:both-sides:

https://hexbear.net/pictrs/image/7dLnjj3Hyq.png

  • RedDawn [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    because it’s in their national interests not to

    Thank you for conceding the argument, Russia losing is against the interests of AES and global south countries. That’s the whole point.

    • UncleJoe [comrade/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      national interest

      And I like how you immediately ceased your "Akcshually Russia is technically not imperialist 🤓" claptrap after seeing that last paragraph lol, concession accepted

      • RedDawn [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Russia isn’t imperialist, technically or otherwise. I haven’t conceded that at all, but you’ve literally agreed that socialist countries benefit by supporting Russia lol.

        • UncleJoe [comrade/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          I'm sure that them not criticizing the one semi-great power not opposed to their existence is because of the extremely socialist character of the war and not because they'd want to avoid biting the hand that feeds them lol

          Russia isn’t imperialist, technically or otherwise.

          Then I don't care what un-Marxist definition of imperialism you use if you don't agree with Lenin

          • RedDawn [he/him]
            ·
            2 years ago

            The fact that Russia is a “hand that feeds them” is evidence of Russia’s anti-imperial actions in a world where the imperialists are trying to destroy these countries.

            if you don’t agree with Lenin

            I do agree with him, Lenin’s description of imperialism does not fit Russia. You want to call his definition “myopic” and then turn around and say I’m being un-Marxist.

            • UncleJoe [comrade/them]
              ·
              2 years ago

              I do agree with him, Lenin’s description of imperialism does not fit Russia.

              Did it fit Tsarist Russia?

              • RedDawn [he/him]
                ·
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                You raise a good point here. Tsarist Russia was definitely an empire in the traditional sense, but when Lenin wrote Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism he described the new method of imperialism that was forming out of capitalism, the method of exporting financial capital to colonies in order to generate super profits and buy off the domestic working class. That’s the form of imperialism that exists today and which Russia does not conform to, but modern Russia also doesn’t fit the older model of imperialism which Tsarist Russia did. That older kind of imperialism, distinct from the form Lenin describes, doesn’t even really exist anymore as global capitalism has developed to the point that it can’t be supported… I think something important to note here is that Tsarist Russia wielded it’s power in service of reaction, crushing revolutions across Europe to maintain the older status quo economic and political model in the face of historical progress.

                Today, the “new” form of imperialism that Lenin laid out IS the status quo, so the US, it’s allies and institutions are both 1) perfectly exemplary of imperialism as described by Lenin in ItHSoC AND 2) the hammer of reaction which seeks to crush historical progress toward a new economic order anywhere it pops up, like Tsarist Russia once was in Europe.

                Modern Russia, conversely, is neither of those things, which is why describing modern Russia as imperialist doesn’t fit in either sense.