At the moment, it seems clear Russia is winning the Ukraine war, and no matter how many weapons NATO gives, that reality likely won’t change. Still, others have dreamed up a theory of victory for Ukraine that looks nearly impossible, but, nonetheless, should be considered and debated. Indeed, while it might not be a popular […]
      • rpa@europe.pub
        0·
        5 days ago

        If that’s the only way you can comment this, says much how low you are. I’m no nazi, quite the contrary. And misinformation has to be fought. On both sides. You wouldn’t know a nazi if one was right in front of you.

        At this moment much that comes from US based sources isn’t reliable, specially with Trump in power who is a crony for Putin.

        This war shouldn’t have started at all and it is all Putin’s fault. Best way to “win” the war? Russia retreat and give back the territories. Too many have already died in this stupidity, on all sides.

        • huf [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
          0·
          4 days ago

          you’re on an instance that just recently made a nazi a moderator of at least one of your communities, and you’re apparently fine with it. nazi bar.

  • Kawasaki@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    0·
    6 days ago

    Is this a good or a bad thing? I mean, I hate NATO (they’re fascists, also they played a pretty crucial role in starting this war, didn’t they?), but I’m not Putin’s biggest fan either, I tend not to like fascists.

    On the other hand, I hate Ukraine’s government as well (again, fascists, you know).

    This seems like a gigantic fascist infighting! I can’t help but feel bad for the proletariat of both Russia and Ukraine, especially the ones who didn’t want any of this to happen.

    (I am asking this in good faith)

    • Conselheiro@lemmygrad.ml
      0·
      6 days ago

      I’m of the opinion that the continual and prolonged defeat of NATO against Russia is much better for the international proletariat than a proper “defeat” and withdrawal. It’s better for their resources to be bogged down in Ukraine for another decade like it’s their own Afghanistan than diverted into more winnable wars.

    • Kirbywithwhip1987@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
      0·
      6 days ago

      Bruh it’s surreal to see comment like this on Lemmygrad. Also, how is Putin a fascist? He is no communist and far from perfect, but how exactly a fascist?

      • Kawasaki@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
        0·
        6 days ago

        I might be overly critical, because as a Russian myself, I am very unsatisfied with the current state of Russia, and I recognize that maybe he’s not exactly a fascist, but more of a reactionary. Things like having castrated communists party, the anti-LGBT laws, his endorsement of Ivan Ilyin (a fascist and nazi sympatizer!) and Dugin, his slander of communism and Lenin, the lack of effort in social plan for the poor…

        He’s not a communist, but not a Gaddafi (a criticizable person who did a lot of good things, and was overall a great thing for Lybia) either.

        Credit where it’s due tho, at least he avoided the entire collapse of Russia post-Yeltsin.

        • Kirbywithwhip1987@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
          0·
          6 days ago

          My cousin lives in Russia and he also obviously agrees that current state is not good, from what he told me, CPRF is the biggest opposition(and biggest communist party) there is to Putin, but for some reason they agree with him on some policies. For LGBT, it’s completely unfair to criticize him on that considering that his stance is the norm in even most of the communist parties since Stalin, it was the same during USSR, CPRF has the same stance, KKE has same stance and it was the same during Tito in Yugoslavia here, so pretty much Eastern European standard. As for Illyin… yikes.

          And he sometimes praises Stalin for some reason(even while shitting on Lenin), although he had some interesting takes recently like that time when he said that nationalism is the first stage to nazism since it’s based not only on love for nation but also on hatred for others. So it’s really hit or miss with him.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
      0·
      6 days ago

      A NATO defeat is an unquestionably a good thing overall. It’s also worth noting that Russia is a far better actor geopolitically than the west. Russia is helping liberation forces in Africa, they’re supporting China, and are generally aligned with the global south. This is why Russia deserves critical support right now. We can acknowledge the internal contradictions born out of capitalism in Russia, while also acknowledging that Russia winning the war will lead to a positive change in the world.

      • Kawasaki@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
        0·
        6 days ago

        I see, that makes sense. I just have one more question: what about Ukraine, or more specifically, the Ukrainian people? It feels like they’re in a horrible situation: either die, or lose your state as a result of NATO’s war (and its inability to defend them). Are we just expected to add them to the endless list of victims of capitalism? And while I do believe that nation-states are ultimately a problem, losing yours at the hands of another power still feels awful.

        This whole situation is just so messy, and while communist sort of agree on most things, there is no consensus here. Some don’t support either, some want Ukraine to fend off Russia, some prefer Russia to defeat NATO and take Ukraine. Never have I seen so much division, and all make some pretty good points to me.

        I mean, «This is an imperialist war. It shouldn’t reguard us.», I see, logical. «Ukraine is just a proxy of the USA. It’s better for it to he defeated. Russia also helps Burkina Faso, DPRK, and other communists around the world at least.», you’re right! «Russia shouldn’t have begun the war, and it’s imperialism and irredentism. It’s true that Ukraine is fascist, but it’s the job of Ukraine’s proletarians to overthrow it.», that’s a good point too…

        I am assuming that, Ukrainians are inevitable victims of capitalism, and if there was a strong disciplined national liberation movement of Ukraine from both NATO and Russia, we would support that, but since there is not, a NATO defeat that helpes an enemy of the West is the next best thing. Is that correct?

        I apologize for the questions, I am trying to deprogram myself and see this matter a little more clearly.

        • davel@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
          0·
          6 days ago

          Despite Western claims, Russia is not prosecuting this war in the name of imperialism nor revanchism. You could say that irredentism was a factor, but only insomuch as ethnic Russians inhabit eastern & southern Ukraine and had been suffering persecution by US/Ukraine-backed fascists. The major factor was US/NATO expansion. Previously.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
          0·
          6 days ago

          Ukraine allowed itself to be used as a NATO proxy and the people of Ukraine are now paying the price for that. People of Ukraine allowed the west to overthrow their legitimate government and to install a fascist regime in its place.

          The destiny of Ukraine is to serve as a warning for others going forward. It’s important to clarify that NATO never had any intent to defend Ukraine. NATO used the people of Ukraine to fight Russia as a proxy.

          It’s also important to note that Ukraine was already in a civil war before Russia intervened. This lecture that Mearsheimer gave back in 2015 is an excellent primer on the subject. Mearsheimer is certainly not pro Russian in any sense, and a proponent of US global hegemony. First, here’s the demographic breakdown of Ukraine:

          here’s how the election in 2004 went:

          this is the 2010 election:

          As we can clearly see from the voting patterns in both elections, the country is divided exactly across the current line of conflict. Furthermore, a survey conducted in 2015 further shows that there is a sharp division between people of eastern and western Ukraine on which economic bloc they would rather belong to:

          The most likely outcome of the war is that Russia is going to absorb Russian majority parts of Ukraine that either actively wish to be part of Russia, or are neutral. Meanwhile, western Ukraine will be left as a problem for Europe to deal with.

          NATO defeat that helpes an enemy of the West is the next best thing. Is that correct?

          As I noted earlier, it’s not simply that Russia is an enemy of the west, but also that it’s currently aligned with the global majority and unlike the west it is not hostile towards socialist states. I also think that both military defeat against Russia and economic defeat in the trade war with China will play a significant role in discrediting neoliberalism within the west. This will create opportunities for new ideas to emerge which is essential for any sort of a socialist movement in the west. I wrote about this dynamic here in more detail.

          https://dialecticaldispatches.substack.com/p/the-stress-test-liberalism-never