The image is a bit provacative, but its a good real. Hoping to hear from some materialist-understanders here. I'll repost the tweet in its entirety below, with no further comment. A 15-20ish minute read:

In the aftermath of Tucker Carlson's world-famous interview with Vladimir Putin, western audiences are left puzzled and confused. Their sentiment can be summarized as follows:

"We wanted to know about the Ukraine war. Why is Putin giving a lecture about 1000 year old history?"

The massive polarization occurring in the world is not simply geopolitical. It is not a competition over resources, or even simply a rivalry based on trade relationships.

The conflict between Western elites and the rest of humanity is also a conflicting philosophy of history and time itself. And this conflict is best expressed in the conflicting narratives not only between pro-Russian and pro-NATO commentators, but also between pro-Palestinian and pro-Zionist commentators (and even between Chinese and Taiwan separatists).

Everyone who is familiar with debates surrounding the Ukraine war knows that the contrasting positions boil down to this:

The Russian perspective insists upon HISTORY: "The war did not begin in 2022, but in 2014."

They insist upon keeping the record straight, insisting upon a CAUSE rather than just an EFFECT.

The Western-NATO perspective insists upon the IMMEDIACY of the event itself: "How dare Russia just invade Ukraine, all out of a sudden!"

We see a similar dynamic when it comes to the Palestine conflict:

The Palestinian perspective insists upon HISTORY: "The war did not begin on October 7th, it began in 1948."

The Zionist perspective insists upon the IMMEDIACY of recent events: "How dare Hamas commit those atrocities on October 7th!"

Notice the pattern? This is not simply a conflict between short-sightedness and far-sightedness, but a conflict over the integrity of historical, and therefore human existence itself.

But this conflict actually has deeper roots: During the bipolar world-system that took place during the cold war, where the world was divided between the Communist and capitalist blocs.

The origin's of Putin's outlook lie in the new, special type of state which emerged with the Soviet Union, alongside its unique relationship to historical time. In other words, it has its basis, whether consciously or unconsciously, in the Marxist-Leninist outlook.

That should be no surprise, as Putin was a member of the KGB. They only accepted true believers, and people trained in master-class Soviet education.

While the Marxist outlook is well known for its insistence upon the division of society, and its focus on class warfare, many overlook the flip side of this view: The understanding of society and history as one, integrated concrete totality.

In giving recognition to the contradictions and divisions of society, Marxism also simultaneously assumes a more holistic perspective, which can account for, rather than overlook, the contradictions within the fabric of reality.

Naturally, this outlook is applied to the study of history itself: Where history is regarded not in a one-sided way, not just from the perspective of the dominant classes of the present or even the past, but in its entirety, in a manner that does not spare inconvenient contradictions, but rather fully recognizes them.

When Communists assumed state power in the aftermath of the October Revolution, Marxism was no longer about just analyzing reality, but assuming direct responsibility for it.

The Communists had inherited the governance of nations, civilizations, cultures and religions which they themselves were not responsible for creating. They likewise did not base the existence of these realities on their own ideology.

They regarded them as outcomes of HISTORY, a history which is not the result of any one person's actions, but a concrete totality which they were tasked with correctly understanding and making decisions not only in harmony with, but which respond to its contradictions and tasks.

Stalin, in defending the territorial integrity of the USSR, had to take on this basic historical perspective: It became necessary to defend the historical integrity of Russian civilization, as a precondition for the defense of the proletarian dictatorship itself.

Boris Groys, in the Total Art of Stalinism, goes to lengths in explaining how originally, some Communists (and particularly Trotsky's faction) had an ambivalent relationship with the traditions of the past, but soon realized that those traditions were the premise of Communist rule itself, and therefore had to be safeguarded - lest they be conceded to the class enemy.

Thus, Soviet statehood inaugurated a new, unique relationship to historical time, where safeguarding the integrity of history became one of the preeminent and fundamental roles of the state.

Modern states before the Soviet one, by contrast, were tasked only with the purpose of defending an arbitrary constitutional sovereignty, and the integrity of existing institutions.

To defend the integrity of the entire historical past, means ultimately to defend ones unique existence, to defend the existence of your people, their unique culture and way of life, as irreducible to the whims of institutions.

Communists very soon realized the folly of attempting to 'remold' the people from scratch. That is exactly why Lenin rejected the folly of 'proletkult' and other such 'Trotskyite' and 'liquidationist' phenomena, which sought to destroy all culture in favor of an ideologically pure one.

They realized that the cultural, national, and civilizational heritage of the Soviet people was irreducible to the decisions of institutions, but rather represented an organic, integral, and holistic culmination of the people's historical existence itself.

Take language, for example: Wouldn't it be ridiculous for Communists to attempt to create a completely new language from scratch?

The diverse languages of the Soviet Union contained so many hidden meanings, complex vernacular, subtle and implicit nuances, and the accumulation of so much historical wisdom. It was 'lindy.' How could an institution replace all of that from scratch?

But this doesn't only hold true for language, but the entire culture, civilization and overall way of life of the people itself. It is an integral outcome of ALL history, which no institution could possibly replace artificially.

A cursory familiarity with Stalin's speeches and writings would allow one to understand that in addition to his role as a wise ruler of the living, he assumed the sage-like status of being a guardian of the integrity of history itself.

It is for that exact reason that after WWII, with the development of the people's democracies, Stalin insisted that the Germans, who the Soviets lost 30 million lives to, retain and preserve their historical national heritage. This held true for all the other People's Democracies, too.

Two worlds began to take shape after the Second World War: One which is cosmopolitan and historically nihilistic, and one which was deeply national, civilizational, and whose primary basis of legitimation was safeguarding the integrity of history.

In contrast to the Soviet Marxist-Leninist outlook, historical nihilism took root as the dominant historical and temporal outlook of the Western world.

The main basis of the legitimation of the 'Western outlook' has always been satiating the immediate desires, needs, and whims of consciousness. The immediate necessities of maintaining institutions, corporations, profits, and military advantages.

Did the West not learn the lesson of Hitler? The maniacal drug-addict Hitler thought he could conquer the world with 'Blitzkreig.' NATO also thinks of all events in terms of 'blitzkrieg' - of immediately fulfilling immediate necessities, rather than accounting for the more integral totality of civilizational existence.

We see this supremacy of satiating immediate 'necessities' in the form of consumerism, pornography, drugs, hedonism, and during the cold war, making sure the population was satiated with a good standard of living, distracted and hypnotized by mass media, stupefied, and dumbed-down to the point where it doesn't care about anything but the latest Funko-pop.

Look at the state of the American people: We care so much about celebrities at the Grammys and Taylor Swift. We only care only about Football, celebrities, pop-music, and the latest movie or TV show. An utterly distracted, purposefully under-educated, and ignorant population chasing the latest high and ignoring the trail of destruction left in its wake.

Compare the average historical literacy between Chinese netizens and the mass orgy of willful, proud stupidity you get on the English-speaking internet. It is truly sad and pitiful. "How could Russia invade Ukraine!" - but you didn't even care about Ukraine until Russia invaded!

But I suppose Wikipedia was there, all along, recording everything for you, so that you could become a scholar overnight in case reality IMMEDIATELY forced you to give a crap, right? What is this if not an abominable, disgusting historical nihilism, which divorces the latest events from their fundamental and deeply rooted causes?

Another great example of historical nihilism is America's credit bubble itself: During the 2000s, when Americans on a mass scale bought McMansions with credit, we had 'prosperity, freedom and happiness.'

Nobody cared about the fact that we were in debt, and it was all a bubble. When 2008 hit, it was like an apocalypse. And we still didn't learn from history!

Today, America is over 30 trillion dollars in debt. BUT WE DO NOT CARE! Why? Because everything still immediately appears to be going smoothly. We do not care about taking responsibility for history.

"All that's in the past, who cares? Let's just print more money."

I'm not surprised Western audiences were confused about Putin. The West does not even care about what happened yesterday, let alone history. As long as things continue to appear 'working,' everything is A-OK.

Notice Putin's masterclass lecture on America's reckless disregard for Russia's interests in the 2000s: No one thought about the future consequences. As long as things continued to work in the short term, as long as the stock market is green in the short term, everything is fine.

Unfortunately, one must inevitably account for history, whether they forget about it or not.

Everyone acts so surprised when Russia acts in February 2022, or Hamas acts on October 7th. But why? What's wrong? I thought the past didn't matter to you!

You should now know it did matter: You were just arrogantly neglecting it, and pretending like there would be no consequences for your gross, reckless disregard for the integrity of history.

The Satanic, capitalistic pretension, that we can somehow avoid the concrete culmination of humanity's existence (history), and pretend like it doesn't matter, and only act in the short-term interests of profit, desire, pleasure - this is at the root of why the West is spiraling into corruption and oblivion.

Even more pathetic is the view that Putin should have satiated the instant-gratification of Western conservatives, by talking about LGBT and culture war issues.

This is nothing more than a pornographic pathology, where one wants instant, immediate gratification at the expense of any deeper, more integral, comprehensive and far-sighted consideration.

Reality is more than the latest news cycle. It is more than the 'latest event.'

Both Putin and Hamas bare in common a basic responsivity to history. They are acting in accordance with keeping the record straight. Imagine the hideous and disgusting arrogance of the Western imperialist, which kept telling them:

"Too bad, so sad, we don't give a crap, that's in the past, now you must submit to us."

Why should they? Men and women make history. History is still alive. And it is not finished, in contrast to what the Western-liberal mind would prefer to believe.

We in the West are entering an abominable era devoid of dignity, where to act and take responsibility for ones existence is regarded as the greatest crime. Everyone is just supposed to passively accept the status quo. Everyone is just supposed to passively consume.

Not only passively accept the historical record as final and complete: IGNORE the historical record all together. Passively accept the most immediate form of power, charisma, persuasiveness, and pay no attention to the record.

Keep electing corrupt scumbags to congress and the senate. Pay no attention to the record. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

If you act, if you take responsibility, if you are responsive to the totality of your own historical existence as a people: You are an aggressor, you are upsetting the harmony, the peace and the balance.

If Palestinians decay in Gaza, or Russians decay in Donbass, too bad! Maybe they are just genetically inferior. They have no sovereign historical existence. They must passively accept their fate, as dictated by the West. This is the 'peace, harmony and balance' Western liberals want for the whole world:

Africans condemned to starve in poverty, Palestinians erased, the people of donbass decayed into non-existence. Even for their own people! Die off through fentanyl and drugs, despair in debt and misery.

Too bad, so sad! Fight back, and you are an aggressor. You are upsetting the beautiful, untouchable post-historical peace.

But humanity refuses. It decides to fight back, and the West has the audacity to label them as the aggressors. Too bad FOR YOU, REDDIT.

As Mao said: people of the world will surely be victorious. Too bad, so sad for the enemies of the people.

Whether or not there is a conscious acknowledgement of this legacy, the Marxist-Leninist outlook is a fundamental repository of the experience that has helped shape this emerging and fundamental polarization within the world, whether expressed in the conflict between Palestine and Zionism, or Russia and the West.

Putin is here guilty of nothing more than refusing to take a one-sided view. The reason he decides to give a two hour lecture on Russian history, is because he is trying to communicate to the Western mind just how ignorant it is about the great difference between the Western and Russian worlds.

He is saying: We have our own unique historical existence and our own world. You have no right to impose your historically nihilistic reign of instant-gratification upon our existence.

The separation between the Western and Russian world is not just a separation between two civilizations. It is a separation between two completely different relationships to history itself.

For the 'Western world' is just as ignorant of its own history, as it is of Russia's!

To appreciate the gap between the Western and Russian world, is the only way Russia and the West can ever come to an understanding.

But that will take an education far greater than what can be communicated in a few hours.