to prop up Nazis and other reactionaries anywhere they meddle around the world.
Perhaps a positive way of viewing things is I want to pull US influence out of the region and you want to push it out. In that way, we work towards the same goal in different ways.
hey, sorry for being so rude before, i shouldnt have overreacted like that. your point of view is understandable, even if i cant agree one hundred percent. but maybe im a bit riddled with nationalistic brain worms and should practice self-criticism. the whole war wasnt really good for my emotional health
It’s ok, my friend. I could tell you meant well even if it was slightly rude. I wasn’t bothered by anything you said. As a self-hating American, maybe I even liked it a little bit.
okay you two, break it up
We can both acknowledge the justification and also be against conflagration. We can both acknowledge NATO as the aggressor and also seek an end to the bloodshed. We can both recognize the anti-imperialist actions of Russia and also recognize that they do not create liberator conditions for eiither Russian or Ukrainian proles.
Europe remains a mess. I wish in one day that far-left would lead Europe.
More likely then not he’s probably just afraid of the vitriol and getting assaulted in public. We know how rabid the pro-ukraine bunch are, Fico nearly getting assassinated being a case in point.
