I’m not sure how to write this without it sounding like ragebait or a fed post.

But why do most fellow Marxists critically support Russia today?

I can understand having seen Russia as a potential temporary ally or a necessary power that can stand against US / NATO hegemony over the globe. In short I can understand it from a strategic standpoint.

But what about morals of this?

To explain I’ve seen seen Russia as a necessary potential ally in the past too. But that has changed with the Ukraine war and concurrent events in Russia.

The way I see it, even with a CIA coup, a full scale invasion of a country still isn’t justified. It’s bordering on insanity in my mind to start such a war. The way the war and conscription is handled in Russia is also highly critiquable. The way people who fall from grace, also “fall out of windows” too.

The other major event that made me doubt Putin more was part of the leaks that happened with Navalny’s death. Specifically the revelation of how Putin spend hundreds of millions not just on a palace like so many corrupt leaders and dictators do, but essentially what amounts to an own private town.

This is what lead me to believe that Putin devolved into insanity and paranoia from what he used to be, a calculated sensible dictator.

With all this in mind, why should we offer critical support to Russia instead of Ukraine?

Yes you can argue that Ukraine has been taken over via a pro-western coup regime, but they’re still not the aggressors in the war.

I find it morally questionable to support an aggressor in such a clear scenario. And purely strategically speaking with how Russia is bogged down in Ukraine, I find their military capabilities not great either for any conflict with NATO.

Do any of you have any moral reasoning to critically support Russia? Or do you support it out of strategic reasons despite moral objections?

  • TheLepidopterists [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s a lot to dislike about modern Russia but I’m not sure why a Marxist would strongly object to them for being at war with a US aligned, neo-nazi aligned NATO proxy that was running an ethnic cleansing campaign right on the Russian border.

    • RedPandaRedGuard@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The issue is you can say all the same about Russia in this case, except for not being NATO aligned.

      My objection is starting a war and attempted full scale invasion with the intend of territorial expansion and installing a pro-Russian government (not much different from the CIA couping a pro-Western government to power).

      I’m asking for reasons as to why to critically support Russia as opposed to Ukraine and if the strategic advantage is worth the moral repercussions.

      To me it’s a case of two condemnable states at war with each other. Where the aggressor is still less moral due to being the invader.

      • Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m asking for reasons as to why to critically support Russia as opposed to Ukraine

        One is allied with the world’s colonial hegemon that has been committing genocides and invasions everywhere, is openly run by nazis, has been involved in helping NATO conquer at least Syria and Iraq, and has been carrying out terror attacks on behalf of the genocidal empire of NATO.

        Where the aggressor is still less moral due to being the invader.

        Attempting to join NATO, threatening to bring NATO’s weapons and troops to the borders of is targets, and threatening to engage in terror attacks is an act of aggression. Furthermore, Ukraine has also invaders at least Syria and Iraq.

        Also, seriously, what’s with the ‘full-scale invasion’?

      • TheLepidopterists [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Full scale invasion is a phrase that you keep using, and it makes you sound like you’re getting all your information from redditors, because it just means invasion but sounds worse, like regime vs government.

        The issue is you can say all the same about Russia in this case, except for not being NATO aligned.

        First of all, that’s not true. Russia wasn’t overthrown a decade ago but neo-nazis and they weren’t creating neo-nazi brigades within their military and using them to harass minority language speakers while also banning them from public life.

        Secondly being NATO aligned is an incredibly big deal. For one, it puts you within the political block that’s committing a modern Holocaust, amongst a bunch of other horrific crimes.

        And trying to destroy a Nazi government is much different than the CIA couping a country to install a Nazi government what are you talking about?

        I’m asking for reasons as to why to critically support Russia as opposed to Ukraine and if the strategic advantage is worth the moral repercussions.

        You sound like a liberal. I’ve pretty much only ever seen good posts from lemmygrad so this is shocking to me.

        • RedPandaRedGuard@lemmygrad.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Now this is just an irrational and insulting response, calling me a lib.

          All you’re doing is throwing the word nazi around.

          Neither Russia nor Ukraine is run by nazis.

          But both have nazis and other fascists running rampant in their society and army. Wagner quite famously had many far right elements. The only difference between Wagner and Azov was that Wagner was a mercenary troop and not directly part of the Russian army.

          What you’re describing essentially draws no difference between the two countries, except that one has been aligned by NATO. So again I have to ask, why support Russia in this case? And as it seems from your comment, why so uncritically on top of it?

          Russia is not struggling against western imperialism, it’s trying to cling onto it’s past sphere through it’s own imperialism which just so happens to put them up against the expansion of the US hegemony.

          As I said before I can understand the strategic interest in Russia winning. But again morally I do not see how this justifies it. Neither government is worse than the other, both filled with corruption, far right elements, oligarchs, oppression and massacres. But only one is defending.

          I’m not defending Ukraine. I’m saying they have a right to defend themselves against aggression. As any nation does with the rare exception of countries that commit massive atrocities and genocides (Cambodia, Nazi Germany (ofc tho they were in fact the aggressor), Rwanda, Myanmar).

          Furthermore if not a full scale invasion, then what was the push for Kiev when the war started? Its goal was the quick overthrow and surrender of the Ukrainian government and armed forces. After that failing Russia is still occupying probably around 1/4 to 1/3 of Ukrainian lands since the war started. Troop movements and the front lines are objective facts.

          • eldavi@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            All you’re doing is throwing the word nazi around.

            nazi is the right word; the ukrainian brigades fomenting the violence pride themselves in following in the footsteps of the 3rd reich and have even adopted their imagery.

            it seems like you’re intentionally ignoring this very important point.

          • cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ukraine is run by Nazis. Sorry but you are out of your depth in this conversation. You won’t understand why we critically support Russia until you get your basic facts straight and stop listening to the western propaganda around this issue.

          • TheLepidopterists [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I strongly disagree with almost everything in your post, but I don’t want to get into a huge line by line discussion about everything, so I’m just going to address the emotionally loaded propaganda phrasing that you keep using.

            Furthermore if not a full scale invasion, then what was the push for Kiev when the war started?

            An invasion. You can just say invasion. You know that that accurately describes what happened, but “full scale” makes it sound more sinister while providing zero information.

            What does full scale even mean? Total war like in WW2? Troops in every part of the invaded country? All of the invading country’s armed forces entering the invaded country?

            It clearly can’t be any of those because none of those are true. It doesn’t mean anything. Russia invaded Ukraine is a fact. “Russia’s full scale invasion of Ukraine” is a propaganda line from a Washington Post article.

          • TankieTanuki [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            why so uncritically on top of it?

            This tells me you’re not here in good faith.

            Read the opening phrase of this comment chain.

            There’s a lot to dislike about modern Russia

  • Space Dengism@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I wouldn’t call myself a supporter of Russia or Putin. But any country that stands up to U.S./NATO imperialism should have support from Marxists. Ukraine a proxy for U.S. intervention in Eastern Europe. Their military is also full of Nazis who have been trying to exterminate ethnic Russians in the Eastern regions of the country.

  • porcupine@lemmygrad.mldeleted by creator
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes you can argue that Ukraine has been taken over via a pro-western coup regime, but they’re still not the aggressors in the war.

    Yes they are.

    • RedPandaRedGuard@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      How so? Ukraine deployed the military to its eastern regions to crush opposition protests and possible secessionist movements. But that’s still an internal affair. Not an attack on another nation.

      • REEEEvolution@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ukraine was engaged in ethnic cleansing for 8 years with the ambition to become another Israel. By 22, one million people had fled to Russia from Ukraine. After 8 years, Russia intervened by recognizing the breakaway republics and answering their calls for help. Was this technically illigal under international law? Yes, the breakaway republics were not officially recognized by most countries.

        Was it provoked by Ukraine? YES. For 8 years, constantly, with full support of the West. Ukraine wanted this war and did everything sans marching into Russia to get it (there were rumbors of incursions into Russia just before the SMO tho, make of that what you will. Considering what the ukrainian forces got away with during that time, it might have been more than rumors). And now the nazis in Kiew cry because they get their shit kicked out of them.

      • stink@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Believe it or not, the moral thing to do when a country is committing a genocide at your borders is to intervene.

      • TankieTanuki [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        to crush opposition protests and possible secessionist movements

        That’s authoritarianism. Zelensky was killing his own people. Freedom and democracy demanded an intervention.

  • idkanymore@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m not sure how to write this without it sounding like ragebait or a fed post.

    You very clearly failed at avoiding that.

  • IHave69XiBucks@lemmygrad.mldeleted by creator
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    How much do you know about the era prior to Russian intervention in Ukraine? As far as i understand it the Ukrainian backed neo-nazi groups were literally shelling ethnically Russian towns, and killing civilians long before Russia stepped in. So i don’t think portraying this as a black, and white agressor vs defender situation is correct. Donetsk, and Luhansk were actively asking Russia to intervene.

    Now do i think that is why Russia intervened? Because they are just super nice, and wanted to help? Fuck no. They did it for geopolitical reasons like anything else. To secure the historically single most effective corridor for invading Russia. That doesn’t mean that context is irrelevant though.

    This is also functionally a proxy war. It’s the US vs Russia, but the US is using Ukraine as its manpower pool, and bullet sponge. Ukraine doesn’t have the ability to defend itself like it’s done alone. Even with western backing it’s losing.

    The war only happened because the US wanted it to happen. They played Russia, but it backfired on them. The US wanted Russia to come in, and get weakened by Ukraine. Didn’t really care how much damage Ukraine took in the process. But Russia is arguably better off militarily today than it was before this war started. It’s also strengthened the ties between China, and Russia since Russia relies on China to be its economic lifeline in spite of all the sanctions.

    So to answer the question: Why critically support Russia?

    Morally- Tie: Neither side is worth a damn. Ukrainian civilians and Russian civilians are both innocent, and leadership in both countries is irredeemably evil.

    Strategically-Russia Wins: Russian victory weakens the US. Aids the long term goal of destroying US empire.

    Pragmatically-Russia Wins: If Ukraine maintains its independence it will have a total lack of young people, destroyed infrastucture, and be economically insolvent. It will be turned into a resource extraction site for the west, and likely never recover. It’s neo-nazi government will be backed by the US, and impossible to overthrow via domestic rebellion. Another war could happen at any time. Not just with Russia, but with Turkey, Poland, etc. If conditions arise to allow it. As Ukraine will still not have nukes, and will be weakened significantly.

    If Russia wins Ukraine will be taken over, and become part of Russia. Economically they’ll be better off. Likely with significant investment from both Russia, and China in rebuilding their infrastucture. Still used as a resource extraction site, but since manpower will be able to be brought in from the rest of Russia working conditions will likely be better. They’ll now be under the Russian nuclear umbrella. So unless WW3 happens another war isn’t likely. (Yeah WW3 isn’t exactly unlikely, but yknow.) Ukraine also has significant wheat production. To the west this is kind of a meh thing. They have plenty of farmland in the US, and are more interested in minerals. But Russia/China would be quite interested in maintaining wheat output, and would not risk it just to get some minerals. Not just for their own use, but to keep nations like Egypt stable. So the international food supply markets are likely to be more stable in this situation. Which helps not just Ukrainians themselves via jobs, and investment, but anyone in a food insecure region too.

    Anecdotally-Russia wins: Idk how much this matters to other people, but personally when it comes to foreign policy stuff I recognize that the info we as civilians have access to is limited. So i look to the positions of organizations i believe have similar long term goals to my own, communist orgs, and also have access to more information. Intelligence agencies, etc.

    China: Officially neutral, but leans toward Russian support.

    DPRK: Openly supports Russia.

    Vietnam: Neutral, Abstains from UN votes about the conflict.

    Cuba: Leans pro-Russia.

    These have a clear trend. When 0 AES states are supporting the side of Ukraine that tells me all i need to know. The situation isn’t black, and white clearly. But critical support for Russia is the choice that makes the most sense for me. Not that my random poor person trying to survive opinion does much of anything.

    • WIIHAPPYFEW [any, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If Russia wins Ukraine will be taken over, and become part of Russia

      Highly doubt they’d annex the whole country, they’ll absorb the significant Russian-speaking oblasts ofc but the rest would probably be under a Union State member provisional gov (as well as a top market for premium bodyguards to protect officials from 24/7 guerilla attacks)

      Beyond that idk what I’d expect beyond a surge in internal support for aforementioned guerilla cell networks likely dominated by gladio’d up OUN-style groups, as well as whatever company makes Lexapro finding a way around sanctions just to make a killing off of the less conservative 60% or so of citizens who hate the new gov but also are too principled to fight it alongside guys with kolovrat face tats

      the Soviet collapse and its consequences etc, era of blackest reaction etc

  • m532@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Morals? Full scale invasion? Russia bad? Fall out of windows? Nazivalny mentioned? Irrational putin?

    That’s not just a bingo, that’s a full bingo board of liberalism

  • Kras Mazov@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    What does morality has to do with this? Marxism is not a moral compass. Sure each of us have our own moral compass that is influenced by our own cultures, but that is not a part of Marxism.

    We can disagree with Russia all we want, the reality of the matter is that, at the end of the day, they are still fighting and resisting NATO’s imperialism.

    Also, if you’re going to bring morality into this, then you can’t only talk about Russia invading, you also needs to weight in the ethnic cleansing Ukraine was doing, their Nazi military that are now officially recognized, their rehabilitation of figures like Estepan Bandera and their erasing of Soviet symbols in the country.

  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think what NATO did to Ghaddafi explains Russia’s behavior. They could no longer treat NATO as a defensive alliance, it proved itself to be an arm of imperialism. If they allowed Ukraine to become a staging ground for NATO bombers it would be begging for color revolution. They couldn’t just wait, they had to act preemptively.

    • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      NATO was never an defensive alliance, USSR at the time of its forming had no doubt about that, Warsaw Pact was a defensive alliance created explicitly as defense from NATO. And later history proven this to be 100% correct.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, NATO didn’t transform into a tool of imperialism, it merely revealed itself to have always been a tool of imperialism.

        • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, but this revelation is repeated every single time NATO does anything, some people like Molotov got it even before its creation and some people like every fucking lib out there never get it even when it’s right in their face like the cake toss.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Putin himself expressed desire for Russia to join NATO as late as 2000, and in 2005 he said that Russia would respect Ukraine’s choice to join NATO. Those aren’t the actions and words of someone who understands what NATO is.

            Was this rhetoric? Maybe, but I don’t think so. I think the bombing of Libya was when everything changed. Only a few years after that, Crimea was annexed.

  • diegeticalt (any)@lemmygrad.mldeleted by creator
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can you explain how you:

    • are ignorant of the conversations that have been had on this topic for 3 years.

    • with a 2 year old account.

    • while using “red guard” in your username.

    You’re clearly not as unfamiliar with the topic or the ML thought process followed here as your post implies.

    I think it’s weird wrecker shit to re-hash topics that were covered in this space already.

  • Sleepless One@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    But what about morals of this?

    I find it morally questionable to support an aggressor in such a clear scenario.

    Do any of you have any moral reasoning to critically support Russia? Or do you support it out of strategic reasons despite moral objections?

    • amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Russia is not imperialist: https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Imperialism#Russian_"imperialism"

      Having some global influence and a capitalist model does not automatically mean you fit the definition of imperialism. You could try to argue current Russia might have the potential to become imperialist given the right circumstances, but short of them losing their sovereignty to the western empire and becoming a puppet state (and therefore only imperialist in the sense that they are part of the west’s empire), that seems like a snowball’s chance in hell. Russia is currently an important actor in a newly forming multipolar world, which is in direct contradiction to having monopolistic capitalist power. And it is “socialism with Chinese characteristics” China, with its fast-moving advances, increasing mutually-beneficial ties with other countries, and powerful forces of production and supply chains that is the dominant force in that multipolar push for sovereignty and self-determination, not Russia. So even if Russia were trying to do some kind of 5d chess maneuver to become a global imperialist power, they would have to go through China to do it, which is where some of their most significant support comes from.

      There just simply aren’t the conditions there, as far as I can tell, for Russia to independently develop into the kind of domineering power that the west has had, part of which was built on the tendrils of colonialism created over hundreds of years and then further developed on the advantageous technological and productive position that the US was in, in post WWII; and those US conditions were owed in part to it suffering so little damage to its own country while other places, like the USSR, suffered incredible losses. Russia is again suffering losses for fighting against the puppet/proxy state Ukraine and its neo-nazi and NATO-backed fascist elements, so that they don’t get NATO knocking at their door, coming for them next. This is not some easy war that simply wins them territory and resources, and loses them little. You don’t have to like Russia’s leadership at all to recognize that this is a part of the ongoing existential fight for sovereignty against a brutally expansionist western empire. It was the west that invaded the USSR in its beginnings, it was the west that sought to destroy the USSR and successfully did so. It was the west that couped Ukraine. It was the west that sabotaged peace deals between Ukraine and Russia. The same west that has been doing constant wars, coups, economic sanctions, and other forms of waging war against the entire world for decades, killing millions, just in post-WWII. Not even counting the damage done via colonialism if you go back further. Any attempt to make equivalent Russia and the western empire is nothing short of the most high grade, top of the line BS, and most likely comes from western imperial sources who are trying to flip the script.

      Critical support means what it sounds like. It means you support but with caveats, not that you give unthinking support. It means you recognize that the world is not a Marvel movie, but instead has complex contradictions and factional crossovers. That it is not made up of perfect victims and cartoon villains, but of varied peoples and cultures who don’t all have the same interests, and you have to engage with and navigate that in order to develop toward global communism and a world free of imperialism. You can despise it all you want, but you still have to engage with the realities of it in all its messiness.

    • -6-6-6-@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Getting a lot of mileage out of copying this around.

      я не из калининграда@lemmy.ml (not a native english speaker, I believe)

      i do not support the current administrations internal actions, as capitalism has brought nothing but injustice, suffering, poverty, crime and corruption. but i absolutely do support its foreign policy, especially regarding the ukrainian question. the putin government has evolved to become one of the most effective anti-imperialist forces on the planet and even if you ignore the terrible nature of the terrorist zelensky-regime one has to be grateful to our military for fighting the biggest enemy of mankind, america.

      so lets detail the happenings that led to the current situation:

      (it may be important to note that the current russian administration pushes a slightly different narrative due to sadly being a right wing state)

      banderite collaborators parading in front of nazi officers the banderites (see picture), members of the fascist “organization of ukrainian nationalists” led by stepan andreyevich bandera were a gang of rapists and murderers who collaborated with the invading german hordes and assisted them by conducting acts of terror against civilians. It is important to note that popular support for them was close to zero. after the victory of the heroic red army, the majority of those parasites fled to the west, predominantly to canada. they received funding from american and british intelligence agencies, which were more than happy to welcome “former” nazis into their own anti-communist ranks. another subset of the banderites remained in the ukrainian ssr and conducted a campaign of terror and sabotage against the civilian population. their bloody deeds were supported by the cia and its european puppet agencies through the so called “operation aerodynamic”.

      spoiler

      referendum on the preservation of the ussr. its results were ignored by the anti-communists

      After the illegal and undemocratic dissolution of the ussr, the leaders of those fascist gangs were glorified by the ukrainian far-right, with support from the cia. efforts to further their “rehabilitation” were primarily directed by nazi expatriates in canada. outlets such as voice of america portrayed them as “heroes”. (aerodynamic, some of these were manufactured in the U.S under Operation Mockingbird like a lot of U.S state dept. bullshit)

      election before cia intervention. this division between neonazi northwest and pro-russian southeast is visible to this day

      in 2004, the west sabotaged the ukrainian presidential elections and installed their puppet, viktor andreyevich yushchenko, through a color revolution. he was a terrible leader, not only dismantling the remaining aspects of the ukrainian economy and managing to make life even more miserable than it already was, but also granting “hero of ukraine” status to banderite leaders and holocaust perpetrators stepan bandera and roman iosifovich shukhevich.

      (not adding picture of 2014 ukrainian nazis since you have already said you believe in that)

      in 2014, america and the west orchestrated another coup, this time not even bothering to hide the involvement of neo-nazis. the new regime perpetrated unspeakable atrocities against the russian population, whom it consideres “subhuman,” as well as against ukrainian anti-fascists. in odessa alone, 39 people were burned alive in the local trade union building.

      those developments led to the revolution in the predominantly russian populated donbass-area and the creation off the donetsk and lugansk peoples republics, as well as the referendum in crimea that led to the peninsula finally rejoining russia. from 2014 till 2022 the majority of humanitarian aid to the donbass republics came from the cprf.

      the reason for the smo is the ukrainian western-aligned nazi regime violating the minsk accords by refusing to demilitarize, trying to join the fascist nato-block and murdering russian civilians for years on end. the russian government showed itself extremely lenient, to lenient even, as any sensible politician would have staged a military intervention much earlier. if you need further proof for the tyrannical nature of the kievan regime just look at the fact that zelenskiy has banned all opposition parties in his country, refuses to hold elections and effectively rules as a military dictator. furthermore he has outlawed the russian language, made any negotiation with the russian state illegal and is currently selling whatever is left of his country to the highest bidder. combine all this with the fact that the west and its puppets need to always be opposed due to them being a cancer of humanity and you’ll get a pretty good picture of why to support the russian military.

      [Query: Do communists have to support Russia?]

      from @[email protected]

      In a word, no. In a few more words, support for Russia (not Putin, as historical materialists don’t subscribe to great man theory) is only a partial, temporary, tactical one, in the context of imperialist liberation. Russia is still a capitalist state, though, so it’s a two stage strategy: first liberate colonized bourgeois states from colonizer states, and second revolution within those liberated bourgeois states.

      Russia is an interesting case: it has already liberated itself from the post-Soviet “shock therapy” neocolonizers. This occurred during Putin’s administration, which is why he is especially hated by the US. So now the support for Russia is in the context of keeping the colonizers from recolonizing it, and supporting Russia to the extent that it helps other states liberate themselves. But Russia isn’t trying to “liberate” Ukraine, at least not all of Ukraine. It’s trying to resolve the genocidal attacks on the people of the Donbas, and it’s trying to resolve the imperialist military expansion at its border.

      Also, Ukraine really does have a fascism problem and has for a long time, and the coup government has materially supported it.

  • haui@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m reading about this a lot recently. Especially outside of western “free speech media” (read: propaganda outlets), the view is kinda different. Some people from donetsk were reporting their native russian language and ideology being forcefully repressed. I’m not saying that is what actually happened. It is what I heard from people claiming to be from there. Paired with accounts of ukraine being allegedly coup’d twice by the west and building up arms, allegedly to repress separatist movements and preparing to sell off most of the country to the west (something I read today but no idea if it is what happened).

    So, in my humble opinion, there is no clear morality to this. Compared with videos of men in ukraine being kidnapped off the street and brought to the front to be detonated by a drone, russia isn’t great either but I dont see the moral binarity that you seem to do.

    • RedPandaRedGuard@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would never defend the actions of the Ukrainian government in ending the protests in the east following the Maidan coup. Put putting down the opposition is still on a different level from invading a country.

      • stink@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Putting down the opposition? Being able to speak one’s native tongue isn’t opposition. They were committing genocide to ethnic Russians within their borders. To think Russia had no reason to invade seems more like a libertarian isolationist ideology.

      • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        putting down the opposition

        With Artillery? For someone so obsessed with morality you don’t seem particularly worried about the morality of shelling people who voted against you.

      • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        putting down the opposition

        Nazis were shelling civilians in eastern Ukraine for almost a decade for the crime of being ethnically Russian and you’re talking about morals. Go fuck yourself pigpoop

  • vovchik_ilich [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh boy this is gonna be a spicy comment section.

    Essentially, the point is that Russia has no choice. The western empire has expanded eastwards and aims to control increasingly the former “Russian sphere of influence”, which used to be the eastern block for the most part. The west can do this because it has the economic and geopolitical supremacy, and can do this through so-called"soft" power, political power and economic power.

    This process progressively weakens the Russian empire in favour of the western empire. This leads to a stronger western empire over time, and this is something patently bad for the entire global south and all nations suffering under the yoke of western imperialism. Fighting against the western imperialism, even by means of military struggle, is considered positive by many socialists, even if done by a reactionary nationalist force. For example Mao famously allied with the Kuomintang during the Japanese invasion, because the priority was the elimination of imperialism, followed by the revolution.

    Furthermore, history didn’t begin in 2022. Tens of millions of Ukrainians have suffered the oppression of the west since 1990, becoming the poorest country in Europe and losing millions of lives to poverty, malnutrition, stress, unemployment, alcoholism and suicide since then. If you’re concerned about the wellbeing of Ukrainians, you should primarily be concerned with the western role in the fucking up of the entire country over the past 35 years, which arguably affected it much greater than the ongoing invasion.