https://mronline.org/2023/03/10/eight-contradictions-of-the-imperialist-rules-based-order/
Show
This is such a concise, clear and well written article. Love the work Vijay Prashad does
Search "8 contradictions in the new era" in Tricontinental Institute .
Russia isn't going to lose. The Ukrainian counteroffensive has been a complete failure, and Ukraine's Western patrons are already at the stage of acceptance. Of course, Russia won't agree to freezing the war, like what happened at Korea, because they have all the leverage.
Yeah it's still a bit divided over there on opinions of the big two communist parties over in the RF.
I believe it's a case of either believing the KPRF is the Russian equivalent of the Yankee CPUSA in the negative connotations that's normally associated with cpusa, that the KPRF is a boomer social luncheon party to spend days in nostalgia for the CCCP, or that the KPRF is objectively captured by the Russian capitalists under Putin and are controlled opposition.
And I've seen some takes dismissing the RCWP-KPRF as being a patsoc party on the grounds of their chauvinist LGBT+ views. But the few people that did hold that view that I knew of haven't shown their face for a while so the RCWP's more or less an unknown existence
It becomes even worse if you point out that a preemptive invasion of a weaker nation due to a fear of attack is the same justification that the USA used for the invasion of Iraq.
The difference is that in the case of the US that was a lie. And Ukraine being a US proxy is not actually the weaker party in this, Russia is because they don't have the full backing of an alliance like NATO behind them. So Russia was entirely justified in feeling threatened by a militarized russophobic Nazi regime, not on the other side of an ocean but right on their border, wanting to join a hostile military alliance who openly declare that their principal enemy is Russia.
People who try to draw superficial comparisons between Ukraine and Iraq are lying by omission because literally everything about this is different.
So if Ukraine couldn't defend itself due to US support, then the comparison would have been accurate?
I was expecting an attempt at an argument. I mean, criticizing the Ukrainian Communist Party has a "if you're not with us, you're against us" energy to it.
Use our emoji
:debate-pervert:instead if you can, more accessibleUnfortunately it doesn't work for me, so I have to copy paste it like this.
If you’re on the Lemmy website, type it in manually instead of using the emoji picker
If you’re on an app, I don’t know — I don’t use them
Looks correct on Hexbear, but those aren’t Lemmygrad emotes
Oh yeah, I think lemmy emotes work fine for me. I was trying to use hexbear emotes. I guess I'll just try and stick with ours from now on.
Show
Yeah, if you want to use Hexbear emotes, it’s probably best to copy them from a Hexbear account
If Ukraine couldn't defend itself due to US support, there would have been no war in the first place.
The threat of NATO having bases ON the Russian border is why this war is happening.
But don't take it from me, take it from this guy
Show
Or better yet, how about the CIA?
Show
Show
Show
They knew in 2008 that this was THE red line for Russia, then laughed and crossed it anyway, and it played out EXACTLY as their analysts said it would
And there are no NATO bases currently in Ukraine nor was there support for Ukraine in 2008 to repel Russian aggression. So it might have been a strategic worry for Russia, but nothing ever came of it.
And it comes back to my original point that the war was pre-emptive attack on a weaker sovereign nation for the stated purpose of defending the stronger nation from possible attack. This war has Bush doctrine all over it.
And it comes back to my original point that the war was pre-emptive attack on a weaker sovereign nation for the stated purpose of defending the stronger nation from possible attack. This war has Bush doctrine all over it.
It's more complicated than that. There is still context from 2014 up till now, Minsk 1 and 2. Russia tried diplomacy talks then the SMO happened.
"If the situation was entirely different, would this comparison be accurate?"
Are you talking about 2014, when the U.S. orchestrated a coup in Ukraine, and Crimean residents were overwhelmingly in favor of joining Russia, foreshadowing the following decade of low-intensity civil war leading up to the current war?
Then would that justify France invading Niger after the Niger coup due to geopolitical reasons?
And these votes only seem to happen immediately after an invasion without any international observation. Or are you going to freak out when I point out this is how the Sudetenland got annexed.
Is Niger right next door to France? Did the most powerful country on the planet, that has been trying to destroy France for a century, instigate that coup, start arming up the Nigerien military, and then intimate that Niger would be allowed to join its aggressive military alliance? Do Nigeriens want to join France?
these votes only seem to happen immediately after an invasion without any international observation
You're right to be skeptical. However, look at things like the shared political history of Russia and Crimea (both in the USSR longer than modern Ukraine has existed), the disagreeements between Crimea and Ukraine dating back to the 90s, the presence of ethnic Russians in the region, the absence of violence before or after the annexation, and the separatist movements in parts of Ukraine that also have large ethnic Russian populations. Nothing about the situation -- other than western propaganda -- suggests Russia is there against the will of the people.
Someone remind me which party isn't the mainly opportunist one?
KPRF is the old-school Marxist-Leninist communist party and the one which is most principled anti-imperialist. It's also by far the biggest one, in fact it's the second biggest political force in Russia behind Putin's liberal United Russia party.
The other "communist parties" that exist in Russia are insignificant fringe groups of Trotskyists and ultra-leftists who hate Putin so much that they would rather side with the imperialists and help them destroy Russia thinking they can do another revolution after this government is toppled kind of like Trotskyists thought that they could have a second revolution if Stalin was defeated by the Nazis. It is no coincidence that some of them are outright funded by the West...
The KPRF are not old school Marxist Leninists. They are liberal shills and at best a controlled opposition party. They bend to every one of Putin’s whims, (minus a few pointless disagreements for appearances).
Their leaders receive absurd funding and “gifts” from United Russia, and the higher leadership is so corrupt you would have thought you were in American Congress.
I just wonder how United Russia works? Yeah that's totally I have observed. There are "leftists" in Russia who were cheering for the bombing of Kerch bridge and who thinks Russia is an imperialist state. Not that I know KPRF that much but it seems they have conservative social views (it's not so much different than in Pakistan/India and many parties in Africa and middle East). Regarding SMO and others, I think they should have their own viewpoint and we shouldn't think it as a similar situation like in Iraq and Afghanistan. KPRF is a coherent party and not some anarchist masturbating for Azov.
There are a ton of genuine and principled communist parties around the world especially in the global south which hold on to at least some social conservative lines. We need to accept that contradictions like this are a fact of life, it is to be expected that many communist parties, at least those that are not astroturfed from the outside, will in some way reflect the dominant social mores and attitudes of their country. After all, their members come from the general population, they are not above them but part of the people and will share some of the same prejudices inculcated in them by their upbringing.
Of course we would like to see their attitude change in a more progressive direction but this is not something that we have the power to enforce on them, and to attempt to do so would be viewed as cultural imperialism. They need to come to the right conclusions on their own. In the meantime we must not allow such secondary contradictions to be exploited to break our international solidarity with them, or indeed with most other forces that share our principled opposition to imperialism. Imperialism and not social conservatism is the primary contradiction of our time and the main obstacle to socialism.
Yeah thats totally my view , even I don't like some aspects of LGBT movement of the west . Eastern culture should have its own thought and progressive movement and it can't be enforced from outside . You can't tell Pakistani comrades to abandon their religion before coming to world conference of commies , also Eastern society functions in a more different way , openly kissing and nudism is strictly prohibited you can't do parades like in the west .
As for United Russia, i am not the most knowledgeable on this subject, but from what i know it's basically a big tent party with no real unifying idea apart from being a platform for the current political establishment which is all about stability and status quo. They have largely managed to absorb virtually the entire center of the political ideological spectrum leaving only the communists, the western funded liberals, and the few truly far right Nazi types that exist in Russia (and this last group frequently enters into alliances of convenience with the astroturfed liberal opposition; the poster child for this type of collaboration is of course Navalny) still remaining outside of it.
A YouTube link was detected in your post. Here are links to the same video on Invidious, which is a YouTube frontend that protects your privacy:
