417
A new country in the world!
(feddit.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
417 points (100.0% liked)
Memes
45660 readers
1177 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
It's just so baffling, they're all from lemmy.ml defending Putin's invasion. Modern Russia isn't even ML, the USSR is gone. It's only "America bad" that's driving their alignment with Russia at this point, isn't it? Or they're a troll factory. Or under the influence of Russian propaganda. Probably people from all of those.
Tell me you haven't heard of revolutionary defeatism without telling me you haven't heard of revolutionary defeatism
Revolutionary defeatism is just accelerationism with academic window dressing. Thinking that the defeat of western imperialism at the hands of Russian imperialism will improve revolutionary conditions is moronic and dangerous.
And I get that NATO imperialism bad, but so is Russia invading Ukraine. No need to muddy the waters with "the Zelensky regime is illegitimate", Russia fucking rolled their tanks right into another country that did not threaten them. But these shitheads suddenly can't recognize imperialism. Again, outright military invasion, is somehow not imperialism 🤪🔨
Can you kindly contextualize the MIC and it's interest in NATO, Mearsheimer (a foreign policy hawk that loves war) saying its NATO agression, Biden joking in the 90s and knowing full well what NATO east expansion would mean, Putin going from friend to foe, Russia's economy after the fall of the SU until now?
Imperialism is when military intervention. The more militarier the intervention the imperialister it is
You're right we should be running dogs for western imperialism instead.
And yes it will improve revolutionary conditions as the contradictions become more aparent (money for weapons and genocide is seemingly endlessly available, but not when it's about housing, environment, healthcare, etc.). The only reason you see it as moronic and dangerous, is because you seem to live in a country that reaps the benefits of imperialism that grant you stability in life
Ah yes, because there are only two options, you're either a running dog for western imperialism or a running dog for Russian imperialism. But being a running dog for Russian imperialism is actually cool because it will lead to communism somehow. Don't ask what happens in between, that's not important...
Wow that's incredible, why don't we just skip waiting for the imperialists to do it and carry out the genocide ourselves. That'll really make those contradictions more apparent, I can't wait!
It's almost like there isn't, right? Could it be the "critical" part in "critical support"?
Your brain is melting wtf are you even saying?
I thought it would be obvious I was mocking you by repeating the viewpoint you expressed without the air of pretentiousness that you surround it with, but I guess I was the stupid one for thinking you were capable of recognizing sarcasm.
Also "critical support" for what, Russian imperialism? Why does Russian imperialism deserve "critical support" while western imperialism deserves direct opposition?
I see you're like arguing with strawmen in your head
That's what I'm asking you dumbass lol why can you lend western imperialism critical support and not to Russia? Maybe figure out the term and how it's defined before speaking on it?
Kindly point out where I expressed critical support for western imperialism.
Sorry, I was under the impression you were speaking in favor of NATO expansion and think that while the US is bad, it's emdevours in Ukraine are just (this time).
Revolutionary defeatism
Recognizing that yes, Putin's Russia is a bourgeois state with highly questionable rights for sexual minorities and a husk of its former Soviet glory, its re-nationalized industries are a target for the US imperialist emdevours ripe to be privatized again. (You can see how the NATO supports racist nawalny,.but not the largest opposition force in Russia instead, etc.)
To understand the geopolitical context of the NATO proxy war in Ukraine against Russia it helps to watch the Mearsheimer lecture on it (hardly Russian propaganda)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
Also Ben Norton gives a solid breakdown here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhajzlhcgSk
Let me approach this from a different angle. If a military defeat is necessary to create revolutionary conditions, is it not then in the best interest of the working class in each imperialist power for the other to win, and does that not then put the working class in each imperialist power at odds with one another?
Don't you believe in internationalism? Solidarity?
How many hundreds of thousands of lives does it cost to create revolutionary conditions, and how can you be so arrogant as to cheer while they're fed into the meatgrinder, believing with such certainty that it means you'll get your chance at revolution?
Yes?
Yes I would like the war to end asap and not to see Ukraines working class be forced into the meat grider to fight the imperialists fight..
Yes?
That's such a perverted misrepresentation of material reality I'm not even sure where to begin. 1) Analysis does not mean justification. That's your interpretation of it. 2) where am I cheering it on? You make it sound like I endorse it when in fact it's NATO and it's proponents 3) heightend contradictions improve condition for revolution is a basic historical fact..
When they point "NATO expansionism", you know that any logical discussion is beyond hope
Thanks to your valuable contribution to the discussion
No, accelerationism is vulgar deterministic Marxism, Revolutionary defeatism was invented by the Marxists who understood that to get socialism you need revolutionary conditions and a proletarian organization capable of taking advantage of those conditions.
Growing multipolarity has already resulted in a lot of North Africa freeing itself from colonial domination: it has also created the conditions that allow for the economic isolation of the apartheid state of Israel.
Get off your ivory tower and actually study the present conditions.
What no theory does to a mf
True, if thia were WW2 they would be non ironically saying for the allies to surrender to the Nazi, Soviets and fascists, to "prevent deaths"
The soviets were part of the allies, and killed 8/10 Nazis. Seeing your historical illiteracy explains your lack of understanding on current geopolitical events
of course after nzia invaded them, but before that they had agreements to share Europe with the Nazis, who don't know history is you, not me
Literally everyone made agreements like that. The Soviets were the last to do it after spending years trying to form an anti-fascist pact with the liberal powers.
You didn't know the soviets were part of the allies, so it's futile to go in any discussion with you. Your repeating fascist propaganda and insinuating that Stalin and Hitler were allies. You can't even contextualize the Munich agreement. Just stfu and lurk more
of course i know that in the end they fought the nazis, this don't exclude the fact they had an pact with the nazis to partition europe, also why would be a fascist propaganda if they were the ones making agreements with the fascists?
maybe yes, maybe not, the love for genocide was mutual tho
Because fascists like yourself like to share this without the proper context to paint the Soviets in a bad light, when in fact it was them almost alone stoping the Holocaust.
I like how the article you shared says
That's...wow đź’€
You're right, the Soviet Union joined the allies against the Nazis because they were explicitly not revolutionary defeatists, which cannot be said of a large number of modern day tankies.
"Tankie" functions for libs the same way, as "woke" does for chuds. It's a meaningless term
And libs often seems to function for tankies in exactly the same way. I'm an anarchist but when I argue with tankies I get called a lib even as I call for the overthrow of capitalism. Funny how that works, almost as if the problem is dogmatism.
Unlike "Tankie" and "woke", "lib" does in deed have a definition.
So does "tankie" and "woke." I used mine correctly, you are indeed a tankie. When a chud calls a left-wing political activist woke, at least they're using it correctly, even if they don't necessarily know that they are.
You called me a liberal for - let me check - opposing imperialism regardless of who's doing it. Interesting, do you think that fits the definition?
Could you kindly defone that for me?
Where? Lol funny how you get that feeling I talked about you