Settler talk that ignores the intersectionalities necessary for you to have your 'class war'. While you may not be wrong about innocent blood being shed, "no war but class war" is honestly just as bad to me as right-winger anti-Black dogwhistling because it says to me that the settlers and their descendants can never be put in a position of actually having to pay for all they've done. Can never be made to feel uncomfy, can never have support withheld from them due to a historically-earned lack of trust. This is not the way.
I didnt imply anything like that, and am from a colony.
The thing here is that Russia is not the soviet union anymore. Its a proto-fascist dictatorship, fighting another proto-fascist nation for their resources.
I also understand we are better off in the long run if the US loses. But we are talking about comple innocents here, we would be much better off without this war in the first place.
If Russia is that then so is every single western "liberal democracy". With the crucial difference that Russia is not a part of the imperial core, it is a semi-peripheral country and at the moment one of the main antagonists of the empire.
And while the Russian Federation is indeed a bourgeois regime, it would be un-marxist to look at the country in isolation and to close one's eyes to its position in the context of the larger global conflict between the imperial core and the periphery (or what could be called the global class struggle).
It is a fact that Russia, with its numerous internal contradictions that we as Marxists are acutely aware of, plays a pivotal role in the new multipolar world that is taking shape. They continue (if not to the same degree as their Soviet predecessors) to be involved in aiding anti-colonial struggles and helping global south countries that have found themselves in the crosshairs of the empire to defend themselves: from Syria and Iran to Mali and Burkina Faso, and even Venezuela and Nicaragua.
It is not only incorrect, it is downright lazy to blindly parrot the liberal line about Russia being a "proto-fascist dictatorship". This "neither Moscow nor Washington" type of fencesitting is not helpful and not appropriate to the current phase of global struggle that we find ourselves in.
I understand all of the things you said, but this isn't a colony fighting for its freedom. Its an empire spazzing out over resources and dare I say it here, their own greed too. Russia oppresses its citizens regardless of how we define the terminology to explain it.
As stated before I understand that a war that weakens the empire is a good thing to me, I also understand no war would be way better. Unless its a war for liberation (as in actual class war), which this is very clearly not.
it's not "stooping" to remark that racist favoritist hypocrites are racist and favoritist (which is what the OP is doing)
No war but class war. And this aint a class war, its just innocent people being killed on both sides.
Settler talk that ignores the intersectionalities necessary for you to have your 'class war'. While you may not be wrong about innocent blood being shed, "no war but class war" is honestly just as bad to me as right-winger anti-Black dogwhistling because it says to me that the settlers and their descendants can never be put in a position of actually having to pay for all they've done. Can never be made to feel uncomfy, can never have support withheld from them due to a historically-earned lack of trust. This is not the way.
I didnt imply anything like that, and am from a colony.
The thing here is that Russia is not the soviet union anymore. Its a proto-fascist dictatorship, fighting another proto-fascist nation for their resources.
I also understand we are better off in the long run if the US loses. But we are talking about comple innocents here, we would be much better off without this war in the first place.
If Russia is that then so is every single western "liberal democracy". With the crucial difference that Russia is not a part of the imperial core, it is a semi-peripheral country and at the moment one of the main antagonists of the empire.
And while the Russian Federation is indeed a bourgeois regime, it would be un-marxist to look at the country in isolation and to close one's eyes to its position in the context of the larger global conflict between the imperial core and the periphery (or what could be called the global class struggle).
It is a fact that Russia, with its numerous internal contradictions that we as Marxists are acutely aware of, plays a pivotal role in the new multipolar world that is taking shape. They continue (if not to the same degree as their Soviet predecessors) to be involved in aiding anti-colonial struggles and helping global south countries that have found themselves in the crosshairs of the empire to defend themselves: from Syria and Iran to Mali and Burkina Faso, and even Venezuela and Nicaragua.
It is not only incorrect, it is downright lazy to blindly parrot the liberal line about Russia being a "proto-fascist dictatorship". This "neither Moscow nor Washington" type of fencesitting is not helpful and not appropriate to the current phase of global struggle that we find ourselves in.
I understand all of the things you said, but this isn't a colony fighting for its freedom. Its an empire spazzing out over resources and dare I say it here, their own greed too. Russia oppresses its citizens regardless of how we define the terminology to explain it.
As stated before I understand that a war that weakens the empire is a good thing to me, I also understand no war would be way better. Unless its a war for liberation (as in actual class war), which this is very clearly not.
For the Donbass this has been a war of national liberation since 2014.
how so?