Multipolarity I think is what people are hoping for here. Not having a single capitalist power so invincible that it can control the world unilaterally.

It would ostensibly allow smaller countries to play the larger powers off each other and extract some concessions for one. Just the very fact of having other options provides at least some leverage and makes development and security more likely. And if any of those alternatives are less bloodthirsty and exploitative than the US (how could they not be?), so much the better.

You’re right that none of this is a direct confrontation of capitalism, but even just as a demonstration that other nations can stand up to the US, perhaps with the help of a competing capitalist power, this war can (maybe already has) bolstered resistance to the worst of imperialism. It’s not global communism but it’s a step in the right direction, or at least a step away from complete subjugation to a single globe spanning hegemon.

So, emboldening for the global south at least. And perhaps it coalesces into a broader post-post-colonial movement at some point. Who’s to say. Hard to imagine any shift in the global balance of power away from the west right now being a bad thing anyway.

The war itself is of course a disaster and tragedy for everyone involved. But on a purely geopolitical level, I think there’s a real possibility that it ends up benefiting the global proletariat going forward.

I think it's pretty evident that the western hegemony has already been greatly weakened by the conflict. While it's true Russia isn't trying to weaken capitalism, capitalist hegemony is a completely separate issue - Russia's actions are weakening western hegemony. Capitalism is a domino later in the chain. Africa breaking the neocolonial chains and hopefully being able to develop itself into the economic powerhouse it could be will be a massive boon to everywhere that isn't The West, because it's a new market and trading partner that doesn't require westerners to get their cut.

As far as the global south, the benefits don't really have anything to do with Russia getting more territory. The benefits are about demonstrating western weapons and tactics to be paper tigers, showing how shallow western weapons supplies are and how slow and unproductive western military industrial complexes are. It's also showing the value of western promises of military support - Taiwan and every other western vassal are surely watching this. The conflict is bleeding NATO resources dry, which is the reverse of what NATO hoped they would be getting out of this. The exposure of the west's weakness is what benefits the global south and the rest of the planet.

I think it's certainly true that Russia is now and will be feared in Europe, but that ship had already sailed. The US is doing as much economic warfare against Europe as they are Russia, and Europe is the one seriously damaged by it. America also started that warfare before this conflict expanded in 2022 - trying to cut Russia out of the European market has always been important for the US State Department. Europe has lost their energy sovereignty and is now undergoing shock doctrine style de-industrialization. It's not going to matter what Europe thinks about Russia as they get increasingly economically hobbled and poorer. The rest of the world however doesn't share Europe or America's view of Russia, so this is not really any loss for Russia geopolitically. In South America and Africa, for example, Russia is largely viewed positively. The people of the world know whose heel is on their necks - it's not Russia's.

I guess you think kings were oligarchs too? Oligarchs are not in the government but exert undue influence on it. If they're in the state then they're just state actors in some form or another.