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.
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.