Imagine how many Ukrainian lives would have been spared if they had kept their word with the Minsk agreements and didn't shell civilians in Donbass. Ignoring that, imagine how many Ukrainian lives would have been spared if they (or lets be real, their Nato handlers) actually sat down and tried to hammer out a peace instead of prolong a lost war at the expense of every last ukrainian life. Of course if you have the russia is ebil psycho genocidal pootin state brainworms then the geopolitics and all material conditions can be ignored and you can keep living in your hyper-propagandized liberal fantasy world.
You can live in your little fantasy with that cute little excuse for a full scale invasion, hundreds of war crimes, thousands dead and millions of people displaced, but we all know that's a load of bs.
We all know who was in dombas and how many people were shelled.
Hammer out a deal with Putin hahaha ha. You got to be joking. You mean a new one, not like any of the previous ones he doesn't care about?
You have 0 arguments.
You are a pathetic, war crime apologist. Disgusting.
I didn't write the following, but I think it is an excellent summary as to why it should be the position of Marxists and leftists in general to critically support Russia specifically with respect to the SMO. It was a response to someone saying they just didn't like the war in general and that it's just one capitalist state fighting a proxy war against another, similar to what you're saying. While it's understandable to feel that way, it is not materialist and it is failing to see the bigger picture. At the very least, I just think it's something you might consider. The person who wrote that response is @SimulatedLiberalism@hexbear.net and I hope they don't mind that I am quoting them here (if so, I'll delete).
Edit: I'm putting it below a spoiler tag because it is longish and a little OT. Sorry about that, I'm tired.
spoiler
and this struggle is between two capitalist empires which both want to do more capitalism, so there's no benefit to either side winning
I keep seeing this take cropping up in online Western leftist circle and to be very honest, I always consider this to be the laziest takes on war for people claiming to be on the left.
This is no different than saying that there is no difference for the left when it comes to whether the North or the South wins in the American Civil War because neither of them was socialist. Well, would it surprise you that Marx wrote an entire collection of essays just on analyzing the American Civil War?
For a Marxist clarifying the nature of the war is a necessary preliminary for deciding the question of his attitude to it. But for such a clarification it is essential, first and foremost, to establish the objective conditions and concrete circumstances of the war in question. It is necessary to consider the war in the historical environment in which it is taking place, only then can one determine one’s attitude to it. Otherwise, the resulting interpretation will be not materialist but eclectic.
Depending on the historical circumstances, the relationship of classes, etc., the attitude to war must be different at different times. It is absurd once and for all to renounce participation in war in principle. On the other hand, it is also absurd to divide wars into defensive and aggressive. In 1848, Marx hated Russia, because at that time democracy in Germany could not win out and develop, or unite the country into a single national whole, so long as the reactionary hand of backward Russia hung heavy over her.
In order to clarify one’s attitude to the present war, one must understand how it differs from previous wars, and what its peculiar features are.
We can write entire essays about the war in Ukraine, and it is anything but “a war between American and Russian capitalists”.
For one, if this is about Russia expanding its capital, why is the Russian Central Bank doing everything it can (including rate hikes and devaluing the ruble) to undermine Putin’s effort to achieve economic self-sufficiency in the face of unprecedented sanctions, and directly aiding the Western imperialist cause? If anything, it is stifling the expansion of Russian capital.
Such narrative crumbles at the slightest inspection of what is actually going on within the Russian political and economic structures, and points to a more fundamental division that Michael Hudson had pointed out regarding the conflict between finance vs industrial capitalism.
And we’re not even getting to the wider geopolitical implications of the war in Ukraine yet - what does it mean for Western imperialism? The anti-colonial struggles of the Global South? The effects on global financial institutions (IMF, World Bank, WTO) and the efforts to decouple from such oppressive structures (which is what de-dollarization is all about).
We have to ask ourselves, what would a fascist victory in Ukraine mean for left wing movements in Eastern Europe? What could the total subjugation of Russia - a country that has large scale military equipments, raw resources and minerals, and agricultural products - to Western capital mean for the anti-colonial movements in the Global South?
Leftists who refuse to apply a materialist and historical method to understand the world’s events will inevitably fail to see the underlying currents of the global state of events, and as such they cannot predict where the world is heading and will not be able to position themselves to take advantage of the impending crisis.
After all, it was WWI that resulted in an explosion of socialist movements within the imperialist European states, why? Because the socialists back then actually combined theory and practice (what Gramsci referred to as praxis) to take advantage of the predicament.
You have fully retreated into your liberal subject mind palace and there is absolutely zero point in interacting with you, nor was there ever to be frank
It's a shame we don't have the "wojack playing chess with his own brain while sitting on it like a giant chair, and also, the opponent is somehow his brain" emoji
You can live in your little fantasy with that cute little excuse for a full scale invasion, hundreds of war crimes, thousands dead and millions of people displaced, but we all know that's a load of bs.
It’s like we’re saying the same thing, only you’re on the wrong side of history
You can live in your little fantasy with that cute little excuse
We have reached the shallow "I'm rubber you're glue" portion of debating with a liberal. Having no concrete grounding in knowledge of on-the-ground conditions or a political framework by which to understand the forces at hand, the "debater" actually escalates when challenged. Rather than becoming informed or reading a book or dealing with the points made directly, they engage in a thin pantomime of the rhetoric flung their way.
This is defensive behavior and what a poor handling of cognitive dissonance looks like. We've all been there, but you can choose to move on from this period in your life by just being honest with yourself. A good first step is to disengage when you don't know something - at least until you gain the knowledge or the alibility to gauge and admit when you don't know something.
There are many things I don't know, but I have a much nicer time in political discussions because I don't dig a hole for myself by blathering on about it and escalating when cornered.
You can live in your little fantasy with that cute little excuse for a full scale invasion, hundreds of war crimes, thousands dead and millions of people displaced, but we all know that's a load of bs.
Imagine how many Ukrainian lives would have been spared if they had kept their word with the Minsk agreements and didn't shell civilians in Donbass. Ignoring that, imagine how many Ukrainian lives would have been spared if they (or lets be real, their Nato handlers) actually sat down and tried to hammer out a peace instead of prolong a lost war at the expense of every last ukrainian life. Of course if you have the russia is ebil psycho genocidal pootin state brainworms then the geopolitics and all material conditions can be ignored and you can keep living in your hyper-propagandized liberal fantasy world.
You can live in your little fantasy with that cute little excuse for a full scale invasion, hundreds of war crimes, thousands dead and millions of people displaced, but we all know that's a load of bs.
We all know who was in dombas and how many people were shelled.
Hammer out a deal with Putin hahaha ha. You got to be joking. You mean a new one, not like any of the previous ones he doesn't care about?
You have 0 arguments. You are a pathetic, war crime apologist. Disgusting.
Zero facts, zero sources. Head empty, vibes and propaganda only![blob-no-thoughts blob-no-thoughts](https://www.hexbear.net/pictrs/image/1ef20b55-8fcc-4ed6-8fa2-57d4faa6b6a6.png)
deleted by creator
Ah, the good ol aboutism, it was strange that it took so long.
14.000. That's all you know? Maybe read more about this figure and come back then.
🐖 💩 🏀 🏀
lol, they didn't even know it's called "whataboutism." smh. Must be a new recruit.
Shit, they came up with a different name for being shameless hypocrites I guess that makes it fine.
Dammit the UVF made a cute name for what we say, guess those pogroms in Derry are ok now
Didnt the US back a coup in Ukraine back in the early 2010s?
I dont support Russiia, its just another failled capitalist state but I really do not support the imperialistic antagonism of the US.
Also you cant just post "stupid commie learn more" while not citing or demonstrating that you know anything more yourself.
Inb4 the lib says that was a popular revolution for muh freedumbs and muh dumbocracy.
I didn't write the following, but I think it is an excellent summary as to why it should be the position of Marxists and leftists in general to critically support Russia specifically with respect to the SMO. It was a response to someone saying they just didn't like the war in general and that it's just one capitalist state fighting a proxy war against another, similar to what you're saying. While it's understandable to feel that way, it is not materialist and it is failing to see the bigger picture. At the very least, I just think it's something you might consider. The person who wrote that response is @SimulatedLiberalism@hexbear.net and I hope they don't mind that I am quoting them here (if so, I'll delete).
Edit: I'm putting it below a spoiler tag because it is longish and a little OT. Sorry about that, I'm tired.
spoiler
I keep seeing this take cropping up in online Western leftist circle and to be very honest, I always consider this to be the laziest takes on war for people claiming to be on the left.
This is no different than saying that there is no difference for the left when it comes to whether the North or the South wins in the American Civil War because neither of them was socialist. Well, would it surprise you that Marx wrote an entire collection of essays just on analyzing the American Civil War?
To quote Lenin from his Lecture on “The Proletariat and the War”, October 1 (14), 1914:
We can write entire essays about the war in Ukraine, and it is anything but “a war between American and Russian capitalists”.
For one, if this is about Russia expanding its capital, why is the Russian Central Bank doing everything it can (including rate hikes and devaluing the ruble) to undermine Putin’s effort to achieve economic self-sufficiency in the face of unprecedented sanctions, and directly aiding the Western imperialist cause? If anything, it is stifling the expansion of Russian capital.
Such narrative crumbles at the slightest inspection of what is actually going on within the Russian political and economic structures, and points to a more fundamental division that Michael Hudson had pointed out regarding the conflict between finance vs industrial capitalism.
And we’re not even getting to the wider geopolitical implications of the war in Ukraine yet - what does it mean for Western imperialism? The anti-colonial struggles of the Global South? The effects on global financial institutions (IMF, World Bank, WTO) and the efforts to decouple from such oppressive structures (which is what de-dollarization is all about).
We have to ask ourselves, what would a fascist victory in Ukraine mean for left wing movements in Eastern Europe? What could the total subjugation of Russia - a country that has large scale military equipments, raw resources and minerals, and agricultural products - to Western capital mean for the anti-colonial movements in the Global South?
Leftists who refuse to apply a materialist and historical method to understand the world’s events will inevitably fail to see the underlying currents of the global state of events, and as such they cannot predict where the world is heading and will not be able to position themselves to take advantage of the impending crisis.
After all, it was WWI that resulted in an explosion of socialist movements within the imperialist European states, why? Because the socialists back then actually combined theory and practice (what Gramsci referred to as praxis) to take advantage of the predicament.
GOOD post
deleted by creator
Whataboutism? What about deez nuts?
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
How do bots like this get made without falling into the Droste Effect
deleted by creator
It uses an advanced technique called an "if statement"
You asked for context, we gave you context, you cried "whataboutism". What a pathetic creature.
Just know that the entire rest of the world is against you and the entire rest of the world will win.
You have fully retreated into your liberal subject mind palace and there is absolutely zero point in interacting with you, nor was there ever to be frank
It's a shame we don't have the "wojack playing chess with his own brain while sitting on it like a giant chair, and also, the opponent is somehow his brain" emoji
It’s like we’re saying the same thing, only you’re on the wrong side of history![thinking-about-it thinking-about-it](https://www.hexbear.net/pictrs/image/e2f95486-0fe2-4d5b-8070-19e21bbc984e.png)
deleted by creator
We have reached the shallow "I'm rubber you're glue" portion of debating with a liberal. Having no concrete grounding in knowledge of on-the-ground conditions or a political framework by which to understand the forces at hand, the "debater" actually escalates when challenged. Rather than becoming informed or reading a book or dealing with the points made directly, they engage in a thin pantomime of the rhetoric flung their way.
This is defensive behavior and what a poor handling of cognitive dissonance looks like. We've all been there, but you can choose to move on from this period in your life by just being honest with yourself. A good first step is to disengage when you don't know something - at least until you gain the knowledge or the alibility to gauge and admit when you don't know something.
There are many things I don't know, but I have a much nicer time in political discussions because I don't dig a hole for myself by blathering on about it and escalating when cornered.
Wait how did Iraq come into this?
Pick up a gun. Go to Ukraine and fight, you fucking coward. No one will miss you when you die for nothing.