It doesn’t matter. I have argued with literal western sources, like primary attributions what the chief of the NED said or the archived funding page of the NED, or academic works by Ukrainian scholars. Photos and western media articles about the Nazi problem in Ukraine.
Nothing with convince a liberal that the Nato isn’t a holy alliance of the pure and willing to bring freedom, justice and democracy to Ukraine. A full embrace of the fantasy that the west finally fights “the good fight” again.
All I want is peace and a diplomatic solutions, an end to the warmongering. But what do pacifists get today? Endless insults and mocking. The liberals and “leftists” are acting just like MAGAts and climate change deniers and anti-vaxxers. I look from one to the other and back again and see no difference.
So what’s your solution? Let Ukraine put their weapons down so that Russia would annex and genocide them?
Let’s not forget that Russia is a nazi state, hellbent on promoting Russian ethnic supremacy.
One major reason that Nazis are bad is their propensity for invading, robbing, and murdering the people of their neighboring countries.
Fuck Ukraine and fuck your fake concern for anything but yourself
If your premise is that Russia is “obviously” is a fascist nazi state hellbent on genocide, there is obviously no solution but constant war. If that were the case I would obviously agree with you. But there is no evidence for your premise. Russia was an antagonist interfering in other countries before the Ukraine regime change, but they didn’t engage in conquest and genocide. Nor do I know of state sanctioned discrimination between the different ethnicity living in Russia.
So because Russia had other conflicts where they didn’t commit genocide, it’s impossible for them to commit genocide in the future? Or if they do start doing genocide them it’s actually someone else’s fault?
Weird amount of genocide denialism and victim blaming from a self processed passifist
“There’s no evidence”… Except for the damn war they started and continue to this day with the explicit intent of conquest.
No no komrade, is special 3 day operation, Ukraine totally attacked first, Russia is just bro, trust us.
They’re literally taking children from Ukraine to give to Russian families so that they Russified, as part of their Russification programs. Which is classified as cultural genocide, if you didn’t know.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_abductions_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_war
While it’s true that it classifies as a genocidal act under Article II of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, it’s not the only criteria. To be technically classified as genocide, you need to prove the clear intent of destroying a specific group, either in part or fully.
Judging by how this war started, and by both sides’ behaviour, I don’t think it’d be ruled as genocide in any international court or tribunal. Cases formally ruled as genocide are rare, precisely because it’s not easy to prove the intent.
And frankly, it’s rarely present. In almost all cases governments are after leverage, power, or resources, and could not care less about the nations or ethnic groups.
Even in Israel’s case it took a long time to produce enough evidence for the UN and ICC to formally declare a genocide is ongoing. And look how obvious that one is.
Did you forget about Crimea?
All you want is for the Ukrainians to stop fighting back, you mean.
I don’t think for a moment Ukraine is getting NATO support for altruistic reasons, but that doesn’t mean NATO started this fight. Nobody in the EU wanted a proxy war with Russia. They were all making tons of money from Russia, and vice versa.
The Russian pretext for the invasion has shifted about a dozen times since the war started, and Putin’s little green men were all over the border region stirring up trouble ever since the invasion of Crimea. These are all documented facts too. He gambled he could get away with it without much of a fight, and lost the bet. Fuck around and find out I guess.
It’s also true that there is a well documented percentage of Ukrainians who are literally neonazis, like the Azov brigade. But surely one could reasonably assume the biggest reason Ukrainians hate the Russians nowadays is because Russia invaded their country, not some CIA psyop, or because they’ve been reading Meine Kampf to the kids at night.
Ukraine has a Nazi problem? Oh man, that is horrible!
Do Ukrainian Nazis invade rob and murder their neighboring countries? That would be a really bad thing for Nazis to do.
How many seats in the Ukrainian parliament are currently held by Nazis?
Based. Venezuela and Cuba too (I’m from Venezuela, founder of the ALBA-TCP/BAPO-PTT [Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America - Peoples’ Trade Treaty], and Cuba is the main provider of military and political support of the Venezuelan Narcoterrorist State).
this is so ambiguous, because it’s making fun of the far right, because Donald Trump was accused of getting help from “Russians” when the libs decided to start a new Cold War. but also is attacking the far left, which is against imperial overreach and proxy wars against Russia.
the independent thinker is just someone who thinks hating Russia is dumb and goes out of their way to understand a “taboo” nation the West wants to destroy. On the right these people flock to Trump, Tucker Carlson, and Steve Bannon’s camp. on the left they’re actually independent and lack a political movement. they listen to podcasts like Chapo Trap House and maybe are involved with the DSA.
but also is attacking the far left, which is against imperial overreach and proxy wars against Russia.
The far left is against imperialism full stop, that includes Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
What does imperialism mean to you?
It’s when a ruler is in a military dress uniform with a tall, feathery, hat.
It’s literally Ukraine’s fault for being an imperial puppet and Western proxy. The US helped one side overthrow their democratic government, started a civil war and now the Western side says the election was illegitimate (meanwhile Zelenskyy has halted elections to continue an unpopular war).
We funded a Jan. 6 in Ukraine (the Maidan), where political losers overthrew fair elections, the coup succeeded and now we have to hear about how these people want to be free and their puppet regime filled with neo-Nazis is so great🤮? No thanks. That’s dumb. I’m against imperial puppets, and Ukraine is a Western imperial proxy, not a legitimate democratic state.
Holy fucking victim blaming, batman.
“Ukraine deserved it” is surely one of the takes of all time.
Glad to know you can be ignored
Ukraine has been a US puppet since we overthrew their government in 2014, the people might be victims but the current government is complicit in their suffering and absolutely deserves to be dismantled
So roll out the genocide! Amazing gymnastics work.
What fucking genocide? Words mean things, and genocide does not just mean a war you’re particularly upset by
Literal Russian propaganda.
Putin claimed that Ukraine had been committing genocide against Russian speakers in the region; that Ukraine’s government were neo-Nazis under Western control; that Ukraine was developing nuclear weapons; and that NATO was building up military infrastructure in Ukraine, threatening Russia.
Putin said that Russia was acting in self-defense, that its goal was the “demilitarization and denazification” of Ukraine, and claimed that Russia had no plans to occupy Ukrainian land. He threatened severe consequences for any country that intervened.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Putin_speech_on_invading_Ukraine
In this case, “propaganda” is a matter of emphasis. I think that there is a very strong case to be made that the USA supported pro EU/pro NATO forces in Ukraine, with weapons, services, and goods, during and after Maidan. This aid influenced Ukraine to join NATO which was a hard red line for Russia. There is a strong case, and historic precedence to be made that the USA pushed, or at least nudged (using aid, which made up 90% of foreign aid) Ukraine to join NATO specifically to draw Russia into a long, protracted conflict with Ukraine.
NATO is an entity that was formed to stop Soviet “spread” into Europe. So.why does it still exist after the fall of USSR? It still functions as a hostile military front against Russia. It makes sense in any context that Russia would not permit a new NATO installation in Ukraine.
Does this justify the Russian invasion of Ukraine? Fuck no. But that doesnt mean that being objective about the history is propaganda, it means the lead up to the invasion was messy, there were western and Russian elements using Ukraine to carry out their own imperial agenda. Ukraine has been incredibly vulnerable and heavily exploited for a very long time. Ukraine had the lowest standard of living during the USSR, which dropped significantly after the fall, and basically never recovered. Post USSR Russia played a role in this, as did the USA, EU, and NATO.
Propaganda does not mean “facts that don’t suit my camp”. Such facts may be used in propaganda, but doesn’t make them false, context is everything. Being a pro-USA campist is also bad. Even if it puts you on the “side” of the victims in the invasion doesn’t give you the right to disregard the USA’s role in using Ukraine for their own imperialist aganda.
Maybe they should stop having Nazi symbolism keep showing up in photographs and stop constantly celebrating the Nazi collaborationist UPA then the accusations will have no weight.
I think it is highly debateable that having Nazis in a country is justification to invade them, because that’s a justification for practically any country to invade practically any country. Especially when the Invading country is also full of neo-nazis.
I don’t support the invasion for what it’s worth. But it would be good if they carried out denazification with the same enthusiasm as they carry out decommunization. Soldiers wearing patches with swastikas, wolfsangels, SS runes and so on should face prosecution. So should showing support for the organisation which slaughtered Poles by the thousands between 1943-1945 with the explicit approval of Nazi Germany.
These things are ignored at best and encouraged at worst. I think Ukraine and Russia both have a Nazi problem. Neither government seems to care as long as it’s more bodies for the frontline.
denazification
Just isn’t really possible for a capitalist country to denazify another capitalist country. Fascism is capitalism in decay. As long as the conditions for fascism exist, it will continue and reemerge as a social phenomenon.
The state targeting individual fascists, without delegitimizing them, just creates more fascists. And the only thing that can delegitimize fascism is a social system that can take care of people’s needs, end wars, resist capitalism, provide a high quality of life (or realistically promise one), and carry out mass education that teaches people to be critical and engaged.
As long as the capitalists are with us, there will be poverty, and fascists to make sure things remain that way.
having Nazi symbolism
A fringe party with less than 1% popular support (could not find the actual number, IIRC about 12k votes total) tied to a far right paramilitary group of few hundred people does not mean a country is Nazi. Its as stupid as idk, like saying China is Nazi because of Kuomintang.
Or alternatively, if fringe support is enough to make Ukrainie a Nazi hotspot, then USA is Nazi Grand Poobah.
Dealers choice.
The government won’t do anything about it though. Nazi symbols should be a criminal offence to wear. And UPA members get streets, stadiums, and postage stamps named after them. An example being Roman Shukhevych who joined a Nazi battalion and helped the Germans murder Jews. This is not fringe stuff. It is grotesque that Ukraine tolerates this kind of thing.
then USA is Nazi Grand Poobah
These days, not far from the truth.
Yeah, just trying to understand. You are literally the one pictured in the meme. You’ve spouted enough Russian disinfo that I already tagged you for it months ago.
Oh, you’re part of the Ukrainian bot farm that keeps villainizing Russia? Or you’re a liberal who drank the Kool-Aid and does it because the mainstream media told you to? Either way, it’s ignorant and cringe.
I mean. This isn’t the clearest meme is it? Lol
Yes, but english language political discussions are 70-80% russophobia and sinophobia by volume.
Funny, bcs I notice pretty much everyone who talks about “Russian Propaganda” uses that to mean “anything that contradicts the US state department and billionaire owned media narrative about US geopolitical adversaries”
You notice people slurping up one propaganda while you’re slurping up another, and think you’re smarter than they are.
“Both sides are the same! I am very smart.”
Yes, those two are the same. They’re not two different sides. The side opposite them both is woke, learns what propaganda looks like, recognizes it, refuses it, and doesn’t employ it as a tactic. Get outta here trying to paint me as a centrist when the common enemies of mankind are all on the side of rape, genocide, and greed.
Try harder halfwit
Then surely you would know that NATO’s propaganda is far more pervasive and commonplace than that of non-NATO countries, and that just because another source disagrees with NATO’s official message it’s not necessarily propaganda (at least, not one that fabricates evidence)?
Then surely you would know that NATO’s propaganda is far more pervasive and commonplace than that of non-NATO countries, and that just because another source disagrees with NATO’s official message it’s not necessarily propaganda (at least, not one that fabricates evidence)?
Yes I know that. It is propaganda, though. I mean, it’s pretty fuckin obvious. Hilariously so. I get that it works really well on uneducated people living in enforced ignorance, but I’m not one of them. You’re a faux-communist dictatorship propaganda sockpuppet and you stick out like a sore thumb.
Hint: maybe you shouldn’t all post this dreck on .ml accounts.
So that’s a definite “yes” on believing everything the US State Department has to say about the geopolitical adversaries of the US?
Oh, you’re just a straight up tankie lmao. Ta-ta!
Not beating the allegations lol
Damn, it usually takes two or three rounds of replies to get them to just admit it like that.
Have you stopped beating your wife yet? Yes or no. If you don’t answer I will interpret that as a “no”.
Can’t stop what you never started!
That’s exactly what a domestic abuser would say!
“… in favor of Russian state departament and oligarch owned media narrative”
ftfy, now fuck off
Why not loathe the existence of every nation state on earth? The worst religion is nationalism, and there is stuff competition.
Spending time on Chinese social media has shown me platforms that read exactly like the garbage from the right wing talking heads here on Twitter. Extreme nationalist sentiment is very, very, common. I have seen soooo many memes expressing desire to just wipe out the Philippines, and just repopulate it with mainland Chinese. Memes about their eventual control over Africa, which uses surprisingly western racist stereotypes to portray Africans. So much discussion that mirrors MAGA like behavior, in many ways, but just discussing the greatness of China, instead. So many who, at least claim, to wholeheartedly believe revisionist, extremely idealized, versions of China’s past, often including things that just are not physically possible. There is a lot of open talk about what China is going to do to so many of it’s neighbors when it over takes the US, and NATO recedes from the region. I stopped going on their, because it was just becoming more, and more, X-China. Then my translator stopped using social media there, expect for work, as well, and now I just can’t.
Friends of mine who have spent the past 20+ years living in China are reporting seeing more, and more, of it offline too, when politics was not something Chinese would publicly really talk about, especially to foreigners. However, especially in the past 10 years, they said their open expression of xenophobia, hardline nationalist sentiments, desire to take, and punish other countries, has become almost common in certain social spaces there, and it is worrying them. These people moved to China after studying Chinese language, culture, and history, for many years, including attending Chinese universities. They loved it there. Now they are talking about how it is sounding more, and more, like the rhetoric you get from flag wavers in the US.
So I do not trust China to maintain it’s non-expansionism once NATO not longer controls so many of the waters around them. Nationalism is popular their, and the idea of finally taking revenge for the century of humiliation only grows.
It is so annoying to hear people prop up China or Russia and North Korea as these moral islands. There is no moral outpost in the world.
So I do not trust China to maintain it’s non-expansionism once NATO not longer controls so many of the waters around them.
Right. China bad, I forgot. This isn’t sinophobia at all.
Do you have anything else than anecdotal evidence? How much of a percentage of the Chinese social media can you scan for this type of ultra-nationalist and fascist content? There are like 1 billion people there.
decides to become highly imperialist, all of a sudden, I’m not going to care as much. If, all of a sudden, China starts invading a bunch of its neighbors, then that’s a huge d
China is a country which throw ethnic minorities into concentration camps and executes political prisoners. Workers are exploited to the point where they throw themselves off the roofs of factories. It’s an entire society where the only way you can advance is by screwing the people below you.
So yeah, China is bad.
So you think the unhinged ramblings of an Austrian Christofascist have some kind of merit? That’s all I’m getting from this comment.
You could win an Olympic gold medal with the leap in logic you just made.
China is a country which throw ethnic minorities into concentration camps and executes political prisoners.
Ok, find me a source for that assertion that isn’t
the unhinged ramblings of an Austrian Christofascist
…or his allies in the recognized terrorist group the ETIC or the US State Department.
I’ll wait, knowing that no such source existed the last time I looked in to it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_China
https://www.hrw.org/reports/1994/china1/china_948.htm
I actually thought you were joking at first.
Edit: You understand me criticizing the CCP for human rights abuses does not automatically make me a Nazi, correct?
“It is known”
Way ahead of you
Nice instance name 👍
ML discovers anarchism.
I think most anarchists do exactly that. The obvious tension is that marxists want to replace one state with another, whereas anarchists would prefer not to swap one yoke for another.
Is there such thing as a Marxarchist? Lol. I read Marx, but don’t believe in swapping one ruler for another, or that one governing body is somehow magically morally above another.
Marxxxxanarchisting.
the most common strain of anarchism these days is anarchocommunism, which is by and large a movement that is defined by defiance of all hierarchy and broad agreement with Karl Marx on matters of economics as they apply to hierarchical violence
There is anarcho-Communism but Marx’s philosophy is very state-centric, even if it does ultimately oppose the existence of a state.
If you’ve read Marx, I’d suggest reading the anarchist criticisms of him by Kropotkin, Proudhon, and Bakunin.
I’m not well-versed on those yet, so definitely piquing my interest. Thanks!
Conquest of Bread by Kropotkin is an absolute must read.
I actually started reading this a while back. This is a good reminder to go back to it.
Closest thing that comes to mind is autonomism
They’re after my stuff?!
I do!
Russia, China, the US, the EU are imperial entities with imperial interests. None of them and non of their propaganda outlets care about the Ukrainian people.
Given that, it’s perfectly realistic that the US willingly engineered a situation where conflict was inevitable.
If you think the US wanted Ukraine in NATO for the good of the Ukrainian people, you’re delusional.
If you think the US invested millions in pro western „news outlets“ in Ukraine for the good of the Ukrainian peoples, you’re delusional.
Just as delusional as those that think Russia invaded Ukraine to liberate its people.
How are you defining China as imperialist? Does China engage in global politics? Yes. Do they engage with global Capital? Yes. Do they use soft power to achieve nationalist aims in national conflicts? Sometimes. Are they a hegemon? Depends how you define hegemony.
Do they use their military might to spread their influence and national agenda? No. Do they have Military bases in other countries? No (Russia has like 12, USA has like 130). Do they try to expand their territory? They engage in border conflicts and Taiwan is contentious, but mostly no.
Imperialism is using military might to establish economic dominance or neocolonialism, to establish economic monopolies and an imperialists friendly ruling class in a foreign country. Influencing another country can be regarded as hegemony, depending on the definition of hegemony being used, and imperial countries are hegemonic. But hegemony is soft power, imperialism is hard, direct domination. Hegemony is not imperialism.
Looking back over your comment, and realizing you also consider the EU as imperial, I think you’re confusing hegemony, in an IR/sociological context, for imperialism. EU is not imperialist. They are a function of like global capitalism, which is imperialist, but EU is not imperialist.
Separate comment because its easier to talk that way:
EU is not imperialist. They are a function of like global capitalism, which is imperialist, but EU is not imperialist.
That sentence does not make sense. Its a shade of green but not green makes no fucking sense.
Here’s my reasoning: Capitalism is global, capitalism is imperialist, the national or transnational character of capitalism is geographically dependent. The EU as an entity does not carry out imperialist activity outside of the national/transnational framing. It engages in trade, legal definition/refinement, regulation. It empowers capitalists within the EU to conduct business on a global stage. The EU does not have a military, it does not operate a military that functions imperialistically. It can serve as an organizing force that unites national capital to coordinate national militaries with the aims of empowering national capital to conduct business globally.
Honestly the more I think through this the harder it is to parse out differences. Most, if not all, EU members are imperialist, but the imperialist part of them is national, not transnational. Honestly I can’t really fault your perspective, and I’d like to develop it more than a “I’m right, you’re wrong” type debate would really allow. I’d be interested in resources that support your position.
I think this depends on whether by EU you mean the actual political leadership body, or the member countries as a general Western-European power/cultural/economic projection project.
The EU itself cannot compel military action by member countries, for instance, so you could argue it is never imperialist. But if all the major EU countries are also in NATO and sign up to help the US invade Iraq and Afghanistan, is it really unfair to criticize the EU as a shared Western-European bloc?
I mean, yeah, after writing my way through it, I can appreciate the perspective. I generally like to be precise, concrete with definitions.
But the more I thought about it, the more I worked through it, I found it interesting that, based on strict definition of the EU, as an entity unto itself with particular functions, it is like you say, it is never imperialist.
But when searching for the contours of it, where an imperialist or historically colonial member nation ends, and where global imperialism picks up, those lines are not clear at all. I’m sure they are defined legally somewhere, and I would be interested in those legal definitions, but when defined by its relation to power, it is conspicuously “never imperialist”, while existing between, and functioning in tandem with, national imperialist powers and global imperialist powers. Like it’s a little too unimperialist for an entity that is situated deep within, and rooted intrinsically with imperialism.
I think it has been a good discussion and exercise sussing this out, I don’t think in was wrong Witt my comment, but I was also only looking at it from this one perspective that doesn’t consider the EU’s most crucial relationships. And as a matter of fact, I think defining the thing, particularly in the realm of social/economics/IR, by its relationship is much more revealing and historically accurate. So i guess I mean i started with the concretization process when I commented, but it wasn’t until we continued discussion that I was able to really work it out.
But that’s why I contribute to discussions! In good faith, I learn a lot
Do they (China) try to expand their territory?
Well, they quitely took over what, 10% of Bhutan, since 2021 - and noone cares, because noone cares about Bhutan, right? Bhutan didn’t sold those territories, and isn’t even trying to defend them, because how would that work.
And that it is militarily a very good position in case they’d want to expand into India, that’s just a coincidence, I’m sure.
I mean yeah, I get it, compare it to the empire of evil and it looks benign. But it isn’t good, just a lesser of two evils.
I mean, that’s a really good example! And I appreciate it. Do you have any more resources about it? The wiki article is a little vague, and it would be interesting to compare with border skirmishes w India.
I’m a little hesitant to frame things as “evil” but I get your point. Its really hard to pin down China international policy, IMO, so having something concrete to review is always helpful.
Only whan Bhutan newspapers output - Kuensel and the other one I forgot the name (paywal https://kuenselonline.com/dz/news/bhutan-china-border-talks).
Bhutan is literally being polite invaded and is doing anything to deescalate and stop, but it is a much weaker party. They tried formal protests in Chinese Embassy in India, they are trying… negotiations (e. g. https://www.mfa.gov.bt/joint-press-release-on-the-25th-round-of-boundary-talks-between-bhutan-and-china/), but they are still being annexed against their will by China - see also https://blogs.soas.ac.uk/china-institute/2024/12/18/the-bhutan-anomaly/
Thanks, I’ll look these over
“polite invaded” isn’t a thing
Well, yeah, sorry, in my mind it is different than e. g. what Russia is doing or Israel, because China is not bombing the Bhutan capitol. They destroy the villages and drive away or kill the locals.
But I should’ve clarified.
Other examples , though much less blatant are the ways that the PRC won the Sri Lankan civil war and led to the total massacre of the Tamil Tigers, and the PRC’s ongoing support for the Tatmydaw in Myanmar - pulling lots of levers and helping keep the aircraft bombing rebel population centres going.
You can be an imperialist by supporting other nation’s governments to get your own benefit.
I mean, the links provided above re:Bhutan aren’t what I would describe as blatant. One link is paywalled, one link is very tame and conciliatory toward China, one link makes some bold claims but upon inspection has a particular political alignment, and cites some compelling but not really definitive sources. Its been a good place to begin, but IMO doesn’t demo anything conclusive.
I’ll look into the situation in Sri Lanka, and Myanmar. I agree that China is not above real politik when it comes to foreign relations, but any references you could share would also be appreciated.
Chinese arms in Myanmar- but be aware that the United Wa Army are allies of and get their weapons from the PRC.
A longer opinion piece from the same paper on China’s meddling in the ongoing civil war, and earlier parts of history.I was sure I had found a PRC diplomatic statement about the Sri Lankan Civil War and China’s aid for legitimate governments opposing separatism, but my 百度夫 is weak today - or I need to VPN into China to get better search results. I’ll try to find time to dig it up, but some poking about will find plenty on Chinese aid to Sri Lanka in the first two decades of the 21st century while the war was ongoing.
Thanks for the links I’ll check them out
I don’t find these sources to be particularly damning toward PRC. The section in the second reference that was like “why would an authoritarian communist country support a democratically elected government?” Was just like redscare bs. Is it hard to believe that China does not want a civil war on its border? That they would make moves to stop illegal arms markets? Criticisms of China would be much more convincing to me if the reporters weren’t holding flashlights under their chin and describing somewhat normal and peaceful IR tactics in a spooky ominous tone.
Like, no, I don’t think supporting a military junta is a moral good. But I can also recognize that, after 5 years of civil war, China may want to normalize relations with their neighbor. If they invaded to overthrow the junta, that would also be bad. If they support the rebels, then the junta uses that to foment anti-Chinese sentiment on their border. It might be appropriate to disagree with the policy, but it seems to be coming from a source where no matter what actions PRC took, there would be risks and grounds fr criticism.
Based on the sources you provided, even reading through the doomish tone, Chinese actions appear pretty rational. Not above criticism, perhaps, but such criticism should be carried out in a principled and not opportunist or polemical manner, at least, if it is to be convincing to me. I like objective views, and I like views coming from real people. Lacking that, and serving a big dose of propaganda, is a real turn off for me.
France is absolutely imperialist on its own, the other EU powers are at least imperialist to the extent that they are and were directly involved in US imperialist wars. China is a different case, theoretically there is a possible future were china is the first post imperialist power. I think it’s much more likely though, that at some point they will use either military coercion, start militarily supporting „rebels“, or at some point do direct military intervention, to protect their investments abroad, the ones that they are currently building out.
Call me a cynic, but I think if China ever becomes the world hegemon, they will behave as such.
Hm. I mean, thats a really good point. Now you’ve got me thinking about the differences between neocolonialism and hegemony, as well as the difference between the historic imperialism of EU nations, vs the role of the EU; as well as like how the national interests of a formerly imperialist country functions within the imperialism of global capital. Not sure where to start but its a very compelling line.
Re: China as global hegemon, we are all becoming Mearsheimer-ists, aren’t we?
China (PRC) kinda already is - but it’s not supporting rebels.
Its crushing rebels to secure the incumbent government’s assistance to ensure they keep their investment/get to get it all.
- Mining in Myanmar. (Arming and assisting Tatmydaw in the ongoing civil war)
- Ports and crops, and probably gems, in Sri Lanka (Weapons, Intel, training, and possible boots on the ground killing off Tamil Leadership).
- Pakistani marble, ports, (and oil iirc). (with PMCs in Balochistan, and arms sales to Pakistan, plus the anti-India (fuck Modi) alliance).
I assume similar things in bits of Africa, but I’m sadly ignorant of much there. (I’d put money on Chinese support of Ethiopiab government during the ethnic cleansing and nigh on civil war a few years back though).
If you think the US wanted Ukraine in NATO for the good of the Ukrainian people, you’re delusional.
If the Ukrainians had just been included into NATO, the war would have never happened. That’s because the Russians are rational actors and long-term planners, who recognize a long-term disaster of a military conflict when they see one and always play a conservative, largely non-military game when they can.
The Ukrainians, once included into NATO, would immediately become a net asset for the organization thanks to their large and rapidly growing economy. Their top-tier military would add to the common defense. And it wouldn’t be long before they were inducted into the EU, because Western Europeans love Eastern immigrants and transplants crossing into their country en mass.
I think its abundantly clear that including Ukraine into NATO - and eventually the EU - would be a win-win for everyone involved. Even Russia. And the only reason Ukraine wasn’t added to NATO/EU before the war started is… uh… hmm…
Why didn’t Ukraine get admitted before the war started? Anyone remember?
I guess the people running NATO/EU are just stupid.
Bro, I stare at goats for a living; I don’t kill them, I just make them ejaculate. If you don’t get the reference to the movie about how America does counterintelligence like I do for my job I think I do for the aliens, you should watch The Men Who Stare at Goats and become enlightened to the degree of the game being played. Operation Mockingbird was over fifty years ago, people. MKULTRA and Star Gate are the same program.
When people say Russia, do they include their government? Because the Russian government can fuck off alongside any government. I consider myself far left and I refuse to simp for any government or its leaders. Now if we’re talking about the Russian and Chinese working class, I’ll always support them.
So you are not far left, you are an anarchist
I still support worker-lead efforts. I just don’t fold to singular figures or authorities. I’ve watched people excuse abhorrent shit simply because it’s a person they otherwise like.
Au contrare, virtually all anarchists are ultra-left.
If you take them by what they think about themselves, yes. But if you judge based on practical consequences of their ideas, they serve to preserve capitalism by oposing a proletarian state
Hey bud I don’t actually think you can get any further to the left than anarchism.
So two things worth mentioning IMO, one important, the other kinda pedantic but still important from a theory POV:
-
Being the “furthest left” is not always the best tactic, and certainly not a strategy. If being far left means a practical program to unified liberation and resistance to capitalism, that’s great, I’m right there with you. But actual conditions are contradictory and constantly struggling to be the furthest left is sectarian/opportunist and not practical/critical.
-
Capitalism contains anarchist elements, such as anarchy in production. There are right wing anarchists ho want to consolidate power by delegitimizing/eliminating social protections; not liberate the masses to self actualize, but liberate the individual to rob and oppress.
I don’t make these point to attack you or anarchism, I work with anarchists and feel affinity with them, and I think they would agree with me on these points. But in my experience, the point is not to be the furthest left, but to have the best means to determine actual truth and teach others to think critically. In some ways, the left/right paradigm does more harm than good, even if it is useful in other contexts.
-
Anarchism is just disorganization and in the end serves to preserve capitalism because it will opose a proletarian state, the only thing that can bring down the capitalist class.
Incorrect. Anarchism is against unjust hierarchies. It can absolutely be organized.
Ironically, calling anarchism “disorganization” is almost always a result of capitalist/authoritarian propaganda about what anarchism is. Sorry you can’t conceive of a world where people organize themselves without the use of oppressive violence.
“Without a hierarchical authority system of a small group ‘directing’ the large group, the people can’t remain organized!” - every supposed “stateless”, “classless” ML.
Now if we’re talking about the Russian and Chinese working class, I’ll always support them.
There’s literally one question that I ask Russian people that determines if they are worth the support. Just ask them if Crimea should return to Ukraine. That’s it.
Actually… No, don’t do that if you still want to believe in them.
I think “support the working class” doesn’t have to mean “do whatever they say”. We’re all generally propagandized into oblivion. Like, the US working class has been concerned about immigrants and trans women in sports but it’s not pro-worker to go after those things.
Well of course we should support the international proletariat, even the ones heavily propagandized to the right such as in Russia and the US.
Yeah, this can’t be a partisan thing. That’s just feeding into the same nonsense division governments manufacture. It has to cross those aisles and educate folks on the fact that all working class are in the same battle against the same collective ruling class around the world. We’re seeing authoritarian regimes forming around the world and they are working together. We have to do the same.
When people say [country] it’s their government.
When people say [group of people] it’s that group of people.
When people say Russia, do they include their government?
I would think that would be all they are including. regular russian civilians aren’t out there making a lot of propaganda, it’s all either state owned media or right-wing nationalist influencers.
Hell yeah
So what’s your opinion of the US working class?
Support. We’re the most propagandized country in the world and need to free of this tyrannical bullshit.
What qualifiers are there that we’re the most propagandized country in the world? I’m of the opinion that that’s an incredibly hard thing to truly know and quantify.
Yeah, I’d accept “we’re heavily propagandized,” but “most in the world” is quite the claim.
American exceptionalism, of course
Because US propaganda has never been interrupted for 250 years. The regime in control of the USA has been the same regime the whole time, and the propaganda of that regime never went through an overturning. Russia’s propaganda machine started in 1992, because the propaganda machine of the USSR went through a counter-revolution with the dissolution of the USSR and its machinery. The same is true of China, which would only have it’s propaganda machine since 1950.
Additionally, the USA is the inventor and creator of essentially all modern mass media from movies, to television, to the internet. It has the largest and most prolific media production organizations in the entire world, and it has such a robust propaganda system that it has literally been running radio and TV stations for propaganda on every inhabited continent for decades.
It has the time, the means, the capabilities, the money, the power, the history, the staffing, and the motive and it doesn’t have an adversary anywhere near as effective as it is for everyone else.
Also, PR professionals in the US outnumber journalists by more than 6 to 1. And most journalists are enmeshed in the Western propaganda engine, just as they had been in Europe well before the USA even existed.
The US has the largest military and police force in the world, and has had their hand in a multitude of regime changes, top secret experiments, etc. “Most propagandized in the world” might be a stretch, but the propaganda machine that has been manufacturing consent on this scale for years is easily among the worst of them all. Couple that with being in bed with Israel—another heavily propagandized population.
Fascinating to see one comment deeming “most propagandized in the world” a stretch with +8 -0 and another with +3 -4.
orca is not just friend-shaped but comrade-shaped
Greatly appreciate you modeling healthier ways of engaging with leftist political ideology, thank you ❤️
I definitely can’t take full credit, but I appreciate this. My mom was a foster system case worker and bestowed her empathetic ways to me. I also admire people like Patrice Lumumba, Fred Hampton, Parenti and a few other folks. I like to assume most working class folks aren’t approaching a debate or idea with malice. Our brains are so inundated with stuff on the daily; we have opportunities to reduce that load and be respectful.
You’re based.
I truly don’t understand that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” rhetoric that LOT of folks maintain out there just because they hate the US. Like if China or Russia were better places to live. The worst part is that this is what dominant classes want, polarization.
It’s wild because I know the folks saying those things are aware that politicians are not their friends. So I don’t know why they allow themselves to be captured by otherwise problematic beliefs. We don’t apply enough nuance and separation of ideas from people.
No government can wage a war for twelve years against wishes of their own population.
History says you are so, so wrong. Indisputably wrong
Am I? In all those long conflicts the population was at first at least indifferent(Like the US in the Vietnam war or USSR in Afghanistan war) or outright supportive(Like the US in their Afghanistan war) and after the public opinion changed the wars quickly ended. On the other hand the tsar was deposed after less than 3 years of WWI.
How do you explain the US wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan?
The US population elected a president who was promising to end the Afghanistan War in 2008. That war ended in 2021. That’s at least 12 years of war against the wishes of the majority.
How do you explain the US wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan?
The Americans were asking for it. Did you see how they were dressed?
Good question. For most of those years (goes for both wars) they just straight up lied about how bad things were going. Then there’s the propaganda. Holy hell, so much propaganda. Like not saying you’re wrong by asking that question but there are ways of selling unpopular wars.
Added to this, capitalists fucking LOVE wars. And without breaking capitalism all they’re really going to do about the majority coming out against war is say ‘yeah, what the fuck are you gonna do about it then?’
capitalists fucking LOVE wars
Wait, I thought China was capitalist?
How many Chinese billionaires are there again, I forgot
Yeah, that’s the idea! China is capitalist but
capitalists fucking LOVE wars
And China hasn’t fired on a ship since 1988 and hasn’t dropped a bomb in a conflict since 1989.
So is it that capitalists love wars or that China isn’t capitalist? I’m confused
The question itself is ridiculously reductive. Let’s also not forget how China has ongoing border disputes with pretty much every neighbor that occasionally flare up, is expanding its reach in the South China Sea with artificial islands that serve as military outposts, is building up a massive navy and is in the process of modernizing its army.
The .ml explains a lot lol
deleted by creator
Damn, americans must love expensive insulin
Ok? They might, if they wanted they could have adopted one of the European healthcare models a long time ago.
Voting is a sham in the US. whatever the owning class pays for is what we get here. They just propagandize the voters they can control and disenfranchise the rest. Regardless of what percent of the population wants something, the scales only move when the elite tip them. We don’t have a true democracy here.
I’ll support a government in so far as it does something to help the working class, generally that means I’ve only ever supported a government on one issue and told it to fuck off on the rest. I vote as far left as possible and that means I’ve never actually had a government comprised of people I’ve voted for.
Absolutely. Of course the world isn’t black and white, it’s not divided into good guys and bad guys, and there’s degrees to things. If micronesia decides to become highly imperialist, all of a sudden, I’m not going to care as much. If, all of a sudden, China starts invading a bunch of its neighbors, then that’s a huge deal to me!
If one country is responsible for 12 million deaths abroad in its imperial dealings in the past decades, and it has invaded and bombed more countries than I care to list here (I’m not sure if lemmy has a character limit, and spelling all this out is less effort and fewer characters than the actual list of countries), then I’m going to care about that country a whole bunch more than I’m going to care about a country that’s invaded two countries and whose death count abroad doesn’t even hit 7 digits.
Anyway my point is pick your battles, and focussing on China over America is really missing the mark. If you go by the actual numbers on imperialism, you are focussing on a country that is literal orders of magnitudes less bad. Complete waste of time.
If one country is responsible for 12 million deaths abroad in its imperial dealings in the past decades
Do you have any sort of source for that? I can find 4.5-4.6 million for the war on terror and that is being very very loose with the term US imperialism has caused(like includes indirect deaths and includes deaths caused by all sides in pretty much every conflict you could consider part of the war on terror)
We don’t even need to look at war, the death toll from the USA’s bipartisan consensus on collective punishment via brutal economic sanctions is 40M people over the last 50 years. Without firing a single shot. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(25)00189-5/fulltext
15 - 45 million deaths over a 2 year period but the U.S. is evil for economic sanctions resulting in 40 million deaths over 50 years.
The U.S. could cut ties with every nation on Earth and you people would still be blaming us for deaths on the other side of the globe.
What way are you reading the meme because the government and mainstream media are incredibly hostile towards Russia and China.
Instead of trusting US imperialism, like a simp, they’re sucking straight from the teat of Russian imperialism instead, like a Chad. Is the meme. How are you reading it?
Maga has been on a IV drip from known Russian assets for a minute
Americans will ingest American Propaganda from an American billionaire backed by American industry in pursuit of American foreign policy and get called “Dupes of an Evil Foreign Insurgency” by their next-door neighbors who have been ingesting slightly different American Propaganda.
Don’t be so hasty!
We love propaganda from ANY source so long as it gives us that sweet xenophobic dopamine hit!
One of the bigger jokes of the whole “Russian Propaganda!” line has been how much modern Russian Propaganda is coming out of the same far-right white nationalist clearinghouses as the OG American shit. FFS, we’ve had everyone from Steve Bannon to Ross Douthet to Rod Dreher piling into Eastern Europe to saturate their media with the most dumb-baby US-grade bullshit. And then it’s come right back around again, like the distant echo of a particularly wet fart.
What people scream about from back in 2016, or the Tim Poole shit as recently as 2024, is perfectly interchangeable with your standard issue Rush Limbaugh / Ben Shapiro western chauvinism going back to the 1960s.
You’re right. Putin’s definitely not in bed with multiple us presidents and probably never actually killed anyone. Not the smol ex-KGBean, wtf are you talking about?
Putin’s definitely not in bed with multiple us presidents
Why do I get an earful about Putin every five minutes, but not one word about Robert Mercer or Ann Getty?
FFS, Mohammad bin Salmon and Benjamin Netanyahu have better claim to being “in bed” with the last half-dozen Presidents. We don’t have a line of videos of US presidents bowing in front of a Russian President or abasing themselves in front of Saint Basil’s Cathedral.
Probably because you jumped up to defend the motherland from the really mildest criticism but that’s your life not mine chief.
I’m not really here to shill for any of those wholesome chunguses but Dubya had some amazing stuff to say about the guy if you want to play waddabouts. Or maybe we could just act cool any time someone says something shitty about a government? Maybe it’s not all a psyop some of the time?
¯\_ (ツ) _/¯
Dubya had some amazing stuff to say about the guy if you want to play waddabouts.
Much like Reagan and Saddam Hussein. They were friends until they weren’t
The character depicted at the bottom isn’t the government or mainstream media, it’s the “independent thinker”
Social media is today’s mass/mainstream media. Capitalist imperialists own both that and the traditional channels. They decide the message in both. Being hostile “officially” and contradicting that algorithmically is a choice
I’m not sure how many MAGA people you know but most of them were running defense for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, essentially saying they should just give up and never should’ve been considered for nato. All of that is proven to be Russian propaganda + the election of Trump was helped massively by Russian bots convincing maga voters.
The enemy of my enemy isn’t necessarily my friend, they just happen to be aligned with me in that one, single, specific enimity.
It takes a lot more to be somebody one can trust than merely sharing a single dislike.
As I read it, that meme represents people who don’t actually think like this and instead whilst claiming to be skeptics blindly accept whatever they’re told by those who voice dislike of one or two of the same things they do (for example, American Imperialism).
Let’s face it, Russian propaganda is a symptom. Trump style Republicans are the cause (Russia spends big on opportunities they provide).
…and one could argue establishment Democrat complicity is what enabled Trump style hard right populism.
The world isn’t America. Your current crop of republicans are only a symptom of the global push of the alt-right.
I’m not American, but I can at least recognize their cultural Hegemony in the western world.
“We can talk about socialized healthcare and the evils of capitalism all day, but before we go any further I need you to pass this two-factor authentication by criticizing China and Russia.”
This comment is so real it hurts.
I just had someone trying to convince me that Russia can’t be imperialist because they oppose the US, an imperialist nation.
… that’s not the definition of “imperialist,” my dear tankie.
Not sure if linking it so others can laugh/cry is “brigading” worthy of getting me banned off of various Lemmy communities/instances or not.
irredentism doesn’t make a country imperialist
I needed a good laugh.
It’s more or less exactly the content of this post here. Literal Russian propaganda, I’m sure. Couldn’t confirm 100% because I don’t waste my precious time checking what Russia has to say about their invasion, but I’m sure the term/topic of “irredentism” comes up and never “invasion” or “genocide.”
Couldn’t confirm 100% because I don’t waste my precious time checking what Russia has to say about their invasion, but I’m sure the term/topic of “irredentism” comes up and never “invasion” or “genocide.”
Irredentism is a negative word, nobody would use it in their own propaganda to describe their own actions. Furthermore, the user you were talking to clearly and explicitly condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine:
i do not support the russian invasion of ukraine btw.
You seem to have misunderstood what they were saying, and the idea that they’re spouting “literal Russian propaganda” while explicitly condemning the invasion, and labelling it an invasion, is completely absurd.
I guess that’s why you felt the need to pretend they didn’t label it as an invasion. I do wish y’all would practice a slightly higher degree of intellectual honesty though.
Never heard the word “irredentism” before, looked it up. It’s literally fascist logic. Do tankies seriously not realize that the logical endpoint of irredentism is a world made up exclusively of ethnostates?
If you actually read what the person was saying, they said:
i do not support the russian invasion of ukraine btw.
that being said, irredentism is still awful. i’m ideologically against all forms of killing, and that includes the russian attack on ukraine. just so we’re clear here, this is just about definitions, i’m not trying to argue that russia attacking its neighbors is good in any way.
Marxists tend to use a specific definition of imperialism, and that user’s position is that while Russia does engage in irredentism (bad), like invading Ukraine, they do not fit the Marxist definition of imperialism (which is more concerned with resource extraction on a global scale). This Marxist definition goes back at least to Lenin, so it isn’t something that they just made up (as they were accused of in the thread), but the common meaning today is different.
This is being misinterpreted or distorted here into, “Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is fine because it’s irredentism” which was very clearly not what they were saying. What they were saying is that irredentism is bad (including the war in Ukraine), but that it is a distinct thing from imperialism.
If they’re going with a niche definition rather than the common definitions everyone uses, they should have stated that to prevent the confusion and argument that it seeded, as I said further down in the argument.
I actually agree with you on that. However, “being too prone to using Marxist definitions and terminology” does not warrant labelling them as a “tankie” or “Russian propagandist.”
It’s this sort of thing that makes me see every accusation of “tankie” as a complete joke. If you can literally say, word for word, “I do not support the Russian invasion of Ukraine” and still get called a tankie and Russian propagandist, then those words have no meaning, aside from, “You disagreed with a liberal about literally anything.”
Did their condemnation of Russia not give you a moment’s pause before dismissing them as a Russian propagandist and misrepresenting their positions to others afterwards? It seems like you just recognized that they’re not part of your political in-group so you ignore everything and jump straight to labelling them a fascist. Yes, they communicated in a way that’s somewhat confusing, but you’re much more at fault for jumping to those unwarranted accusations.
I actually agree with you on that. However, “being too prone to using Marxist definitions and terminology” does not warrant labelling them as a “tankie” or “Russian propagandist.”
That’s not what I was asserting, no.
The rest of your comment soapboxes on that straw man so I’ll not respond to it.
Even if we take the assertion that they are doing apologia for Russia as true; the accusation of ‘tankie’ is strange. As if people who identify as communist have never heard of the fall of the USSR.
Maybe it would make sense when defending China in some contemporary contexts, but Russia?
It all reminds me of how George Bush used the term terrorism. Anyone who thought we need a different approach to respond to 9/11 than GWB was ‘letting the terrorist win’. Now anyone who thinks we need to find a different approach other than throwing the military industrial complex at the war in Ukraine is a tankie.
Do these same people think the war in Iran would be better if China got involved. Of course not, that would be insane. But change China to US and Iran to Ukraine and all of a sudden they support it.
The point is to have more skepticism toward all militarism; that’s not to say militarism is never justified. But NATO was literally built to contain the USSR, it worked on some level, the USSR fell. Russia’s militarism toward Ukraine is completely unjustified, but their complaint about still being contained NATO is valid. They subjected their people to a ton of economic hardship in the 90s to appease the west. But we can’t disband or renegotiate NATO because too many people benefit from it staying how it is.
The answer to the Ukraine war was to bring Russia into the western block on more equal terms 30 years ago. Now the situation is fucked, it gets more dangerous to more people every day it goes on.
They’re still doing apologia by playing with definitions to argue that not only is Russia not imperialist, but they’re anti-imperialist. Stating that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is irredentist and not imperialist carries the assumption that Russia’s officially stated reasons for invading Ukraine are truthful when they are clearly not. Russia wants Ukrainian territory not because it’s populated by ethnic Russians, but because they want to exploit the natural resources contained therein. Irredentism is the justification for imperialism, they are not mutually exclusive.
Russia wants
It’s inherently difficult and subjective to speculate about motivations, and doubly so when talking about a country with multiple groups with their own motivations. Of course, in any conflict, enemy countries will be assigned the worst motivations possible, which is why virtually every conflict draws comparisons to Nazis, and the idea that the enemy will just keep attacking forever if they are not defeated. This was said about Vietnam (Domino Theory) and Afghanistan (“if we don’t fight them there, we’ll be fighting them here”). Those examples show that motivations assigned to enemy countries are often inaccurate.
I don’t think it should be considered “apologia” to express reasonable skepticism that the motivations of a rival country aren’t what some people speculate. Especially when they’re still assigning a negative motivation to said country, just a different negative motivation than the one you assign. That’s kind of a ridiculous degree of purity testing, “It’s not enough to condemn Russia, you have to agree with my exact assessment of their motivations, otherwise you’re doing apologia by condemning them in the wrong way.”
As they said, they condemn both Russia’s invasion and irredentism in general, so my main point was to correct your misunderstanding, when you asked if “tankies” don’t realize that irredentism leads to negative results.
Trying to divine Russia’s True Motivations for invading Ukraine is a total Red Herring side show distraction in the context of this discussion.
The problem we’re discussing is that tankies employ definitions gymnastics to escape giving traditionally capitalist negative labels to their beloved authoritarian dictatorships, like “imperialist” and “tyrant.”
“Russia is not imperialist because they only invade for irredentist reasons” and “Russia is not imperialist because they oppose imperialist nations” are both half-cooked, dumb assertions.
It doesn’t matter if Russia invades other countries and takes their resources because they think the Bible says they should, because there are people with similar genetics in neighboring countries, or because Putin is bored; it’s still imperialist.
Imagine if someone said the USA is not imperialist because they’re only bombing Iran to fulfill a biblical prophesy, so they’re actually just theocratic. That’s obviously a ridiculous thing to say and you wouldn’t jump in to defend them because you’re biased to defend tankies but not western capitalists.
"employing both hard power and soft power”. russia only uses military might (hard power)
What a mind-bogglingly stupid thing to say
“We can talk about socialized healthcare and the evils of capitalism all day, but before we go any further I need you to pass this two-factor recognizing that the US’s military/prison industrial complex has done more harm to the world since WWII than China Russia and Iran.”
Yes actually
deleted by creator
Ah yes, let’s complain when people post factual memes about countries that both commit genocide, and are both heavily invested in destabilizing western governments
I take it you’re one of those “free” thinkers too?
How hard is it to recognize that, yes, the US is fucking evil, yes, always has been, but that the exact same goes for Russia and China? Ooohh, what a concept, multiple parties being evil? *brain explodes
The concept of having more then two parties does indeed stupify the liberal mind.
For the haters, the limit is one.
There will be no third party. The bank rolled two party system needs two bags of dildos and they will stop at nothing to crush any change from the bottom. The third party will be split between two optically moderates from both parties as plants. The stank yanks got amnesia… talking out both sides of the mouth unable to balance their contradictions. It is agonizing to watch since I share their inheritance.
I can’t tell if this is directed at me or a hypothetical conversation with a tankie.
I’m 90% sure they’re directing it at a hypothetical tankie.
deleted by creator
Why can’t Americans just admit that their country suck and leave it at that?
It’s a good question. Because our land is beautiful and a lot of us are working to keep it that way. Because we still see lots of people trying to come here for a better life. There are much fewer now, and a lot of us have deep shame for what the asshole in power has done to their communities. Despite appearances, a lot of us respect and admire them for taking the hard, unwanted jobs that nevertheless still need to get done. We still believe in what the Statue of Liberty stands for despite anything the asshole tries to do to it. Yes, we functionally conquered the world when we became the sole superpower after the Soviet Union fell apart. But we also led the world with science, inventions, entertainment, and aid. That’s lost now, and a lot of us deeply resent everyone who had a hand in ruining that.
We are still working to make ourselves better.
deleted by creator
I didn’t downvote you. I think the answer to that is that all humans everywhere, Americans included, want to immediately jump to whatabboutism to save face.
Yes, we functionally conquered the world when we became the sole superpower after the Soviet Union fell apart. But we also led the world with science, inventions, entertainment, and aid. That’s lost now, and a lot of us deeply resent everyone who had a hand in ruining that.
Oh. So it’s because you haven’t studied history. Got it.
Read your words. You are trying to reclaim a lost position of “goodness” for the USA, that was lost through the bad actions of bad people. You are trying to reclaim the position of helping the world, being a beautiful country that respects others and is welcoming.
We call that “Blue MAGA”. You’re imagining a time before the Rs fucked everything up and trying to move “forward” to reclaim the position of “good”.
The USA was never good. Not only did FDR put anyone vaguely asian looking into concentration camps, the administration stole all of their commercial property and wealth. Not only that, but the FDR administration established the entirety of racial redlining. The USA has been at war for >90% of its existence, and half of the years it wasn’t at war, it was engaged in the massive chattel slavery and maintenance of the genocide of indigenous peoples. The USA wasn’t taken over by racist pedophilic raping oligarchs, it was founded by them. Trump doesn’t hold a candle to the evils of Thomas Jefferson and George Washington.
As long as you believe in some mythical past where the USA was a net good for the world, you will never be able to understand why the rest of the world wants to see your country destroyed and dismantled.
Anything’s possible when you make shit up
“Have you condemned Hamas today?”
but that’s not even what this post is suggesting we do. It’s just recognizing that China and Russia are also imperialist states, so we should be mindfull of where the information we consume comes from, since they’re all shoving propaganda down our throats and pitting us against one another, for their own imperialist intentions.
Exactly. I’ll never understand why certian leftists hold them up as examples to be followed instead of countries like Sweeden or Norway where every quality of life indicator is undeniably better.
If you want an actual answer, it’s because Sweden and Norway continue to participate in imperialism by propping up their economies through exploitation of the global south.
These are capitalist countries, social democracies, not socialist countries. The underlying contradictions that lead to problems under capitalism have not been resolved, so the problems inherent to capitalism persist. The only reason they seem better at this time is because of the exploitation of foreign workers and their participation in the financial models exploiting the global south.
It’s clear that the Nordic model of social democracy is unsustainable (because it’s just capitalism with more social reforms) and has slowly been eroding since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. This unsustainability is also clearly recognized and discussed openly within those countries, which is why they explicitly state that the solutions are austerity or the exploration of foreigners.
So your objection with the nordic form of socialism is that it’s too close to/integrated wtih capitalism?
You know China and Russia do all of these things as well, plus the oppression of thier own people. China is defacto capitalist. Russia is all the way capitalist. Both are essentially oligarchies/dictatorships. Both also exploit developing countries in the global south, both have imperial ambitions on surrounding countries, one of them is even actively in an imperialst war. But leftists support them because they’re “socialist?”
Do you understand these countries are not worth your support? Especially if your motive is to oppose the oppression of exploited peoples.It’s not that Norway and Sweden are “too integrated with capitalism” while being socialistic (or I would argue China is capitalist) but that these countries are explicitly not socialist at all. These are capitalist countries with social welfare programs and will therefore continue to suffer from the failures of the capitalist mode of production regardless of how many social welfare programs are introduced. Social welfare programs are not socialism. Capitalist and socialist countries both utilize social welfare programs. Capitalism and socialism are modes of organizing production and can be differentiated by exploring the following questions:
-
Which class owns and controls the means of production and how the economy is organized? (Alternatively, who is the dictator? Until we are all in the same class, there will always be a dictatorship and oppressed people.) The workers and their parties = socialism, the financiers/owners and their parties = capitalism. There can be exceptions within a system, but one will be strongly favored.
-
Is production aimed at profit or meeting human needs? Often has a messy answer, but profit will usually be favored under capitalism and usually at the expense of workers and their needs.
-
Is the economy planned at a large scale or is it directed by the profit-seeking whims of the market? Socialist economies are centrally planned at a large scale and while corporations often use central planning, this is across companies, not entire industries. Capitalist economies are driven by the needs and desires of corporations rather than planned for the good of the country as a whole.
-
Are key industries collectivized? In capitalism, they tend to be owned by individuals, in socialism, they tend to be nationalized or otherwise collectivized, though exceptions exist under both systems.
Norway, Sweden, and Russia all check the capitalist boxes. China checks the socialist boxes, but yes, oppression, inequality, and exploitation still exist as it is transitioning from capitalism to communism and the underlying class contradictions and subsequent conflict has not been resolved. They run a partially mixed economy because capitalist organization can be beneficial to building up industrial forces. You’ll also notice that they nationalize large and key industries before they became monopolies to prevent capital from holding parts of the economy hostage (as is often done in actual capitalist countries) and are shifting away from capitalist organization as a whole. It was a tool to modernize and does not make them defacto capitalist because capitalists never held political power.
I would never hold either Russia nor China up as some shining example of perfect countries. Russia is not socialist in any way and no socialist argues that they are. They happen to be be in a position that is directly opposed to US/Western imperialism right now, but not by choice. They hold this spot because the West forced them into it.
This is what socialists are arguing Russia is doing, not that they are a shining example of a socialist society that should be emulated. Socialists do not like Putin, but they do seek to understand him. To argue that socialists hold Russia up as a model country is to argue against a straw man.
I do argue that China is a socialist country despite their mixed economic system. Political control of the country resides in the hands of the communist party and the key industrial sectors and land is owned by the state rather than existing as private property. Again, I do not argue they are perfect. My argument is that they are a socialist project working towards communism and that undertaking such a change is a long and messy path that takes more than the 80 or so years the communist party has been in power. I think they genuinely aspire to accomplish the goals they say they are pursuing, but the road to liberation is messy and they definitely have made mistakes. To expect perfection at each individual moment along the path of change is unreasonable. Likewise, it’s not my country. I can learn from them and implement what I think works well in my own country. The Chinese people can direct their country as they see fit. Socialist projects are unique to their societies everywhere they spring up and no two will look the same.
I meant both this and the first comment to help explain these stances in good faith, but I get the feeling the first might not have been taken that way? I’ll leave any discussion of the topic here because the China one is deeper than I want to get into in an online thread. If you truly want to understand why socialists take these stances, I recommend you research socialist theory directly including the topic of imperialism as defined by Lenin and have some deep conversations with people who hold these views.
I hope this better explains not just why we argue what we do but what it is we are actually arguing for.
You know I was going to write this big huge thing, but after reading your last paragraph I see you don’t want to take it further. But thanks, you have confirmed for me that the only reason some leftists support China and Russia is because these countries are supposed to be socialist, and not because of any measurable quality of life standards such as wealth, life expectancy, education, freedom of the press, political representation, and so on.
In real life, Russia and China are defacto capitalist oligarchies. I think I’ll never support the corruption and oppression such governments propogate to uphold an ideology.
I mean, respectfully, it’s tiring writing out so much on a phone screen. I think the discussions are important, but it’s the wrong format to have a long-form discussion, you know?
I hope you didn’t find my tone dismissive even though we disagree. It wasn’t meant to be. If your take-away was that I’m being dogmatic and make choices purely on ideological lines, I don’t think writing up paragraphs of text turned out to be a very effective at communicating what I wanted to say.
These discussions are better held in person because it’s difficult to capture nuance in writing without being long-winded.
-
Bedrock based
I’m so confused. Does dude think the hegemon wants the best for all people? That is unbalance towards a big evil nation better than a bunch of them checking each other? I’m seeing a liberal in anarchist clothes than a Marxist doing analysis of the material conditions. A kid that never saw the USSR pushing global solidarity while its interests not always benign, etc. Tell me how Libya, Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan are now you bozo.
