Everything here is just :agony-shivering: :chefs-kiss:
Langley :handshake: 12 yo kids
I occasionally see hints of this on hexbear too, this attitude of „The enemy hates it therefore I must say it’s good.“ Luckily people here generally have the awareness to call it out, but it’s still something we need to be mindful of.
It's good to laugh at libs whining about Putin destroying murica from the inside, or oposing NATO, or whatever, but I luckly haven't seen "shirtless Putin riding a bear" 2013 garbage here
Yeah, there's a difference between "putin is a bastard, but he's not a stooge for the American empire" and "omg Putin is good aktually"
Yeah, Putin "support" is basically just acknowledging that he is not the global terror that the US paints him to be. He's a shitty neoliberal leader at best.
Yeah this is actually specifically what came to mind for me. Obviously who must go is pretty funny but at the risk of invoking it against myself you do not, in fact, "gotta hand it to him"
If anything I think sometimes we could stand to call it out more than we actually do, but on the whole this site is definitely better about it
Literally "libs mad at him, haha, therefore Putin good"
I'm a strict adherent to the "fuck the US" rule of thumb, but c'mon use your brain a little bit, don't call him "based". That was my point.
I feel like the logical endpoint to this train of thought is saying some real bullshit like "Hitler should be applauded for standing up to the USA's imperialism."
This really is astroturfed bullshit, like literally look at the ratio of the comments and read what the fucking mod commented for fuck sakes, it's beyond parody.
I expect this stupidty in some Argie meme page made by someone who can't point Russia in a map "haha gusanos mad at Putin, so Putin good and peronist", but in a fucking subreddit called INTERNATIONAL LEFT fucking beyond parody.
I remember someone on here arguing that Imperial Japan was actually good because they were non-white imperialists and thus inspired the people that they were brutally conquering to rise up against their colonial overlords.
I spammed that guy with pictures of the corpses of Japanese war crime victims until he deleted his account.
Shouldn't double down on an "imperialism is good aktually" take if you don't want to see what you're supporting...
spammed that guy until he deleted his account
:xi-clap: praxis
I take notes on wrecker moves and then use them for good.
:deng-smile:
No one here was agreeing with them, though. And they had a history of strange takes about Asia.
"Gotta hand it to ISIS for taking up arms against the Great Satan"
Oh my fucking god, they did? Why, trots? Why? :pika-pickaxe: :agony-soviet:
They startef off as contrarian and then never grew their baby brains past that.
There's no point in going to a political subreddit that allows memes. You will be arguing with literal teenagers or younger.
Wow, thank you for that link! That is a very serious website for very serious discussions!
This is why r/socialism and r/communism are the best subreddits and don't massively suck because of their :cia: mods.
i was literally banned from communism years ago when posting any defense of China was considered "liberalism" and I was banned from socialism weeks ago for posting a Tricontinental study on poverty alleviation in China that they called "neoliberal propaganda"
a Tricontinental study on poverty alleviation in China that they called “neoliberal propaganda”
:agony-turbo: r/socialism are liberals.
i even linked the mods a Vijay Prashad article on it and they again called it "neoliberal propaganda" lol
The inevitable result of liberals who've never read a thing thinking they're "the real socialists".
Yes, they're captured subreddits. They suck. They also only allow discussion and no memes or low effort stuff, so they're ghost towns.
I got banned from r/communism for not having a good post history when it was my first post :agony-shivering:
lol me too. They have a bot that automatically bans anyone who has ever posted in a Bernie subreddit. They call that reactionary posting history
I hope the lad at Langley who thought of that one put it on his promotion paperwork. Great stuff.
This is why r/socialism and r/communism are the best subreddits and don’t massively suck
:dont-laugh:
i just stop reading comments on almost all subs. i probably load up reddit maybe 10 minutes a day if that and it's usually to look at food stuff or the acid marxism sub (which i do read comments there though.) but yeah, i've wasted so much time in my life on reddit arguing with brain worm ridden weirdos it's just so much more enjoyable to not subject myself to that shit anymore. i waste enough time on twitter anyways, i don't need to add reddit to that shit
Same. I wish I could blacklist the dunk tank on this site but it never works.
Putin is one of those guys where the support really needs to be critical. Support him for opposing the US and its European satellites, criticise him for just about everything else.
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.
...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.
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.
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.
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.
There would have been no chance for Socialism from that point on.
I think you're swinging too far in the other direction, champ. China doesn't need Russia, even though they have good ties.
Russia is very close to fash already, it's just national vs international bourgeoisie running the dog and pony show.
I agree that Russia is underestimated and that ol' Vlad is better than any neolib puppet NATO would install, that's for sure.
Oh they're valuable trading partners, not arguing about that. China is making good inroads with the rest of the global south however and also already does a lot of business wirh the imperial core (thank you based Deng).
Yeah, I think we have the same opinion about this, capitalism isn't going to go out peacefully.
if Russia falls, Fascism wins in Europe
i would like you explain this. a far-right nationalist country being more neolib makes neolib countries more fascist?
Europe fucking sucks no argument but i see no causal link between these events
None of this explains how Russia competing with the West-neolibs is preventing the rise of fascism. Russia is neolib too, there's a fascist movement there too.
In terms of having a less rabid neighbor on China's frontier you're correct and i'll agree that's better than some alternatives. but it ain't providing an alternative to neoliberalism or fascism.
an alternative is what is needed to combat fascism and China, Belarus, even indigenous euro socialists are doing more for that than Russia
talking completely agreeable points about China then transposing them to Russia ain't gonna convince me.
China is a fucking dictatorship of the proletariat im not gonna accept Russia being given the same leeway on the grounds it also opposes US hegemony.
at its core your argument is 'something's gotta give' and you hope Russia is going to take a not fascist path at some future juncture.
where is the evidence for Russia supporting socialism? what has the Putin government done to advance socialism? what is your belief of Putin preventing fascism based on?
wanting a bigger slice of the pie is NOT building the productive forces for socialism. it does not fight fascism.
I'm afraid Europe will go fascist no matter what. Worsened material conditions due to climate change will make Europe a continent of angry middle class chuds who feel they have been cheated out of the privilege and the treats they feel entitled to. Meanwhile climate change will also create increasing number of refugees, leading to even more murderous and sadistic deportation and border security regimes. The chances of Europe not going fascist and genociding the Muslims are small.
Idk if you've read news from Europe nowadays but the continent is turning fash on its own terms anf Putin is very happy about this
Someone once told me this and I now think it’s true: “Libs see the world through personalities, Marxists see the world as history.” History is shaped by material forces, not individual leaders.
That's true. Polish and Ukrainian far right is obviously anti-russian and it was a mistake on my part that i didn't include them, since it is an obviously trumped up effort to get more cannon fodder in the army in case of a conflict which is more likely to be started from the west than Russia. But if you look further, Hungarian fash are very much pro russian (so much that they're sending mercenaries to Donbass to fight for Russia), Italian and French and if i remember correctly, Greek far-right also has ties to russian oligarchs. I didn't mean he's happy about it as "he must be a fash", more like as it's a favorable development for him.
"If you can't even stand with Putin" like he's the bare minimum for internationalist conviction HE'S A FUCKING REACTIONARY LMAO
He was literally part of the regime that dismantled the ussr and sold the parts to the highest bidder.
You shouldn't have been banned but also I don't think the CIA is pushing pro-Putin narratives.
Nah, my point is "Putin good cuz US libs mad" is a childish understanding that does nothing but poison the well or however you wanna call it
I have no idea whether or not what is shown in the OP is an op. But the way I took it, is that if it is, it's not so much that they're genuinely pushing a pro-Putin agenda so much as poisoning the leftist well, so to speak. It's about optics and making sure leftists look ridiculous especially to anyone who might otherwise be receptive. "Look at those batshit lefties, pretending to stand for equity and social progress but actually supporting reactionaries like Putin."
If that guy is who people say he is, he's done a lot worse to poison the well (patriotic socialism, US imperialism as a tail-wagging-the-dog plot, bizarre sexual pathology towards Luna), but hand-wringing about Putin helps no one. The imperialist argument is "Putin's policies are indefensible, and that's why the US needs to intervene." You are only building the case for them , and worse, tying anyone hurt by Putin's policies to the imperialist cause. Instead, leftists should be clear that Putin's problems are for Russians alone to worry about.
Host of this YouTube channel about socialism in Vietnam. Here's a link to the drama, if you really wanna do that to yourself.
In the context of US imperialism and Russia I was expecting the leader of some socialist party that was banned from elections or some bit of history I wasn't aware of.
Not some random youtube blogger.
And speaking of making leftists look ridiculous...
Edit: Ok, I thought that reply was just gibberish (from an account with a total of 3 comments all made today - rather sus), so I dismissed it out of hand. But if you're not just a wrecker/troll .... I don't know who you're accusing in your first sentence of being "that guy." RNAi?! Tf are you talking about? And I honestly can't make sense of the rest of your comment as it relates to mine. Are you saying calling Putin a reactionary is "building the case for [US imperialists]"? First of all, I wasn't even calling him one, the sentence in quotes in my first comment was a hypothetical. That said, I am now; Putin is a reactionary. And secondly, that's still a ridiculous take.
It's a sus account, but it's pretty clear from the context that "that guy" refers to "Infrared", not RNAi.
He seems to be saying that focusing on Putin's misdeeds in a public context only helps manufacture consent for imperialism, which is a point that has some merit depending on the specific context. Putin is, of course, reactionary. We all know that.
Ok, am I blind? What's the context that makes it clear he's referring to someone never even mentioned in this thread?
As for the rest... I disagree. Refusing to call a spade a spade for the sake of optics, in public or otherwise, only undermines your own authenticity. What's worse is actively pretending it's not a spade.
We all know that.
Then there should be no controversy here.
https://hexbear.net/post/148426/comment/1789445
Here's the context.
Refusing to call a spade a spade for the sake of optics, in public or otherwise, only undermines your own authenticity.
That's why I said specific context. It would, for example, not be productive to rant to liberals about how Putin is evil. That's clearly manufacturing consent for imperialist aggression. In any context where people might support aggression against Russia, you should make efforts to avoid encouraging that. That doesn't mean ignoring that Putin is a reactionary, just being careful about how you discuss it. As for here, we are on a socialist forum, clearly in this context that's not really a concern.
What’s worse is actively pretending it’s not a spade.
Good thing I absolutely am not. I said "focusing" on Putin's misdeeds can be dangerous in certain contexts, that's all. It's like how focusing on Iran's misdeeds can very easily manufacture consent for aggression in that region. This is a very, very ordinary anti-imperialist take.
Then there should be no controversy here.
There isn't. I'm also thinking we shouldn't take anyone with this user's... particular username very seriously (BeriaInocenceProject).
Here’s the context. [link]
Uh, that wasn't posted until well after the comment where he was making the accusation. And honestly, it's still not clear context, since you have to go read a twitter thread that has absolutely nothing to do with anything else here. I'm perfectly happy to admit I'm just totally missing something obvious, but seriously... what does that link, posted long after the fact, have anything to do with the rest of this thread?
specific context.
Ok, here's the specific context of this conversation, BeriaInocenceProject was claiming that either what I was saying in my comment, or what RNAi was saying originally, (I don't know which is the case, this whole conversation is a little surreal imo) was aiding US imperialism. I counter that as being ridiculous, which it is, and it sounds like you agree. But then it seems like you come in with a "well ackshually" response for me.
I agree, it would not be productive to walk into a room full of liberals and start ranting about Putin. But that highly specific context is nowhere to be seen. That is not what was happening anywhere. If instead, someone is glorifying Putin as "based" I think in any following context, it would not be a negative thing to say "No. Putin is bad." I think this is all the more the case if the Putin-praising was being done in a leftist space. And that is what was happening in the original image.
In the context of what's actually happening and being discussed here, to me it seems pretty weird to come in with "they have a point" in defense of someone arguing that it's wrong to call Putin a reactionary. But I dunno. Whatever. I realize we're pretty much in agreement. This whole thing just strikes me as... odd.
Uh, that wasn’t posted until well after the comment where he was making the accusation. And honestly, it’s still not clear context, since you have to go read a twitter thread that has absolutely nothing to do with anything else here. I’m perfectly happy to admit I’m just totally missing something obvious, but seriously… what does that link, posted long after the fact, have anything to do with the rest of this thread?
My bad, when you added your edit to your comment, it replaced the first time stamp, so I didn't realize the order of comments.
Yeah, I agree that the image in the OP is ridiculous. Putin is not "based", and there's absolutely no sense in saying so. I just wanted to make the point that there are contexts in which focusing on criticisms, even if they are true, is still harmful.
In the context of what’s actually happening and being discussed here, to me it seems pretty weird to come in with “they have a point” in defense of someone arguing that it’s wrong to call Putin a reactionary.
Yeah, agreed. I initially read that user's comment as directed in general and not at you/RNAi specifically, but I think in retrospect that may have been too charitable a reading.
IDK, you're probably right that I picked the wrong place to make my point here. Sorry for any confusion I caused.
I hear you, it's all good. And to be clear, I don't think you owe any kind of apology, I just couldn't make sense of BeriaInocenceProject's comments, nor what I took as your defense of them.
Ok, am I blind? What’s the context that makes it clear he’s referring to someone never even mentioned in this thread?
The context is I replied to your post where you mention him and talk about how he's poisoning the well and possibly an op. Which terminally online creep people say he is isn't important, but to clear up the confusion: I meant Wide_Cust4rd (the person you were talking about) is Infrared.
your post where you mention him
I don't even know who that is, let alone did I mention him.
Edit: The person I was referring to was Wide_Cust4rd in the OP image. But I didn't even look at that username until just now. And I wasn't even saying that person was poisoning the well (maybe they are, I don't know), just explaining what I took the OP to mean.
I have no idea whether or not what is shown in the OP is an op. But the way I took it, is that if it is, it’s not so much that they’re genuinely pushing a pro-Putin agenda so much as poisoning the leftist well, so to speak.
What's shown in the OP? Who's the "they" you're talking about?
The person I was referring to was Wide_Cust4rd in the OP image. But I didn’t even look at that username until just now. And I wasn’t even saying that person was poisoning the well (maybe they are, I don’t know), just explaining what I took the OP to mean.
Edit: Even if they aren't an op or "poisoning the well," they're a fucking moron (at best) for praising Putin and banning RNAi for not doing the same.
Three posts on this site and I'm already arguing about pronouns :sicko-hexbear:
Even if they aren’t an op or “poisoning the well,” they’re a fucking moron (at best)
I agree with that, just not because of what's shown in the OP.
Some of the left subs are dumb. I got banned on the spot from one for saying that the Assad jokes are funny, but it's good to remember that he is literally a Nazi sympathizer.
Assad jokes are funny though?
Also, I'm going to need a source on the nazi sympthizer thing.
Being supported by fascists and supporting fascists are two different things. Lots of Bernie people are basically Nazis.
That being said its not a good thing and means you're insufficiently leftist
Its run by the same right opportunists that think infrared is peak Marxist-Leninism.
Saw a crosspost from r/showinfrared, checked what the fuck was that sub, took me 5 seconds to find some utter garbage.
Infrared is a :dumpster-fire: . I knew MLs would eventually wind up with their own version of Va*sh, but god fuckadoodle damn is it ever cursed.
Literally a bunch of social fascists ranting about "cultural degeneration" (aka anyone who isn't a white cishet guy).
They're not social fascists (succdems) they're right opportunists and social chauvinists.
Yes, I agree with this. Thought about calling them social chauvinists instead.
It's pretty hilarious that Wide Custard, the creator of the sub, is regularly downvoted for his takes
the guy makes like 20 posts a day, its such a cursed sub now. i fucking hate americans
I dont even mean comments lol, look at the sub its all literally just him posting this bullshit non stop, who does he think is gonna actually watch like 10 Caleb Maupin videos a day?? such a weird fucking sub, Americans should not be in charge of anything with the word "international" in it
I dont even mean comments lol, look at the sub its all literally just him posting bullshit non stop,
:side-eye-1: :side-eye-1: :side-eye-1:
i fucking hate americans
Thank goodness I'm not American then
Ok been to the hexbear discord and I'm 10000% sure that "Wide Custard" dipshit is a dickhead called "Infrared" who grifts gamergaters while calling himself "marxist leninist"
Wait, Wide Custard is Infrared and is on the old chapochat discord and they didn't ban him? That fella's subreddit is openly transphobic.
Glad I left it when this site launched, what a moderation disaster. You can tell it ain't run by the same folks.
No, no, the hexbear discord is cool, I posted this image there and the people there had a lot of screenshots from that same WideCustard dipshit
They make it so easy sometimes. Like when folks use weird punctuation like ‽ or ⸮ for their main and sock accounts.
We had a certified genius who was banned on our local city sub threaten people, get banned, but he kept coming back with all these old sock accounts still using interrobangs and irony symbols like we wouldn't know it was him.
