assembly.org.ua: Good Night Ukrainian Pride. The Partial Victory of Feet Voting in Ukraine: What Is Behind This?On August 28, the government decree of August 26, 2025 No. 1031 came into force in Ukraine on permission to travel abroad for men between the ages of 18-22. Previously, since the beginning of the war on 24 February 2022, only men under 18 and over 60 were allowed to leave the country. At the border they need to present a passport and a document with their latest military registration data in paper or digital form. The majority of the remaining male population aged 23-60 remains hostage to the state. There are different versions of reasons for releasing some of the hostages now: from the possibly approaching elections to, on the contrary, the desire to get rid of pro-Western students, which have been a central social base for mass anti-corruption protests a month ago, and to prevent the holding of elections. A certain role was also played by the fact that men under 25 are not subject to mobilization, so it is much easier for them to approach the border with a backpack through checkpoints and raids of territorial recruitment centers (TRCs). Moreover, the political situation in the country, which appeared stagnant for some time, has now entered a new, tumultous period. Perhaps for the first time since 2019, there is a whiff of a thaw in the air, against the backdrop of such a regular tightening the "tie of freedom" on the people's neck.
https://libcom.org/article/good-night-ukrainian-pride-partial-victory-feet-voting-ukraine-what-behindPerformative Politics Is a Dead EndAfter losing his seat in Canada’s spring election, where his party collapsed in the polls and failed to achieve official party status, former leader Jagmeet Singh stepped aside as head of the New Democratic Party (NDP). Now, Canada’s nominally social democratic party has launched a leadership race. Contest rules released two weeks ago include a stipulation for signature collection that doubled as a rage-baiting giveaway to right-wing culture warriors and enjoyed the dubious distinction of turning the NDP into a lightning rod on social media for a day or two. Leadership candidates will require five hundred signatures for their nomination, with at least half coming from individuals who do not identify as “cisgendered men.” Moreover, at least one hundred signatures must come from equity-seeking groups. That rule caught a lot of attention and headlines, obscuring the fact that candidates must raise $100,000 to run, considerably more than the 2017 contest’s $30,000 requirement. For a social democratic movement to be both successful and just, it must be broad and inclusive. It ought to be taken as an article of faith that where individual and collective rights are under assault from the state, the free market, or others who’d oppress any person or category of persons based on their class, gender, race, sexuality or ability, the Left should show up to fight for them, right up to the hilt. The pursuit of democratic control over work and an equitable and fair distribution of power and resources should not be divorced from other rights protections, especially minority rights. In short, we shouldn’t be willing or ready to sell out anyone in the fight for justice. That fight, however, is made harder when parties adopt arbitrary, performative, low-bar rules without any obvious connection to political success. Where is the evidence that requiring two hundred fifty signatures from non-cis men leads to stronger leadership? To a higher seat count? To better laws? To a fairer economic system or, even, a more representative political system? And even if there was such evidence, what are the odds that the bar to achieving these outcomes will be met with a few hundred signatures from regions throughout Canada? Very, very low.
https://jacobin.com/2025/09/ndp-leadership-race-social-democracy-identity-politicsWhat Is To Be Done? by Vladimir Lenin Ch. III Trade-Unionist Politics And Social-Democratic PoliticsWe shall again begin by praising Rabocheye Dyelo. “Literature of Exposure and the Proletarian Struggle” is the title Martynov gave the article on his differences with Iskra published in Rabocheye Dyelo, No. 10. He formulated the substance of the differences as follows: “We cannot confine ourselves solely to exposing the system that stands in its (the working-class party’s) path of development. We must also react to the immediate and current interests of the proletariat…. Iskra . . . is in fact an organ of revolutionary opposition that exposes the state of affairs in our country, particularly the political state of affairs…. We, however, work and shall continue to work for the cause of the working class in close organic contact with the proletarian struggle” (p. 63). One cannot help being grateful to Martynov for this formula. It is of outstanding general interest, because substantially it embraces not only our disagreements with Rabocheye Dyelo, but the general disagreement between ourselves and the Economists on the political struggle. We have shown that the Economists do not altogether repudiate “politics”, but that they are constantly straying from the Social-Democratic to the trade-unionist conception of politics. Martynov strays in precisely this way, and we shall therefore take his views as a model of Economist error on this question. As we shall endeavour to prove, neither the authors of the “Separate Supplement” to Rabochaya Mysl nor the authors of the manifesto issued by the Self-Emancipation Group, nor the authors of the Economist letter published in Iskra, No. 12, will have any right to complain against this choice.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/iii.htm