The TLDR of the video is that the Russian invasion of Ukraine was bad, and that Western and Ukrainian aggression didn't poke the tiger. He doesn't mention that the West could end the war tomorrow.
To be fair, I'm not pro Putin. I know Russians in Russia who are risking their safety to be peace activists, which is the correct and noble position to have in Russia. An Australian guy taking the position that Putin bad just seems easy and is doing the work of the State department.
There's a good point made here that "if Russia gained influence in Mexico, that wouldn't justify the US invading it".
But we know that the US would absolutely do that, if it came to it. We know from the Cuban Missile Crisis, we know from the unmatched number of foreign interventions/coups the US has done, we know from the contingency plans that the DoD has had for a long time for invading Mexico and toppling the government, and we know from Trump's threats over the cartels that he'd do it for a lot less than a great power rivalry.
There is a gap between what many countries ethically ought to do, and what they practically can be expected to do. We should be able to tell these apart.
It has been pretty entertaining watching him dunk on Ethan Klein, but I get it.
Cold take: Putin is, in fact, bad.
The war is also bad insofar as victory on either side will not serve the working class. As usual, they are being thrown into the meat grinder so that whoever wins can exploit them better. I won't call it an inter-imperialist conflict, but there's certainly not a socialist element to it.
The only benefit is a slightly weakened empire (US) which will have less regional power. A worthwhile goal, but to be honest, it seems like the price has been really high.
Feels like a number of people in this thread are a couple of weeks away from genuinely thinking “Putin is based secret communist trying to re-establish the USSR” lol.
This is a very bad faith take. I don't see a single poster here saying anything positive of Putin or Russia.
The sheltering Nazis for decades while crushing native populations might be good reasons to hate Argentina. For more contemporary reasons, its regression towards aiding the US and other capitalist powers is pretty good. It's the least good south American country.
They also tried really hard to eliminate their black population, to the point you don't even hear anything about them.
There's also the fact that Argentina is extremely racist and have a pretty clear case of thinking they are European complex.
This video is completely wrong about the Russia-Ukraine war and is actually misleading in many ways.
I wrote an effort post about this a while ago and reproducing it here for people who are interested in the history leading up to the invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
—-
Prologue
expand
The unstoppable tide of the Bolshevik Revolution had swept across the lands of the Russian Empire. Following waves of revolutionary workers councils overthrowing the Tsarist authorities, these nascent workers led governments began to declare themselves as soviet (council) republics.
In the land known as Novorossiya under the Russian Empire, comprising Kharkov, Donetsk, Lugansk and Kherson, the proletarian government had declared themselves as the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Republic (DKSR) on February 1918. This dream of self-autonomy would not last, however. In less than a month, orders would come directly from Moscow that the DKSR would be disbanded and merged with the Ukrinian People’s Republic (UPR) to form the Ukraine Soviet Socialist Republic (Ukraine SSR). Despite protests from the local government, the decision was not to be changed.
Just a decade prior, Rosa Luxemburg had launched into a tirade challenging Lenin’s idea of national autonomy. In her The National Question and Autonomy (1908-09), Luxemburg had criticized granting territorial autonomy for Lithuania but most of all, Ukraine, citing the latter as full of reactionary petit-bourgeois class and a country “without any historical tradition and without any national culture”. Calling the “independent Ukraine” as “Lenin’s hobby” in 1918, she warned against the dangers of Ukrainian nationalism taking roots.
And so it was decided that the industrialized, proletarian republic of Donetsk-Krivoy Rog, predominantly inhabited by ethnic Russians, was to be merged with the Ukrainian People’s Republic, with the hopes that it would dilute the reactionary nature of the Ukrainian bourgeois influence.
Little did they know that in less than a hundred years, the ethnic Russian descendants of the workers republic would end up on the wrong side of the border as the Soviet Union disintegrated, and subjected to ultranationalist violence when Ukrainian nationalism has finally erupted from its dormancy.
—-
Part I: Maidan
expand
Fast forward to 2012, Ukraine’s economy was in deep trouble. The global financial crisis of 2009 had hit their meagre economy particularly hard - once the industrial powerhouse and global leader in shipbuilding, aviation and space research and development centers under the Soviet Union, Ukraine has been relegated to the second poorest economy in Europe.
An opportunity arises when Ukraine was invited to join the EU Association Agreement in the early 2010s, an explicitly free trade agreement that could set Ukraine on the path towards EU accession. The catch? Ukraine has to open up its economy to foreign capital (at this point, land sales in Ukraine was still restricted and not privatized as had happened in other neoliberalized countries), and accepting the austerity conditions of IMF loans that would have included cutting social services and education.
However, this was far from the only difficulties. Because Ukraine had a tariff free agreement with Russia (the latter being Ukraine’s largest trading partner), the signing of the EU Association Agreement would mean that European goods would be able to enter the Russian market freely through exploiting the existing bilateral tariff free agreement, but Russian goods would not be able to do the same in reverse. This obviously concerned Russia, and so President Putin had proposed a three-way meeting between the EU, Ukraine and Russia to settle the tariff issue. Putin’s proposal was rejected by the EU. The ulterior motive behind Ukraine signing the free trade agreement has revealed itself, and the Russians saw the impending peril to their domestic industries.
Around the same time, Putin had floated the idea of a Eurasian Customs Union, a protectionist bloc that would encompass Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan to resuscitate the Soviet-era heavy industry chain. However, the free trade nature of the EU Association Agreement explicitly forbids Ukraine from joining the customs union (a protectionist bloc) were they to choose the EU route.
Thus, Ukraine had arrived at a bind, forced upon them by the conditions set explicit by the EU - it was only allowed to choose a side: the EU or Russia.
Given how much ongoing trade there were with Russia, this was obviously not an easy choice. President Viktor Yanukovych, who contrary to popular narrative was not pro-Russian but instead very much supported joining the EU side, hesitated. Appalled by the austerity demands of the EU agreement, he began to entertain the potential counter-offers from Moscow, which included a similar deal, even significant discounts of Russian gas, but without the austerity part.
Again, contrary to popular narrative, Yanukovych did not agree to Moscow’s deal. He simply decided to pause signing the agreement to buy a bit more time to re-assess the situation. But it was already too late. Ultranationalist fascists saw Yanukovych’s hesitation as signs that he had betrayed the cause of Ukraine becoming part of Europe, and launched a coup in late 2013.
The Maidan revolution followed, nationalist violence erupted, Yanukovych fled, and the rest is history.
—-
Part II: Minsk
expand
On February 23, 2014, the very first day of taking over the Ukrainian government, the fascist coup regime immediately set to repeal the 2012 Kivalov-Kolesnichenko Language Law, which had granted the status of regional language to Russian and other minority languages.
Seen as an infringement of their rights to cultural autonomy, and understood that this was merely the very first act towards ethnic cleansing, the ethnic Russians that mostly inhabited the eastern Ukraine (Donetsk, Lugansk etc.) and who had been subjected by ultranationalist violence over the years since the collapse of the USSR, rebelled against the coup regime and formed separatist factions that demanded independence.
The Ukrainian Civil War ensued. Forced to choose between letting the Ukrainian fascists gaining power and allowing ethnic cleansing of Russians to take place at their borders, or to military intervene at the expense of inviting international condemnation, Russia chose the latter. Crimea which had voted overwhelmingly for secession (not recognized by the international community) was immediately annexed. Meanwhile, aided by the Russian military, the Donbass separatists gave the unprepared Ukrainian Armed Forces a severe beating.
(For this, Russia was to be punished with sanctions. As if that was not enough, when Malaysian airliner MH17 was shot down over eastern Ukraine, even more severe sanctions were imposed against Russia. The economic growth trajectory of Russia since the early 2000s was completely wiped out, and Russia would endure an economic crisis that would last for 44 months (nearly 4 years) before its growth would return pre-sanctions baseline, only for Covid pandemic to hit a year later.)
A truce was made by the end of August 2014. Known as the Minsk Protocol, the Donbass provinces (but not Crimea) were to be returned to the Ukrainian authority, but Donetsk and Luhansk had to be given increased autonomy through local governance, especially with regards to cultural matters. This was such that language and cultural bans cannot be ordered directly from politicians in Kyiv.
The Ukrainian fascists immediately broke the truce and were given another beating by the Donbass separatists. An annoyed Putin had to be dragged back to the negotiating table by the French president Hollande and German chancellor Merkel, who both gave their personal promises that Ukraine would behave and adhere to the protocol this time.
Minsk II was signed in February 2015, and yet in the following years, the Ukrainian fascists had made no attempt to implement the protocol as agreed. In fact, no criminal prosecutions were even made against the Azov fascists who were involved in the torture and murder of civilians. They were instead celebrated as “heroes of Ukraine” by state media. Stepan Bandera became a symbol of Ukrainian history, and rallies were often held openly with explicit Nazi emblems in honor of Bandera. (Imagine if Berlin held open rally that honor Adolf Hitler in this day and age.)
In the years since, Russia kept waiting for Ukraine to honor their agreement, but it would never come. Instead, for the next 8 years, NATO would arm Ukraine and provided military aid and training to the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
This was all too clear that Ukraine had no intention of honoring Minsk. Their goal has always been to militarily reconquer the Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts with the help of NATO rearmament.
Moscow became increasingly concerned, but somehow still held out the hope that things would somehow turn for the better. This illusion would soon be shattered.
Part III: Kyiv and Washington
expand
In 2019, former actor and comedian President Zelensky was elected as the head of state through an overwhelming support by the residents of eastern Ukraine (the separatist Donetsk and Lugansk, of course, were not included in the election). Seen as a “peace president” that would bridge the gap between western and eastern Ukraine that had divided the nation for far too long, it would appear that light was finally at the end of the tunnel.
And yet, Zelensky would soon find himself disobeyed by the civil and military bureaucracies, which have since been staffed with fascist sympathizers since the Ukrainian Civil War had entered its truce.
In 2021, President Biden assumed office and vowed to undo the shame and humiliation that his predecessor, Trump, had brought to the nation. After visiting the White House and met with President Biden, President Zelensky would return to Ukraine a changed man, whose charged and aggressive rhetoric betrays the peace candidate he had once promised to serve his electorate. Explicit announcements about joining NATO, abandoning Budapest Memorendum that had promised the nuclear non-proliferation status of the nation, as well as the mobilization of Ukrainian army towards the Donbass front.
These inexplicable behavior that Zelensky exhibited sent Moscow into high alert. Deeply concerned about the breaking down of truce in Ukraine, Russia called for a serious discussion about its security concerns with the United States. This was the final plea from Russia to the US, and culminated in the Russia-US Summit held in Geneva in June 2021, a direct meeting between President Biden and President Putin. Russian diplomats prepared hundreds of pages of proposal that laid out their concerns explicitly, and proposed various measures to address them. Unfortunately, these would fall on deaf ears. In less than two months after the Russia-US Summit, in August 2021, the US would begin to ship Javelins and Stingers to Ukraine. A second shipment would follow in December 2021.
If there was an illusion before, it no longer is the case. For Russia, it became all too clear that the US is preparing for a war against Russia through Ukraine. Worse, a direct Ukrainian assault on Donetsk and Luhansk would cost significant civilian casualties, and spiral into a full scale crisis that could have adverse repercussions for many years to come.
And so, as the Ukrainian Armed Forces continued to mobilize towards the Donbass front, and with the shelling of Donbass intensified by an order of magnitude, it was now or never for Russia. They either take the initiative and foil the Ukrainian invasion, or they wait until the inevitable Ukrainian assaults on the cities of Donetsk and Luhansk.
—-
Epilogue
expand
While mainstream media would often blame Russia for denying Ukraine from signing the EU Association Agreement that would otherwise have economically “benefited” the Ukrainian state, what is little known is that Ukraine did sign the EU Association Agreement in 2015 as the Ukrainian Civil War was on a pause.
Just as Russia had predicted and warned from the start, the EU was never going to let Ukraine benefit from the arrangement. While Ukraine had anticipated that their heavy industrial products (aviation, space technology) could be exported to the EU, the European states instead enacted protectionist measures to stop Ukraine’s industrial products from gaining ground in the European market. Rather, Ukraine was relegated to exporting cheap agricultural products to Europe, while its heavy industry was wiped out in the process, having lost its former trade relationship with Russia and betrayed by the EU free trade agreement.
The story of post-Soviet Ukraine and Russia is a story of how Western imperialism, neoliberal economic colonialism, and the tried-and-tested regime change doctrine that traced its roots back to the post-war Gladio operations, continue to enforce the unequal exchange of value between the Imperial Core and the Periphery, even years after countries were supposedly “decolonized” and gained independence.
👏 I especially enjoyed reading the prologue. I didn't know this history. That's some incredible foreshadowing, I'd say if this wasn't reality. Thank you for sharing!
Incredible post! Hate to be that guy, but do you have any sources? I’d love to be able to walk people through this timeline, but it’s a hard sell when the sole source is “some commie on bear website”
I wrote a similar effort post before with a good amount of references back then with an old account which has since been deleted. I will have to dig through the sources again when I have time.
Exactly what I was going to ask. I have a lib friend who I think could be pushed somewhat away from the "correct" lib take on the war with write-up like this, but his first question is going to be about the sources.
Agree that this is a very bad take. There are Cable leaks from US diplomat going back DECADES that confirm just how serious the notion of Ukraine joining nato was to Russia and that it would likely mean a war if it ever came to fruition.
This is 2008 so it's pre 2014 coup
I think the other side of this that's rarely talked about are the families with members that were on the ukrainian side and the russian side. For Russia a huge issue with Ukraine joining nato is the quantity of families with individuals who then become nato and will be turned into natoites. The effect that these family members will have on their family across the border is of major concern. They don't want a base being created for colour revolution, or worse.
america has a long and storied history of ignoring the advice of their ambassadors. Not that the stupidity is a defence, but it is believable to me that natos were surprised.
It's an admittedly half-assed video which probably was made only because he never made a proper one when the war started it's to be taken as seriously as his live stream slop content. It's good to piss off both Z-leninist/banderites and harvest that good good engagement nectar.
My general rule is that i dont watch videos of his that doesnt have at least 20 citations in the description.
Hard disagree. His long form videos are some of the most meticulously sourced content on that shitty platform. And tbh the fact that he’s upfront about wanting money is just being more honest about it than the average video essayist. I really don’t see how he could be “grifting” by running away from most popular opinions and content lol. “Grifting” by being one of the most aggressively pro-Palestine people on the platform doesn’t seem like the best way to make a buck, but it seems like you just have some personal hatred of him so you do you, lol.
and that Western and Ukrainian aggression didn't poke the tiger.
I think his argument is more that they did poke it but that doesn't justify a full scale land invasion.
I don't agree with him, but honestly his take here seems way more consistent and rational than Libs on the topic. He's still wrong, but I was honestly expecting it to be worse given his history.
If this was the entire argument, his position would be kind of valid. Nato poking the bear is an explanation, but not an excuse for Russia.
But then he later states that the forced conscription in Ukraine is just what any nation would do. Which, sure, but that's not a fucking excuse either then.
For me the subtext of the video came across as “this is horrific for the working class of both countries and should stop”, which is literally the correct take.
"war is bad and should stop", when removed from context and analysis is not a take, it's a platitude.
The fact that he whitewashes the West's role in the war, pretends Ukraine is not a country with a significant Russian-friendly minority, and puts the blame for the war's consequences and continuation on Russia means that his "war is bad and should stop" ends up being an endorsement of NATO's position - that only Russia can and should take measures to stop the war, and that any escalation from the West is justified.
No I agree.
He made points here I respect tho and think it's good for Libs to hear.
Comparing this to Gaza is ridiculous, Ukraine has a government and a military, more specifically a military with the backing of the most powerful governments on earth.
There's no evidence of genocide, Russia's goal is clearly to take territory not to wipe out a group of people, most of the casualties are combatants not civilians.
I strongly disagree with his downplaying of how entrenched neo-Nazis clearly are in the Ukrainian military though, and suggesting there 0 genuine, non-astroturfed Russian separatist sentiment in eastern Ukraine.
His sentiment is overall much better still than most liberals, of course. It's just his dismissal of very valid leftist positions that irks me. This is a fight between two capitalist nations and the principled take would be no war but the class war. To that end, the forced conscription of both sides should be highlighted as the barbaric thing it is, where the state forces unwilling men to die for the profits of oligarchs. BadEmpanada rightfully points out that this whole war is a pointless meat grinder that doesn't serve either people.
Russia doesn't care about the fascists, but they are still there, and fucking Bandera is now widely celebrated. Ukraine is not a nation worth the blood shed over it. Defending Ukraine serves no purpose for the cause of any denomination of socialism. It is also not our responsibility as westerners to deal with the Russian imperialism either, we got our own house to clean. This shit is what broke the second international, we should know this by now. Working against the war effort of "our" side is the fucking point, because they are not our side, and we are responsible for it. So what, if Russia "wins" or there is a peace treaty? It puts an end to the dying and there are still capitalists in control. Boo hoo. But there is no need to put it this way.
This isn't a fight where leftists should pick a side to "support", it's a pointless war we should oppose. The senselessness and cruelty of it all, of either side, should not be excused, but highlighted. This is what capitalism fucking does. Don't say Ukraine or the West is right, don't say Russia is right, say this war is shit. It was preventable, neither leadership cares about its people, and it should end. If you wanna go for the "good guy" appearance, say you support UN monitored referendums in the contested areas after a peace treaty, or something like that. Put the people first. They live on the land, they get to decide. That's democracy.
Sorry for the rant.
What you just wrote is also BE's opinion though
I'm not sure what was lost in his words, but it's very obvious that he mourns for the loss of life primarily in Ukraine but also for the Russians.
He's against this war not because he's against war generally, but because he's against imperialist wars. Which of course includes everything Israel does.
To "prove" this it's not all that hard. He regularly talks about Hamas and generally any sort of Palestinian resistance, militant or otherwise, as being perfectly legitimate and beyond criticism from him (and anyone on the left being the implication). He supports Palestinians because their cause is truly anti-imperialist. Whatever it takes for them to achieve victory is acceptable or at least we shouldn't try to stand on moral high ground and speak down to them.
Russia's cause is not anti-imperialist. It's actually just the opposite. Ukraine is stuck in the middle between the larger imperialist aggressor, NATO/US.
Anyway, don't feel like typing more, but you and BE already agree. I think he uses purposefully (for engagement or just being an asshole troll- who can say) inflammatory language or at least sort of... gives off a vibe of something. Smug? Snark? Hard to pinpoint, but it makes you want to kneejerk reply with something. But regardless of him poking at people (maybe it's unintentional- but I know it isn't. I've watched enough of his trolling over the years) his underlying sentiment remains aligned with yours and most people on hexbear/lemmygrad. He's just an asshole.
Why would I spend my free time consuming neither educational material nor actual entertainment and escapism? And this dude is a lot more ‘political commentary’ than he is ‘entertainment’ so I’m fucking out
Kind of a sidebar here but he says that Russia is a dictatorship and that people should gtfo about the "elections".
Now, I don't really know much about Russia at all, but polling shows that Putin is immensely popular, right? So what's the point in rigging elections that you're going to win anyway? I don't think he was trying to make a broader point either, I think he was saying the elections themselves are shams? So... Are they?
It's not a sidebar
You found the weakest thing in the video. The elections can be questioned. We literally cannot know either way because it's not like Russia will be allowing in the UN to inspect voting.
But Putin is objectively very popular and has been for over 20 years or so. So, following your same logic, it of course makes sense for them to elect him repeatedly. Is it a de facto dictatorship? Maybe. I don't really care either. It's clear that the people of Russia like him for better or worse
The elections aren't shams. The fact various powers in Russia will kill any threat and get away with it is the main drawback. With that said it's not like the US doesn't have a history of assassinations of political figures, carried out both by the state and by non-state actors.
says that Russia is a dictatorship
lol is George even a Marxist? all states are class dictatorships
it's all a facade, he's probably intentionally taking the L here to make his video about debunking the Holodomir conspiracy theory have more credibility among the libs, a strong long-term move if you ask me.
Holy fuck you people and your parasocial relationships he's just a ficking grifter
I doubt it, I think this is his actual opinion. Dudes way too irascible to give a shit was Libs think.
Yeah, no part of me believes BadEmpanda would hold back one of his opinions for the libs.
I found a YouTube link in your post. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy: