Here we go again westerpropaganda vs russian propaganda.
By leaving Ukraine right? Thats the only logical conclusion I can think of.
Edit: holy hot heck did my block list just grow today.
Edit: holy hot heck did my block list just grow today.
enjoy your echo chamber
Enjoy your misinformation bots.
Who’s winning the war?
No? Why would Russia stop when it’s winning?
bit of a stretch to characterize this as winning. Russia faced off with a much weaker opponent and has been spinning its tires for years now. the russian economy is in shambles. the most effective russian play this entire war was putting trump back in the white house, but that fucker will be dead before midterms. look at his puffy face and purple hands. he is a walking corpse
This is Qanon tier nonsense
Russia has been gradually taking more and more land and strategic footholds. This war is incredibly brutal, and the massive rise in FPV drones that are cheap and deadly forces slow movements, almost like a return to World War I style trench warfare. The Russian economy is still holding on strong, Europe is importing tons of gas indirectly from Russia through alternate channels, and Russia has spent the last decade trying to rely less on unreliable western trade partners. Further, there’s no real evidence of Russia putting Trump in the White House, nor would Ukraine suddenly be winning had Harris been in office.
The word “gradually” is doing some heavy lifting in your post. the economist estimates that russia has only captured an additional 1.45% of ukraine in 3 fucking years. the surge you mentioned has been a month long. it will sputter, just like every other putin blunder. russia has a lot of meat to throw at the enemy and the russian plebs seem remarkably complacent about putin’s misrule, but they can’t sustain this level of pressure.
here’s a chart to put your claim in perspective:
as for russia’s economy being strong - their interest rate is 16.5 percent. inflation is rampant. the us just made it harder for russia to sell oil with new sanctions on lukoil and rosnef. what school of economics do you beong to that calls this situation “holding on strong”?
the evidence that russia influenced the election is pervasive. so many maga influencers have been revealed as foreign accounts. i wouldn’t be too surprised to learn that you yourself are a russian bot, so uncritically do you spout moscow propaganda.
wouldn’t be too surprised to learn that you yourself are a russian bot, so uncritically do you spout moscow propaganda.
Yeah, no shit the “evidence is pervasive” when your standard of evidence for declaring someone a Russian agent is “they disagree with me”
You are a fascist, you are a Nazi ranting about Judeo-Bolshevick conspiracies, you are a McCarthyist ranting about communist subversion of our precious bodily fluids.
There’s no evidence that the collapse in Ukrainian defenses will slow down, rather it seems like it will accelerate as strongholds fall and the war becomes increasingly unpopular. Russia isn’t trying to take all of Ukraine, just the four oblasts, the Economist is trying to frame it as total and complete conquest of Ukraine. When compared to Russia’s actual objectives, Russia is advancing steadily.
Further, Russia does not “throw meat” at the war. Russians are largely supportive of Putin right now because he’s doing a balancing act between appeasing the Russian capitalist class and the rising socialist movements in the public. Russia’s economy is holding strong, the sheer fact that sanctions are still coming out means they haven’t been effective thus far. I belong to the Marxist school of economics, which recognizes actual production over the largely financial western economies.
Your final accusation that I’m a bot for not agreeing with you is just the cherry on top. You give clear examples of liberals manipulating data like the economist graph and using percentages of total Ukrainian territory and not the Donbass region, because when we measure Russia by its ability to achieve its actual goals its clear that its rapidly advancing towards them. You’re quite literally uncritically spouting liberal, western propaganda that falls apart at the slightest prodding.
Removed by mod
Incredible homophobia from you. Counteract my points with your own, not mask-off homophobia. Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds.
Removed by mod
Ableism too, amazing. Mask-off.
“Hehehe CUM hehe people who don’t support the Ukranian nazi government are GAY for a RUSSIAN man and GAY is BAD and SHAMEFUL huehuehue”
Behold: the liberal ally
Removed by mod
Boring chan dweller shit, nurse your bruised little ego elsewhere
I don’t understand what you think is logical about that
Because Russia has no reason to be invading neighbouring countries?
Idk just a thought. Not sure why we reward the aggressors. Remember that time the Russian backed separatists who totally weren’t just Russian military shot down that airliner?
I am genuinely shocked at liberals inability to understand the difference between is and ought
No reason
Oh, of course. This all just happened for no reason, contravening all laws of cause and effect. History began in February 2022.
Reward the aggressor
Who’s rewarding anyone? They’ve won the war all by themselves. This is how war works, not some kindergarten where you can put countries in timeout. To think that acknowledging objective reality is somehow “rewarding” anyone is some real “punish the unbelievers” type shit.
Real life is not marvel comic book that the “good guys” wins over the “bad guys”.
Russia is winning and the logical conclusion is definitely not giving up at the finishing line and turn back. Do you know what logical means?
It’s not a comic book, it’s international relations. You know what would help russias relations? Getting the fuck out of Ukraine.
The logical conclusion is Russia fucks off and leaves other countries alone.
“everyone is twelve” theory of politics continues to be validated, because that is a take a 12 year old would have
👍
Reality will not follow your delusions.
Oh so we’re okay with Russia being a bully?
Please, for the love of God, learn the difference between is and ought
If China had stepped in to stop Israel’s genocide, we would be having this exact conversation about China.
No it wouldn’t. Don’t be an idiot.
We would absolutely be hearing rhetoric about “Antisemetic Chinese imperialism” blasted at us from every angle, quit being willfully naive.
It doesn’t matter if Russia is a bully or not. Marching off of Ukraine is not a logical conclusion, it will not happen.
Tell me why it isn’t logical
Jesus Christ I swear Westerners are fed through a tube.
Go on
Are you literally 12?
Because Russia is winning and has no reason to stop. Whether or not anyone is “okay” with Russia winning makes no difference on what the logical conclusion is, which is eventual Russian victory, as Russia is winning and Ukraine is losing even with NATO support. Russia stopping while they are ahead and the war is coming to a close is the least logical conclusion.
Symping for autocrats are we? How very Marxist-Leninist Edit: * /s *
Reporting on what Putin has said about the state of the war is not “simping” for anyone, nor is Marxism-Leninism about “simping” for anyone.
Cowbee. I appreciate some of your takes on Marxism, but disagree frequently with your frame of reference on state power in the global field.
I view the war with Ukraine as one of Russo imperialism in response to Western imperialism. Indeed the USSR itself had many imperialist tendencies under a unified Asiatic / Slavic Soviet even as did Western and Asian counterparts post WW2
The irony being I am more allied to Trotsky or Luxemburg’s take. Which no doubt wouldn’t receive fair purchase in ML group. Forgive me for not directly referencing War and International - as it meanders but hits many themes relevant to Russia/Ukraine conflict
That being said to summarize my view: wars of conquest as a tool for furthering state capital / geopolitical interests shouldn’t be supported by Marxists, and posting the rationalization of an autocrat reads as support to me.
If Russia was actually imperialist and the Russo-Ukrainian war an inter-imperialist conflict, then I’d agree with you, but Russia isn’t imperialist (and certainly not the USSR). In the current era, the US Empire is the hegemon, and its vassals the beneficiaries of imperialism. Russia is governed by nationalists who do not have a stake in the global imperialist system, and as such are forced into south-south trade and south-south alliances. Further, there is a rising communist movement within Russia that is growing year over year that stands to return Russia to socialism.
Ukraine is used somewhat similarly as how Israel is used by the US Empire; as millitary bases. The far-right Banderites in Kiev have power currently, and are doing their job of de-communization. The Donbass region seceded, and the ensuing war between Donetsk/Luhansk and Kiev is what is sparking Russian intervention. Russia is not doing this in pursuit of new neocolonies to exploit, nor does it have any. Russia lacks the financial capital as well as a spot in the global financial monopoly by which imperialism functions that the west has.
A NATO victory over Russia would result in ethnic cleansing in the Donbass region, serious destabilization in a significant anti-US force, and a strong ally for socialist countries and anyone trying to break away from the IMF.
32·1 day agoFurther, there is a rising communist movement within Russia that is growing year over year that stands to return Russia to socialism.
And, what? What difference does it make? France had a decent communist movement, right? They were still imperialists.
Russia doesn’t have a stake in the world imperialist system, France does and has for centuries. If France were to lose in a war against the global south, there would be a huge blow to their continued domination and subjugation of African countries. The fact that Russia has a rising communist movement is just a bonus tacked onto the end, it isn’t an indication of the country being imperialist or not. In fact, the nationalists in charge of Russia are caught between needing to appease the public yearning more and more for socialism and their own interests in perpetuating their capitalist system.
Does that make sense?
Cowbee, I disagree almost entirely with what you posted. But with respect for you clearly articulating your position I will share my response.
To your “But Russia is not imperialist” , please reflect on the following and to what extent you must stretch a rationalization:
First and Second Chechen Wars (1994, 2000) Puppet Leader in Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko (1996) Puppet leader in Ukraine Victor Yanukovych (2010) Georgian War (2008) Annexation of Crimea (2014) Role in Syria conflict (2000 onwards) Role in African dictatorships in Burma Faso and Niger (2010s- present)
… global south / US bad too / old Soviet vassal states must kneel ect… I get it. But the above conflicts are evidence of state capitalism exerting itself militarily for geopolitical and economic aims
I doubt this will influence you much as you are pretty invested in your world view. But from my vantage point and reading of theory (likely some overlap if you are ML) - you are wrong *respectfully
Comrade cfgaussian already answered perfectly here. Essentially, you mix in defensive wars with allyships with other countries, and claim the defensive wars are for imperialism and the allyships “puppetry.” The Sahel States are progressive, and are allied with Russia in their national liberation from France and western imperialism.
I am a Marxist-Leninist, yes. Imperialism needs to be analyzed primarily by the definition of imperialism Lenin gives, not on whether or not a country interacts with others. In most of these examples, such as the Sahel States, Russia is working against imperialism.
Imperialism is the monopoly stage of capitalism by which finance capital and world monopoly are dominant. Russia does not have this. Russia is currently under the control of nationalists, not finance capital, and it is the west that has that global financial monopoly.
Your error is in both erasing Lenin’s analysis of imperialism and viewing any kind of interaction Russia has as inherently imperialist working backwards from there. To use your rhetoric, I suggest you reflect first on what imperialism is, why we define it as such and how it operates, and consider why Marxist-Leninists therefore have the understanding of the Russian Federation that we do.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/index.htm#ch10
Imperialism is defined as the monopoly stage of finance capital.
Russian economy is dominated by the state and oligarchs, not by independent finance capital. It’s territorial expansion while being an regional historical imperialist action is defensive and self limiting and driven mostly by nationalism and security concerns.
Your list provides critical empirical evidence for a dialectical analysis but requires contextualization to avoid oversimplification. See response from comrade @[email protected]
😂 how’s that 3 day special military operation going.
is your position that since day 4 this has been a Ukrainian victory?
The plan never was ‘3 days’, that was an estimate that came from U.S General Mark Milley.
sssh, the 3 day thing has become part of the mythology of this clusterfuck for westerners, they’ll insist it’s real forever
Now ain’t that the truth.
I guess a broken clock is right twice a day eh?
Then why did they state that at the beginning?
They didn’t
Lukashenko and the editor of RT said it, not the Russian government nor millitary.
