Yeah. It's not like he exactly needs our support. He is quite powerful on his own. We should resist the CIA-inspired panic about hordes of Slavic shitposters disintegrating our "Democratic Institutions." We should resist NATO expansionism in Eastern Europe. But I think those are all things we can do quite well without pulling out the "critical support for comrade Putin" card.
That's what critical support is, though. You support his actions which oppose US hegemony, and oppose pretty much all the rest. Nobody needs our support anyway, so I'm not sure what you mean by that.
Maybe I am splitting hairs. I just feel like demystifying the Kremlinology by saying Putin is a rational actor making rational decisions given the geopolitical context and that NATO is cynically self-interested falls short of taking his side. But maybe that assumes it is even possible to opine on these things neutrally, an excuse which Liberals tend to use egregiously.
I suppose if I consider the objectives of both, I certainly hope NATO is the loser, but that is the basis of my position. It is not so much that the Russian Federation is a flawed good thing that I support despite my criticisms as much as they just happen to be in the crosshairs of a leviathan evil which must be stopped at all costs.
I just feel like critical support needs to be distinguished from lesser-evilism in some way, though I don't know how I'd go about drawing that line.
Honestly, this is a sober take that I agree with. The RF government is good insofar as their international interests run counter to those of the USA, so we should support them in that as well as in opposing any NATO control over Russia. They aren't socialists, or anything approaching that, though.
We should support the RF government insofar as their actions are good and productive, while understanding that they're not a socialist and their domestic policy is generally terrible, and condemning that. Very critical support.
...you know a lot of socialists who are big fans of Putin? It's usually been a fringe position in communities I've seen. The argument is almost always "better than the alternative".
Eh, I see what you're saying. It's degrees of critical support. Some folks tend to use it to mean figures / movements that are socialist, but have strange beliefs / policies / regressive social policies.
Yeah, in this case we all obviously know that Putin is not a socialist. However, he does have an interest in opposing US imperialism in many cases and in opposing NATO control over Russia, and those things are what we should support. It's very critical support.
Western liberal version of feminism and political correctness
What do you mean by this, could you explain? LGBTQ+ and women's liberation isn't political correctness. Cultural norms are of course going to be different, that's true for most things across cultures.
I think what you've noticed is more of the vulgarizing of revolutionaries into non-threatening icons that Lenin wrote about.
It shouldn't be any surprise that capitalism has commodified liberation movements (especially with neoliberalism). That's a new potential market! Porky loves new customers.
:eco-porky: "Gimme more o' that pink capitalism."
It also tends to be white upper classs figures who assimilate because Amerika is racist apartheid state and those figures already had misaligned class interests. Stonewall was an insurrection lead by people of color. Liberation has always been intersectional.
It’s impressive how COINTELPRO really did a number on the American left, isn’t it? The left hasn’t had any massive political power in the imperial core for decades, I don’t think most people here would argue otherwise.
Good we agree that Amerika is a racist apartheid state. Slavery is even still legal, so of course the system has been mass incarcerating people of color. The racial caste system was never abolished, it just got redesigned.
I read “The New Jim Crow” a couple years ago and liked it a lot. I would love for her to write a follow up that speaks more on the class components and how it intertwines with capitalism.
i have trouble wanting to even critically support a person whose government has overseen huge backsliding on LGBT+ issues in Russia, tbh.
Yeah. It's not like he exactly needs our support. He is quite powerful on his own. We should resist the CIA-inspired panic about hordes of Slavic shitposters disintegrating our "Democratic Institutions." We should resist NATO expansionism in Eastern Europe. But I think those are all things we can do quite well without pulling out the "critical support for comrade Putin" card.
That's what critical support is, though. You support his actions which oppose US hegemony, and oppose pretty much all the rest. Nobody needs our support anyway, so I'm not sure what you mean by that.
Maybe I am splitting hairs. I just feel like demystifying the Kremlinology by saying Putin is a rational actor making rational decisions given the geopolitical context and that NATO is cynically self-interested falls short of taking his side. But maybe that assumes it is even possible to opine on these things neutrally, an excuse which Liberals tend to use egregiously.
I suppose if I consider the objectives of both, I certainly hope NATO is the loser, but that is the basis of my position. It is not so much that the Russian Federation is a flawed good thing that I support despite my criticisms as much as they just happen to be in the crosshairs of a leviathan evil which must be stopped at all costs.
I just feel like critical support needs to be distinguished from lesser-evilism in some way, though I don't know how I'd go about drawing that line.
Honestly, this is a sober take that I agree with. The RF government is good insofar as their international interests run counter to those of the USA, so we should support them in that as well as in opposing any NATO control over Russia. They aren't socialists, or anything approaching that, though.
We should support the RF government insofar as their actions are good and productive, while understanding that they're not a socialist and their domestic policy is generally terrible, and condemning that. Very critical support.
I wish I could make this comment visible to every single socialist.
...you know a lot of socialists who are big fans of Putin? It's usually been a fringe position in communities I've seen. The argument is almost always "better than the alternative".
Putin is for sure a fringe position, but celebrating Deng and Assad are a lot more common.
...maybe don't throw Deng in with the other two. I've got my problems with him, but I wouldn't put him in the same category.
Eh, I see what you're saying. It's degrees of critical support. Some folks tend to use it to mean figures / movements that are socialist, but have strange beliefs / policies / regressive social policies.
Yeah, in this case we all obviously know that Putin is not a socialist. However, he does have an interest in opposing US imperialism in many cases and in opposing NATO control over Russia, and those things are what we should support. It's very critical support.
deleted by creator
What do you mean by this, could you explain? LGBTQ+ and women's liberation isn't political correctness. Cultural norms are of course going to be different, that's true for most things across cultures.
deleted by creator
Yup. Intersectional liberation will definitely be reached in ways that match the material conditions of each country / culture.
LGBTQ and Women's rights are due to the left, not western liberalism. Liberals have their own defanged versions, of course.
deleted by creator
I think what you've noticed is more of the vulgarizing of revolutionaries into non-threatening icons that Lenin wrote about.
It shouldn't be any surprise that capitalism has commodified liberation movements (especially with neoliberalism). That's a new potential market! Porky loves new customers.
:eco-porky: "Gimme more o' that pink capitalism."
It also tends to be white upper classs figures who assimilate because Amerika is racist apartheid state and those figures already had misaligned class interests. Stonewall was an insurrection lead by people of color. Liberation has always been intersectional.
deleted by creator
It’s impressive how COINTELPRO really did a number on the American left, isn’t it? The left hasn’t had any massive political power in the imperial core for decades, I don’t think most people here would argue otherwise.
Good we agree that Amerika is a racist apartheid state. Slavery is even still legal, so of course the system has been mass incarcerating people of color. The racial caste system was never abolished, it just got redesigned.
I read “The New Jim Crow” a couple years ago and liked it a lot. I would love for her to write a follow up that speaks more on the class components and how it intertwines with capitalism.