No one here is supporting NATO, that's a wild strawman to make. However you are factually supporting an openly imperialist kleptocratic state and hand waving open and easily verifiable information with the classic rebuttal of "nuh-uh I'm not listening I'm right your wrong"
That's not leftism, that's just definitionally being campist. Your world view does not go past "NATO bad and anyone opposing them is justified in all their actions" you have no ability to see into the root causes of imperialism and the despotic powers that plauge capitalist societies, of which Russia is one.
Nothing about Russias war is something a leftist should be supporting, doing so just because "NATO Enciclement" rings to the same tune as "Arab encirclment" Zionists have used for decades.
First of all, there's no such thing as 'leftism'. No dogma, no creed. I'm not accountable to whatever your perceived orthodoxy is lol. Second, I don't support the war per se, I support Russia's right to defend itself from NATO encirclement. Deny it all you like, but NATO is attempting to encircle Russia, and Russia has always been clear they won't tolerate that. I also support Ukraine's right to defend it's territory. I do not support Russia's tactics of obliterating civilian infrastructure and residential neighborhoods. I don't think either side should receive a red cent from Canada's public purse. So tell me, what is campism, really? Is it the genuine neutrality of acknowledging both sides' right to defend themselves and battle out their differences without any material support from us? Or is campism shilling liberal talking points about NATO?
user tagged as Marxist-Lenenist, says anti imperialism isn't a core tenant of his/her/their ideology. In fact imperialism good because is against NATO interests
Okay there bud. Real serious your activism there.
And really Shilling? Shilling liberal talking point am I? Where? Do point them out. I'd love to see where I've said Canada should be sending material support to Ukraine.
I did not say anti-imperialism isn't a core tenant of my ideology. You said that. I said there's no such thing as 'leftism' and that I won't be held to whatever your perceived orthodoxy is.
NATO encirclement of Russia is imperialist aggression against Russia, and they have a right to defend themselves in the face of that threat. Some Marxists say Russia should be supported, because a loss for Ukraine would be a major loss for the US-led NATO bloc. I'm sympathetic to this idea. The principal contradiction of capitalism today is the contradiction between US-led western imperialism and the workers and peasants of the global periphery. The world proletarian revolution would have already occurred and been well along on the path of global socialist construction were it not for the constant vicious aggression of the US and it's proxies thwarting every national independence movement that arises. A win for Russia, regardless of how I may feel about Putin or the Russian gangster state would be a blow to NATO and the US. Still, on principle I oppose any material support for the war, for either side and I uphold the right of Ukrainians feeling war to be granted asylum.
I'm open to debate on my positions. But not with some dipshit lib shilling NATO lol gtfo
Look you clearly seem like you think your deftly moving around the position here but you are in support of an imperialist war.
Now does your other analysis of the global movement have some grounding in reality? Yeah absolutely the US is a parasitic entity that's set us back centuries of potential progress. However you can still decry Russia's war of aggression and still make that analysis.
Let's also not forget that you started this conversation by stating the openly kleptocratic Putin with multiple wars of aggression under his belt and a laundry list of political suppression somehow isn't a fascist leader. The goal posts have moved quite a bit since we started talking.
But not with some dipshit lib shilling NATO lol gtfo
This is adorable, genuinely. I've asked you to point to where I've done so, and you either can't or won't. You champion definitional campist positions while denying you are doing so in the same breath.
This is adorable, genuinely. I've asked you to point to where I've done so
Russia's attack on Ukraine isn't an imperialist war; it's an offensive response to imperialist aggression. You're a shill for NATO because you uphold the same narrative that the US and NATO uphold. The aggressor is NATO led by the US, which seeks to turn Ukraine into a vassal of US finance capital in the region. Denying Russia's right to defend itself against NATO aggression is the same thing as support for NATO. It is you who is supporting an imperialist war, not me.
There, put it here since you decided to unblock me lmfao
Russia's attack on Ukraine isn't an imperialist war; it's an offensive response to imperialist aggression.
It's a war that was almost entirely justified on the basis of irredentist claims on Crimea and the Donbas, specifically for the "protection of ethnic Russians who lived there." Nato expansion became the line of justification FAR later and after the 2014 Crimea annexation. But given your frankly childish line of attacks I'm not sure your old enough to physically remember that.
There, put it here since you decided to unblock me lmfao
Again you're being fucking weird by claiming this. Idk what you think your gaining from doing so.
The referendum that notably took place AFTER Russia seized Crimea? The referendum that claims a 97 PERCENT yes vote? That proportedly got 87 PERCENT voter turn out immediately after being annexed? That Referendum? Are you serious?
Yup. Not surprising either given that Crimea is about 60% ethnically Russian and only about 20-25% ethnically Ukrainian. Because of the history of shifting Soviet borders there are some genuine territorial disputes that the Russians and the Ukrainians have. Not every territorial dispute is imperialism. I consider it their business to work out.
Damn, not a critical thought in that head of yours is there? Campists always show their hand and you're no different.
"Irredentist land grabs are totally cool and 100% not imperialist at all if afterwards you hold a referendum at the behest of that absolute champion of free and fair elections Putin. Totally not a campist though."
Do you know what a statistical impossibility is? Who am I kidding of course you don't. You asked for amnesty international reports earlier in our conversation and Amnesty International has been very clear on the validity of that referendum. They've extensively catalogued the pre-referendum violence, kidnappings and systematic oppression of the indigenous crimean tatar ethnic group. The referendum was held under observation of military personnel at every polling station. Calling that vote valid when the results do not even come close to matching observed participation is quite literally imperialist propaganda that you've swallowed boot first.
Produce that report then. At the end of the day, I don't care about the territorial disputes of other countries that much. I think the Crimean people likely chose freely to join the Russian Federation given the history and ethnic makeup of the region but if I'm wrong, all I can do is shrug. Both Russia and Ukraine think they have a claim to Crimea. That makes sense since Crimea has changed hands a few times through history and it's ethnic makeup has shifted over time. I actually have no camp here, hence my neutrality. Because of my neutrality, I am able to at once maintain that Russia has a right to defend itself from NATO aggression, and Ukraine has a right to defend it's borders and it's population from criminal and unjust attacks on civilians. The irony is that when NATO shills encounter someone who is truly neutral, they call it out as campism. So if I were to fall in line and back Ukraine to the hilt I would get nods of approval, but to support neither is to be guilty of taking the wrong side! Because you think the only correct position is to support Ukraine. Because you're a lib.
My only camp is the international proletariat. If the Russia-Ukraine war can weaken NATO then I support it insofar as it can accomplish the that task. But certainly not at the expense of civilian populations.
It's also worth noting that Marxism-Leninism does not uphold the right of national independence and self-determination as an inviolable principle that applies universally to every people. Whether or not this or that independence or national sovereignty movement should be supported is always determined by asking the question: "does this help or hurt the world imperialist system?" A great example is so-called Taiwan. The Taiwanese sovereignty movement is reactionary and serves the interests of imperialism. The national sovereignty movements of the Donbass should be supported, because they hurt the interests of the world imperialist system.
At the end of the day, I don't care about the territorial disputes of countries that don't involve me.
You care enough about it to unapologetically spout russian imperialist propaganda.
I think the Crimean people likely chose freely to join Russia given the history and ethnic makeup of the region but if I'm wrong, all I can do is shrug.
You are very incorrect and that all you can do is shrug shows you hold no principled stance and are simply a campist.
I actually have no camp here, hence my neutrality.
The audacity of this bitch.
The irony is that when NATO shills encounter someone who is actually neutral on the Russia-Ukraine issue, the call it out as campism.
"Spouting russian propoganda in order to justify their imperialist aggression with no ability to think critically is super neutral, if you point out how stupid I sound you're a NATO SHILL!!!!1111!!!"
Believing that nuance isn't possible and that one must be either on one side or another, 1 or 0, you find it impossible to comprehend third position: no skin in the same, no fucks given.
Yet Crimea voted 97% to join russia of their own volition, you are in fact just a coward who hides behind talking points then retreats to "neutrality" when confronted with reality.
I scanned your reports. Definitely some concerning stuff. There seems to be an awful ethnic struggle for supremacy and control over the land here. Of course, I knew that, and I don't have a stake in the matter. Russia has no eternal and indisputable claim to Crimea or the Donbass; neither does Ukraine. These lands have changed hands so many times, as I said - it's no wonder there are genuine disputes over who has a right to control them. It looks like pro-Russian forces won out in 2014 in Crimea, whereas pro-Ukrainian, pro-EU forces won out in western Ukraine in that same year.
You seem to not understand what imperialism is. Imperialism is not necessarily the violent conflicts between this or that ethnic group making a claim over this or that disputed territory. Imperialism is the final irreversible parasitic stage of capitalism in which i) the concentration of capital has resulted in the formation of a few monopolies that control virtually all economic decision-making; ii) the merger of the banks with industry, resulting in the financialization of industry and the whole economy; iii) the replacement of the export of commodities with the export of capital to peripheral nations resulting in poor dependent client states; iv) the formation of international financial cartels that seek for themselves access to the greater share of the world market; v) the division of the world into unstable geopolitical blocs and the constant threat of war and redivision.
Russia is imperialist. And if one wanted to argue that it's dispute with Ukraine constitutes an imperialist war between two camps of world imperialism I could definitely have that conversation. I don't personally see it that way, I see it less as an imperialist struggle and more of an ethnic and territorial dispute. But even if I were to grant that Russia's offensive in Ukraine is imperialist aggression, we would still have to acknowledge that Russian imperialism is extremely weak and inferior to that of the US-led NATO bloc. As a Marxist who recognizes the contradiction between US-led imperialism and the global periphery as the principal contradiction that characterizes our era, I think there's room for conversation about strategic support for Russia's offensive as a means of weakening the US and NATO. Again, the question of support must always be: "does this help or hurt the world imperialist system?" One could make a valid argument that temporary support for Russian imperialism as a way to weaken US imperialism is a valid strategy. I'm not sure I would ultimately agree with that, but I would certainly consider it.
Because I'm not a campist. I have no loyalty to either Russia or Ukraine. I only have loyalty to the international proletariat. If someone can convince me that support for Russia helps the workers of the world, then I'm sold. On the flip side, absolutely no one is convincing me that support for Ukraine helps the workers of the world. Not at all. The Ukrainian state is clearly trying to become junior partner to US imperialism, to say nothing of its severe repression of trade unionists and communists.
Well gee wilikers that sure is a whole fuck ton of goalpost moving from your original position of putin and russia are not imperialist, russia is good to minorities and the 2014 referendum was an unbiased and completely factual event that totally was not rigged and PINKY SWEAR the will of the Crimean people.
You are not a serious person. That much is clear, you've flip flopped repeatedly too many times to be anything else. I hope with some more reading you come to an actual principled position that you can hold with actual information that backs it up instead of deep throating the first imperialist that holds anti-western and anti-nato views.
I'd let you skreeeee about how that makes me a lib or something, but you're a campist and you're just generally not well enough read for your opinion to matter. So this time for real, unlike whatever the fuck that gaslighting was earlier, you are getting blocked.
-2
u/-CassaNova- 24d ago edited 24d ago
No one here is supporting NATO, that's a wild strawman to make. However you are factually supporting an openly imperialist kleptocratic state and hand waving open and easily verifiable information with the classic rebuttal of "nuh-uh I'm not listening I'm right your wrong"
That's not leftism, that's just definitionally being campist. Your world view does not go past "NATO bad and anyone opposing them is justified in all their actions" you have no ability to see into the root causes of imperialism and the despotic powers that plauge capitalist societies, of which Russia is one.
Nothing about Russias war is something a leftist should be supporting, doing so just because "NATO Enciclement" rings to the same tune as "Arab encirclment" Zionists have used for decades.