communists should abide by the principle of revolutionary defeatism and not to pick sides in inter-imperialist conflicts
Some people think this is a 100% imperialist war for both sides. I personaly think this is a insane take.
The extreme Putin supporters think this is 0% imperialism and 100% justified self defense etc nonsense. I Think this is also quite naive.
So not to invoke a golden mean fallacy but it is certainly possible that a mostly imperialist adventure(70/30) to also result in anti-imperialist results.
I also think that the future struggle session for people so keen to both sidesism is to provide some theory and concise meaningful actions a country in a similar position should take when they are again put into the same situation. It is important to keep in mind all the historical context, 8 years of deteriorating circunstances, people being killed, Azov battalion going nuts culminating with a extremely unfruitful round of negotiations that lasted 1 whole month.
My critique is that there is undeniably a large amount of idealism going on right now and not a lot of pragmatism. Not taking sides is just theory, what matters is the actions that result from that theory. Objectively speaking not only further NATO escalation would risk WW3 regardless it also means a further blow to any prospects of the left in a 100% US controlled world hegemony. We are lucky that China is an emerging superpower but China already made clear it is not willing to bring about world socialism and there is nothing to say the post Xi CPC will be as effective as they are now.
In the future China will be put in the same situation, heck the DPRK was already in the same situation. and I worry that the western left will once again find idealism more important then the actual consequences of it.
The left is fractured, people can't even give their worthless "critical support" anymore because this is the result. The phrase lost all meaning to some people, almost purposely ignoring the "critical" part as if all the nuance and reservations isn't already applied to that term.
Some people think this is a 100% imperialist war for both sides. I personaly think this is a insane take. The extreme Putin supporters think this is 0% imperialism and 100% justified self defense etc nonsense. I Think this is also quite naive.
So not to invoke a golden mean fallacy but it is certainly possible that a mostly imperialist adventure(70/30) to also result in anti-imperialist results.
I also think that the future struggle session for people so keen to both sidesism is to provide some theory and concise meaningful actions a country in a similar position should take when they are again put into the same situation. It is important to keep in mind all the historical context, 8 years of deteriorating circunstances, people being killed, Azov battalion going nuts culminating with a extremely unfruitful round of negotiations that lasted 1 whole month.
My critique is that there is undeniably a large amount of idealism going on right now and not a lot of pragmatism. Not taking sides is just theory, what matters is the actions that result from that theory. Objectively speaking not only further NATO escalation would risk WW3 regardless it also means a further blow to any prospects of the left in a 100% US controlled world hegemony. We are lucky that China is an emerging superpower but China already made clear it is not willing to bring about world socialism and there is nothing to say the post Xi CPC will be as effective as they are now.
In the future China will be put in the same situation, heck the DPRK was already in the same situation. and I worry that the western left will once again find idealism more important then the actual consequences of it.
The left is fractured, people can't even give their worthless "critical support" anymore because this is the result. The phrase lost all meaning to some people, almost purposely ignoring the "critical" part as if all the nuance and reservations isn't already applied to that term.