EDIT: I'm very proud of this community. All the posts are making me think and solidly criticizing from an anti-imperialist perspective. Thanks, hexbear

  • Ideology [she/her]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Excellent

    A meme that'll make everybody mad :lenin-shining:

    • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      The both-sides purity chauvinism would make Lenin mad too. He advocated revolutionary defeatism, which is attacking your own government and not being neutral/both sides

        • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          Both sidesism that includes your side is fence sitting and is not “opposing first and foremost your own nation”

          • Thomas_Dankara [any,comrade/them]
            hexagon
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Both sidesism that includes your side is fence sitting

            I didn't include "My side". None of these bourgeois nations or international institutions represent the working class.

            I think Russia's invasion was strategically necessary from a bourgeois nationalist perspective of protecting themselves from NATO expansion, and I absolutely think NATO/US/EU carry the largest responsibility in provoking the war. We should stand against all forms of bourgeois nationalism, while recognizing Russia and Ukraine as victims of US imperialism, and a byproduct of US-backed privatization in the 90s. I hope this isn't right deviationism but feel free to correct and critique this stance.

            • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
              ·
              2 years ago

              So you aren’t a Leninist? Lenin is talking about foreign capitalist nations and how attacking them while your own imperialist nation is at war is a form of imperialist intrigue. You are just doing ultraleftism right now and not principled Leninism.

              The difference between organizing around the two:

              Principled: Oppose NATO and work to stop weapon shipments and push for peaceful negotiation as soon as possible

              Unprincipled: oppose everyone equally and sit on your ass going “let them fight”

              • Thomas_Dankara [any,comrade/them]
                hexagon
                ·
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                So you aren’t a Leninist? Lenin is talking about foreign capitalist nations and how attacking them while your own imperialist nation is at war is a form of imperialist intrigue. You are just doing ultraleftism right now and not principled Leninism.

                The US/NATO/EU are responsible for the war, and they're also responsible for the Russian federation existing in its current form. I don't think I'm doing "imperialist intrigue" since Russian Federation wouldn't exist in the first place if it weren't for US/NATO/EU. If I criticize Russian Federation in any way, it is only insofar as they are a direct result of US imperialism. Hope that makes sense. Same goes for Ukraine and any other post-soviet country. They're all victims of US imperialism. To the extent that the meme is an incomplete or lazy metaphor, I apologize. I was hoping it could pipeline libs away from a pro-NATO stance but if it fails at that, maybe it needs to be rethought.

                Principled: Oppose NATO and work to stop weapon shipments and push for peaceful negotiation as soon as possible

                Unprincipled: oppose everyone equally and sit on your ass going “let them fight”

                I don't oppose everyone equally or think the fighting should continue. I'd agree that a peaceful negotiation is necessary as soon as possible. But I don't see NATO relenting, or Russia letting its guard down, or the Ukraine govt. accepting any peace terms put forward by Russia.

                • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  So because NATO previously looted Russia that makes it more ok for NATO to attack them now? I don’t follow your convoluted logic to get out of revolutionary defeatism

                  • Thomas_Dankara [any,comrade/them]
                    hexagon
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 years ago

                    So because NATO previously looted Russia that makes it more ok for NATO to attack them now?

                    I'm not pro NATO or think it's OK for NATO to do anything it has done. Where did I say it was ok for NATO to do anything? NATO shouldn't exist. And neither should the Russian federation. Bring back the USSR. Russian federation only exists because NATO destroyed the USSR through US-backed privatization and looting.

                • MerryChristmas [any]
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  I think this is a fantastic meme to get people into the pipeline. Propagandizing requires tact. The less you say, the more likely people are to engage with it. While it would be cool if there were some meme out there that condensed all of ML theory into a funny wojak face, this is a pretty good way of explaining a current issue without immediately turning your audience against you.

                  As far as online activitism goes, I think our primary responsibility is to plant the seeds of class consciousness. This thread is proof that your meme can successfully facilitate the right kind of discussions.

                  • Thomas_Dankara [any,comrade/them]
                    hexagon
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    yeah, "into the pipeline" I think nails it. i feel like this meme would be better aimed at the libs and socdems falling for the "NATO is protecting ukraine from Russian imperialism" BS than it is an adequate end goal for everyone's foreign policy takes.

          • Ideology [she/her]
            ·
            2 years ago

            Bourgeoisie states bad is a controversial take on hexbear dot net

            • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              Calling bourgeois states that are the enemy of your own imperialist bourgeois nation “bad” during war is indeed chauvinism and failing your internationalist duty

              • UncleJoe [comrade/them]
                ·
                2 years ago

                I'm sure the russian war effort was severely impacted by this meme on an obscure bear enthusiast forum

                • geikei [none/use name]
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  It does represent the prevailing stance in even the "radical" western left and that's the best case scenario since the prevailing stance is more pro NATO than even that. So it's naturalfor users to try and push back and argue against it

                  • UncleJoe [comrade/them]
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    If chauvinists reveal themselves in a time of crisis then all the better, but you don't fight against it by just stanning the opposite side to the other dudes lmao

                    Lenin didn't spend all day defending the German and Austro-Hungarian war effort

            • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
              ·
              2 years ago

              Palestine, Iran, Yemen, Syria, Libya are all evil and bad! They are just as evil as NATO. Let them fight

      • aaro [they/them, she/her]
        ·
        2 years ago

        revolutionary defeatism only works when one of the sides isn't a capitalist bourgeoisie state. I am revolutionarily defeatist in that I want the capitalist nations in this conflict to lose

        • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          That’s absolutely false. The term was coined for WW1, where all sides were imperialists. You are failing your international duty, please read Lenin

          • aaro [they/them, she/her]
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Revolutionary defeatism is a concept made most prominent by Vladimir Lenin in World War I. It is based on the Marxist idea of class struggle. Arguing that the proletariat could not win or gain in a capitalist war, Lenin declared its true enemy is the imperialist leaders who sent their lower classes into battle. Workers would gain more from their own nations' defeats, he argued, if the war could be turned into civil war and then international revolution.

            • https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_defeatism

            NATOpedia, I know, but this really isn't that objectionable of a definition.

            America's defeat in this conflict will not lead to a civil war. The primary motivation here is to take the opportunity of destabilization to build socialism - not only will there be no destabilization as a result of a US loss in Ukraine, but even if the US should become destabilized, it's not hard to see that our scales are tipped far in favor of fascism and against socialism. And since the stakes are about the same for the US and Russia, I want for the bourgeoisie of both sides to suffer.

            I have read more Lenin than a Wikipedia article, I promise. Revolutionary defeatism is a good and valid theory but Lenin lived before the age of proxy wars and like all theory, it needs to be evaluated in a different light after time passes. Lenin's writings aren't a permanently immutable bible.

            edit: to more directly address your terms, in the language of Lenin and his own theory of revolutionary defeatism, as an American I want my side to lose, and as a proletarian I stand in solidarity and share the interests of Russians who want their side to lose. I hold both of these in equal standing.

            • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              For the Socialist of another country cannot expose the government and bourgeoisie of a country at war with “his own” nation, and not only because he does not know that country’s language, history, specific features, etc., but also because such exposure is part of imperialist intrigue, and not an internationalist duty.

              He is not an internationalist who vows and swears by internationalism. Only he is an internationalist who in a really internationalist way combats his own bourgeoisie, his own social-chauvinists, his own Kautskyites.

              (b) In every country the Socialist must above all emphasise in all his propaganda the need to distrust not only every political phrase of his own government, but also every political phrase of his own social-chauvinists, who in reality serve that government.

              -Lenin

              • aaro [they/them, she/her]
                ·
                2 years ago

                Are the Russian Leninists wrong for wanting the defeat of their own country in this conflict? If so, why? If not, why am I wrong to stand with them if they are right?

                • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  Are you a Russian Leninist? No, you are a western one so worry about your own duty that you are failing before pointing fingers across the sea

                  • aaro [they/them, she/her]
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    It's not like I'm out helping America in the war effort, I'm just expressing my opinions and having a discussion on an online bear form. In real life, I don't do any anti-Russian action, I don't do any pro-Russian action, and I don't do any pro-American action.

          • aaro [they/them, she/her]
            ·
            2 years ago

            Also, I caught your accusation earlier that I didn't know that revolutionary defeatism applies to world war 1 - I don't really know what you're basing that on, but as someone interested in the concept, you might appreciate knowing that the concept is actually older than the specific verbage, and originates from the Russo-Japanese war.

            • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
              ·
              2 years ago

              You said that Revolutionary Defeatism only applies when one side isn’t imperialist/capitalist. That’s false. It was invented for a war where all sides were imperialist.

          • aaro [they/them, she/her]
            ·
            2 years ago

            should I not desire the defeat of the government of other revolutionary classes? If they should desire the defeat of their government, should I not stand alongside my fellow revolutionaries around the world? I get that we have our own problems domestically and I would never even briefly consider putting even the tiniest bit of organizational effort into helping the United States defeat one of its enemies, so where's the problem?

            • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              If you disagree with Leninist revolutionary defeatism and think those living in the imperial core should not practice it, make your case for why that is.

              Don’t twist and distort concepts beyond recognition. At least do the reading and understand what you are talking about. No investigation, no right to speak.

      • Thomas_Dankara [any,comrade/them]
        hexagon
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        I've generally been primarily critical of the US since before the beginning of this war, but I see your point. Leninist revolutionary defeatism is always necessary.

        • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          It’s not enough to be critical of the US. You have to oppose it first and foremost, which means not equivocating

          • Thomas_Dankara [any,comrade/them]
            hexagon
            ·
            2 years ago

            You're right. it should be opposed first and foremost. The entire situation at present is a result of US imperialism going back decades. The fact that all sides produce self-serving bourgeois nationalist propaganda doesn't change that the imperial center of gravity is the USA, or that NATO is an imperialist tool, or that Ukraine and Russia are both victims of US imperialism.