Do you really think that we're the kingmakers, that we exercise any measurable sort of damper on imperialist policies, with less than a percent of the population voicing their public opinion?
Putin has been in power for 20 years. I don't think he's come close to losing it even once. So I don't believe that there is "a delicate balance of power", or that aggregate decisions of Western leftists (or even leftists in Russia) to critically support or reject him would have any bearing on whether he stays in power or not.
We're not kingmakers but anti-imperialist efforts are not worthless.
Putin has been in power for 20 years. I don’t think he’s come close to losing it even once. So I don’t believe that there is “a delicate balance of power”, or that aggregate decisions of Western leftists (or even leftists in Russia) to critically support or reject him would have any bearing on whether he stays in power or not.
Silly stuff. You saw how much the US could be destabilised in just 5 years of Trump by the opposition party actually trying to do destabilisation. The communists are completely capable of doing this, the choose not to because it is a very inopportune time and Putin gives communists enough of what we want in regards to anti-imperialism, china and support for anti-imperialist efforts elsewhere in the world in order to keep things balanced.
In Russia I suspect you might be onto something. I'm not very knowledgeable about Russia though.
In Anglo countries I think any impression of this is us just overstating our relevance. I can only think of one instance in the past 50 years when any Anglo country had its government subverted. Plus their institutions are some of the longest-standing and strongest in the world; this is connected to how they've been so dominant for so long.
Australia had one of its prime ministers get couped by the CIA and another one literally disappeared, just straight up vanished. Greece was couped by the CIA too.
You're right though though it is very difficult to destabilise anglo countries. It requires massive effort and resources, something socialists don't have in most places. The American destabilisation wasn't led by socialists, it was led by liberals, the liberal media, the liberal apparatus all working in one unified way.
The only place where socialists have similar strength is France, Spain and perhaps Greece. All three have successfully destabilised thanks to the efforts of the left.
Gough Whitlam was exactly who I was talking about. And even then, it's the great power subjugating a lesser power, so I'd say it's a different category from popular pressure that overturns a government's policy.
The other guy was dummy thicc and got nommed by some wildlife.
Do you really think that we're the kingmakers, that we exercise any measurable sort of damper on imperialist policies, with less than a percent of the population voicing their public opinion?
Putin has been in power for 20 years. I don't think he's come close to losing it even once. So I don't believe that there is "a delicate balance of power", or that aggregate decisions of Western leftists (or even leftists in Russia) to critically support or reject him would have any bearing on whether he stays in power or not.
We're not kingmakers but anti-imperialist efforts are not worthless.
Silly stuff. You saw how much the US could be destabilised in just 5 years of Trump by the opposition party actually trying to do destabilisation. The communists are completely capable of doing this, the choose not to because it is a very inopportune time and Putin gives communists enough of what we want in regards to anti-imperialism, china and support for anti-imperialist efforts elsewhere in the world in order to keep things balanced.
In Russia I suspect you might be onto something. I'm not very knowledgeable about Russia though.
In Anglo countries I think any impression of this is us just overstating our relevance. I can only think of one instance in the past 50 years when any Anglo country had its government subverted. Plus their institutions are some of the longest-standing and strongest in the world; this is connected to how they've been so dominant for so long.
Australia had one of its prime ministers get couped by the CIA and another one literally disappeared, just straight up vanished. Greece was couped by the CIA too.
You're right though though it is very difficult to destabilise anglo countries. It requires massive effort and resources, something socialists don't have in most places. The American destabilisation wasn't led by socialists, it was led by liberals, the liberal media, the liberal apparatus all working in one unified way.
The only place where socialists have similar strength is France, Spain and perhaps Greece. All three have successfully destabilised thanks to the efforts of the left.
Gough Whitlam was exactly who I was talking about. And even then, it's the great power subjugating a lesser power, so I'd say it's a different category from popular pressure that overturns a government's policy.
The other guy was dummy thicc and got nommed by some wildlife.