/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2806811
That's cool and all but I won't support the bourgeoisie just because they are from a 3rd world shithole

>>2806816
Yeah that's the
>although I will be fucked off if I don't get my bananas.
part, because anti-campists can (and do) frame banana reduction as to the benefit of the Banana Republic bourg, who now possess bananas for sale (and more importantly the resulting capital that doesn't need to be repatriated to the west) and implicitly that's supported by their complicit reactionary shithole lumpenproletariat against conscious western Proles if they don't press the Communism NAO! button (and give over the bananas out of socialist fraternity), the anti-campists therefore loudly wash their hands of the inevitable bombing and obstinate from paying any mind to the resumed supply of bananas.

>>2806822
Wow a lot of words and yet I still hope that the 3rd world bourg and petty bourg get proletarized and lose all their wealth.

Crazy how that works.

>>2806839
If only leftcoms had such words for their own bourgeoisie, but I guess it's just so important that their own bourgeoisie continues to be able to pulverize the 3rd world.

>>2806843
I live in Mexico retarded uyghur

>>2806842
>Surrender
But I don't want to surrender my material interest of fighting against the bourgeoisie that exploits me for the sake of "anti-imperialism"

Russia's invasion might be good or bad, too soon to say, but the fact they haven't won yet seems kinda retarded. But I ain't no military guru.

>>2806839
<I want both sides to lose, despite the massive disparity in my bourg's favour
>Crazy how that works.
It really isn't and your surrender to it and framing of that as ideological purity is the problem.

>>2806850
>despite the massive disparity in my bourg's favour
But I want the bourg of my country to lose their wealth and to become proletarized.

>>2806852
So why are you framing it as a zero sum game where you can't fight against your own bourg for both your own material interest as well anti-imperialism?
To treat those as mutually exclusive is to surrender the former to avoid the latter, because a foreign economy will retain more capital for its proletariat to seize?

>>2806856
Because you retarded campists call me CIA, hasbara, comprador and other retarded shit for doing so lol

>>2806858
>my personal fee fees were hurt online
And your response is to become neutral towards imperialism, even at your own detriment?

>>2806859
You really think I care if some retarded liberal like you call me names?

I am not neutral against imperialism, I want imperialism to win because I want to see the bourg that exploits me lose, because if they lose, maybe my country experiences revolutionary defeatism, I am not a fucking classcuck that wants my boss to get richer because "muh anti-imperialism"

Like anti-campists seem to forget the point of revolution is to seize the means of production and the capital it had hitherto produced for redistribution. If the bourgeoisie of the west and the bourgeoisie of "shitholes" are truly indistinguishable, then more equal distribution of capital globally also means the capital to be relinquished from the global bourgeoisie is likewise equalised.

It doesn't follow to consider "allowing" the bourgeoisie of imperialised states liberation to be detrimental to the global socialist movement, because that take presumes that for some reason that a vastly uneven share of global capital is best kept in the west, which is a contradiction with "both sides are (equally) bad". Although you'll note the brackets around "equally", because anti-campists never seem to say that exactly.

>>2806863
Case in point, how can you profess to such ideological purity when you claim a more capital-rich Mexico is simply one's boss getting richer? No other opportunity there? Revolutionary defeatism is conducting revolution once your nation has been milked dry?

>>2806867
That's a lot of cool thirdiephile mental gymnastics but I won't pull up my bootstraps so capitalists in my shithole an hoard more wealth so in case a global revolution ever happens I can relinquish two factories instead of one.

I am not spending any effort in helping the bourg of my shithole gets a "more fair share" of capital wealth, simple as.

Go have a seethe about it you fucking classcuck

>>2806869
fyi talking all dismissive like makes you look defeated, like you're punching but there's no more force behind the gloves.

>>2806870
Thanks for the free psychological diagnostic but Inwill keep voting for communist parties that the bourg in my country dislike, I will keep wasting time and resources at work, I will keep attending communist marches and I will keep spreading anti-bourgeois communist propaganda online.

>NOOOO YOUR HEKIN BOURG WILL LOSE MONEY AGAINST HEKIN WAL-MART
🎻🎻🎻 poor guy :(((

>>2806876
Well look I can't take away performative bullshit as a lifestyle from you, you're also extremely unlikely to gain any traction in Mexico with your "lets wait until we're milked to the bone and abandoned, build communism on that" position, so you're only really humiliating yourself online and frankly I'm non-plussed about that.

At some point I'm going to have to get around to reading this. Like the intra-left ideological arguments about imperialism is pretty boring to me, it's just going around in circles, a more interesting question is who these national patriot guys in the Donbass in 2014-2015 were and how did they see what they were doing. Gubarev was DPR governor for a little while.

This appears to be an A.I. generated summary of an interview with Gubarev from a month ago.

<The Awakening of a 'Z-Speaker': Pavel Gubarev's Interview with Yuri Dud
<Explore the evolving views of 'Z-speaker' Pavel Gubarev as he questions the Russian government's war aims and confronts the painful reality of the conflict.

<Introduction and Initial Observations
>Our team has analyzed an interview granted by Pavel Gubarev to Yuri Dud. The experience was challenging due to the prevalence of high-octane conspiracy theories. Despite not appearing to be the most intellectually astute, Gubarev comes across as sincere, adhering to his own set of values, however flawed.

>This situation underscores a pattern: individuals with a consistent worldview, whether advocating for human rights or prioritizing Pax Russica, find it difficult to align with the Russian government. Only opportunists seem to thrive under the current regime. A coherent worldview inevitably clashes with it.

>The fundamental question of the conflict's purpose remains elusive: What has been the point of inflicting such immense suffering on both Ukraine and Russia over the past four years? This analysis will delve into the interview to explore these themes. We also note that Roscomnadzor recently blocked a tool comparing VPN performance, with a new link provided for access.

<Gubarev's Perspective on the War's Goals
>Upon viewing the interview, Gubarev's initial take on the situation closely mirrors perspectives presented in daily analyses. However, the multiplicity of ways the same situation can be described is perplexing.

>Gubarev asserts that the war lacks both physical and ideological goals, questioning the very notion of victory. There is no clear answer regarding the Russian army's ultimate objective as it advances through the Donbas. He characterizes the conflict not as a war, but as something akin to a "back alley deal" due to its undefined goals. The objectives of the "special operation" remain unarticulated, leaving the endgame, plan, and purpose unclear.

>While propagandists might celebrate the capture of small settlements, the reality is that decisive victory, as initially envisioned (e.g., capturing Kharkiv or Odesa), is now considered unachievable, even by the Ministry of Defense. The current official narrative focuses on grinding through the Donbas, aiming to retain devastated areas, possibly as leverage in future talks. This shift leads to disillusionment among those who believed in Russia's might and a new world order.

<Ukraine's Clear Objective vs. Russian Army's Stagnation
>Gubarev identifies Ukraine's distinct advantage: a clearly defined goal. Ukraine was attacked and aims to defend itself and reclaim its territory. This narrative holds a degree of truth.

>While Dud did not directly ask about the Russian army's transformation, Gubarev rejects the notion that the "special military operation" has revived it. Instead, he views the ongoing events as "human sacrifice," with people being killed without a clear purpose. For someone deeply invested in the "Pax Russica" ideology for over a decade, this situation feels like a betrayal. The senseless killing of Russian soldiers with no end in sight is presented as the official narrative.

<Gubarev's Evolving Views and Lingering Gullibility
>Throughout the interview, Gubarev appears to be shedding his former naivety about the Russian government's objectives and structure. Yet, he retains a degree of gullibility regarding the potential consequences of his statements.

>When discussing Putinism, Gubarev claims it's a system where one can speak and write freely without repercussions, highlighting his ability to do so while implying others cannot. This suggests he is close to identifying Putin as the war's mastermind but refrains from doing so, likely fearing immediate consequences after the interview is published. He seems to believe that his carefully worded innuendos will protect him, a common delusion within the "Z-aligned" community.

>This community struggles to accept the reality of the government they are dealing with and its rules. They seek a legal framework for safety, even resorting to replacing "Russia" with "Laos" in discussions to avoid accusations of spreading misinformation. This avoidance tactic mirrors Gubarev's evasive answers to Dud's questions, as he wrongly assumes a focus on formalities and word games.

>>2806863
buddy with the cartel problem you've got a revolution will not turn mexico into a socialist paradise, realistically speaking it's going to be a second somalia

>>2806883
>Being in favour of your immediate material interest is performative
>You won't gain any traction, despite every single relevant 3rd world communist party thinking in a simular manner
Liberals when confronted with class struggle lmao

Also funny how no argument against my position has been made, the last threw of your posts have been nothing but petty insults.

>>2806892
And yet campists want me to support the cartel controlled government and their national bourgeois friends.

>>2806893
You're also an atrocious orator, like this is playground shit.

>>2806897
But enoguh about Sheinbaum

>>2806895
grim

>>2806686
>>2806732
>>2806809
>>2806816
>>2806839
>>2806852
>>2806858
>>2806863
>>2806869
>>2806876
>>2806893
>>2806895
In scientific socialism, any violence by a subjugated population without even bourgeois rights under imperialist capitalism is acceptable in order to acquire economic sovereignty. You can see this with Marx accepting the separation of Ireland from England if the alternative is the continuation of the subjugation and exploitation of Irish workers, as long as it is not possible to organize English and Irish workers because of English chauvinism that deceives workers into not acquiring solidarity, then separation is an acceptable alternative so that in the future a socialist federation can be formed with more equal relations between Irish and English, but remembering that the ideal would be to organize English and Irish workers together for a socialist revolution acting together. This already helps to understand the position of defending the self-determination of nations that Lenin wrote.

Workers in the imperialist core must cut off and sabotage all funding that maintains the dominance of imperialist capitalism abroad by capitalists and their agents who profit from this type of relationship. This is non-negotiable in order to avoid declining into opportunistic social chauvinism and to show solidarity with the workers of the world. This means that the sale of arms and loans that support the collaborators of imperialist capitalism, who maintain dependency to intensify capitalist exploitation, is not tolerated. All this means that the workers' party must take this position no matter how much it is hated for it, and if a party that pretends to be leftist is in favor of reconciling with capitalist imperialism in the imperialist core under the pretext of saving "democracy" and "freedom" abroad, then this party must be destroyed for serving imperialist capitalism.

Now let's start by explaining to you the question of what capitalist imperialism is with Lenin:

<But very brief definitions, although convenient, for they sum up the main points, are nevertheless inadequate, since we have to deduce from them some especially important features of the phenomenon that has to be defined. And so, without forgetting the conditional and relative value of all definitions in general, which can never embrace all the concatenations of a phenomenon in its full development, we must give a definition of imperialism that will include the following five of its basic features:

<(1) the concentration of production and capital has developed to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life; (2) the merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation, on the basis of this “finance capital,” of a financial oligarchy; (3) the export of capital as distinguished from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance; (4) the formation of international monopolist capitalist associations which share the world among themselves and (5) the territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers is completed. Imperialism is capitalism at that stage of development at which the dominance of monopolies and finance capital is established; in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance; in which the division of the world among the international trusts has begun, in which the division of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed.

<Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, 1916, VII. Imperialism as a Special Stage of capitalism.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/ch07.htm

Now let's look at his position on the types of countries as examples at the time Lenin wrote about the self-determination of nations and capitalist imperialism:

<6. Three Types of Countries in Relation to Self-Determination of Nations
<In this respect, countries must be divided into three main types:

<First, the advanced capitalist countries of Western Europe and the United States of America. In these countries the bourgeois, progressive, national movements came to an end long ago. Every one of these “great” nations oppresses other nations in the colonies and within its own country. The tasks of the proletariat of these ruling nations are the same as those of the proletariat in England in the nineteenth century in relation to Ireland.

<Secondly, Eastern Europe: Austria, the Balkans and particularly Russia. Here it was the twentieth century that particularly developed the bourgeois-democratic national movements and intensified the national struggle. The tasks of the proletariat in these countries—in regard to the consummation of their bourgeois-democratic reformation, as well as in regard to assisting the socialist revolution in other countries—cannot be achieved unless it champions the right of nations to self-determination. In this connection the most difficult but most important task is to merge the class struggle of the workers in the oppressing nations with the class struggle of the workers in the oppressed nations.

<Thirdly, the semi-colonial countries, like China, Persia, Turkey, and all the colonies, which have a combined population amounting to a billion. In these countries the bourgeois-democratic movements have either hardly begun, or are far from having been completed. Socialists must not only demand the unconditional and immediate liberation of the colonies without compensation—and this demand in its political expression signifies nothing more nor less than the recognition of the right to self-determination—but must render determined support to the more revolutionary elements in the bourgeois-democratic movements for national liberation in these countries and assist their rebellion—and if need be, their revolutionary war—against the imperialist powers that oppress them.

<V. I. Lenin, The Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination, 1916

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/jan/x01.htm#fwV22P151F01

Now regarding the issue of wars and the opportunists who obscure the truth by trying to defend imperialist capitalist finance capital that maintains dependency to intensify exploitation. I'm only posting this to avoid confusion if someone is reading what I wrote trying to equate the war of a puppet of imperialist capitalism that uses chauvinism against the Russian population with the right of Palestinians to use violence against Israel to acquire economic sovereignty:

<In short: a war between imperialist Great Powers (i.e., powers that oppress a whole number of nations and enmesh them in dependence on finance capital, etc.), or in alliance with the Great Powers, is an imperialist war. Such is the war of 1914–16. And in this war “defence of the fatherland” is a deception, an attempt to justify the war.

<A war against imperialist, i.e., oppressing, powers by oppressed (for example, colonial) nations is a genuine national war. It is possible today too. “Defence of the fatherland” in a war waged by an oppressed nation against a foreign oppressor is not a deception. Socialists are not opposed to “defence of the fatherland” in such a war.

<V. I. Lenin, A Caricature of Marxism and Imperialist Economism, 1. The Marxist Attitude Towards War and “Defence of the Fatherland"

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/carimarx/1.htm#v23pp64h-029

Now a text against those opportunists who equate every war as if it were "inter-imperialist" to defend US hegemony:

<Advanced European (and American) capitalism has entered a new era of imperialism. Does it follow from that that only imperialist wars are now possible? Any such contention would be absurd. It would reveal inability to distinguish a given concrete phenomenon from the sum total of variegated phenomena possible in a given era.

<V. I. Lenin, A Caricature of Marxism and Imperialist Economism, 2. “Our Understanding of the New Era”

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/carimarx/2.htm#v23pp64h-036

>>2806846
You live in a third-world country, just like me, but your words demonstrate complacency and co-opting the masses with apathy instead of seeing everything from the perspective of the independence of the revolutionary socialist party of the proletariat from the bourgeoisie in order to acquire political supremacy and punish all obstacles that deny the supremacy of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Furthermore, you fail to see state capitalism as superior to private capitalism, even though socialism is superior to both. You also demonstrate a resentment that lacks solidarity with the workers of the world and is not preparing the masses for a revolutionary situation in your country.

Let's look at quotes from Marx first, focusing on what it means to be a communist, and then how to act in a bourgeois democratic election:

<The Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by this only: 1. In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality. 2. In the various stages of development which the struggle of the working class against the bourgeoisie has to pass through, they always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole.

<The Communists, therefore, are on the one hand, practically, the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the line of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement.

<The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat.

<Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848), Chapter II: Proletarians and Communists

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm

<Even where there is no prospect of achieving their election the workers must put up their own candidates to preserve their independence, to gauge their own strength and to bring their revolutionary position and party standpoint to public attention. They must not be led astray by the empty phrases of the democrats, who will maintain that the workers’ candidates will split the democratic party and offer the forces of reaction the chance of victory. All such talk means, in the final analysis, that the proletariat is to be swindled. The progress which the proletarian party will make by operating independently in this way is infinitely more important than the disadvantages resulting from the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body.

<Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, 1850, "Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League"

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm

<The first great step of importance for every country newly entering into the movement is always the organisation of the workers as an independent political party, no matter how, so long as it is a distinct workers' party. And this step has been taken, far more rapidly than we had a right to hope, and that is the main thing. That the first programme of this party is still confused and highly deficient, that it has set up the banner of Henry George, these are inevitable evils but also only transitory ones. The masses must have time and opportunity to develop and they can only have the opportunity when they have their own movement–no matter in what form so long as it is only their own movement–in which they are driven further by their own mistakes and learn wisdom by hurting themselves.

<Frederick Engels, “Letters: Marx-Engels Correspondence 1886”, Engels to Friedrich Adolph Sorge In Hoboken

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1886/letters/86_11_29.htm

>>2806919
Wow that's a lot of works, but tomorrow I will waste electrical energy at my job by leaving the drill press on for an hour

I hope my boss loses his shitty weld shop as a result.

>>2806922
Nothing says Marxism like celebrating the wrecking of productive forces.

>>2806922
>It's not performative bullshit
<Leaving a drill press on for an hour
<Hoping it puts his petit bourg boss out of business
This has to be parody, I've been got

>>2806923
Nothing says Marxism like class collaborative cuckoldry

>>2806925
I can't burn his shop because the neo-neoliberal bourgeois government in power (which I should support in their anti-imperialist struggle according to >>2806919 despite the fact that they collaborate with the US, CIA, DEA, etc) will persecute me and I will end in jail and I can't end in jail as my family depends on me.

Shocking, I know.

>>2806927
>Shocking, I know.
No, the shocking part is you thinking either burning down his shop or covertly putting him out of business is relevant, considering the petit bourg are destined to be proletarianised by the actual bourgeoisie anyway.

If you have a family to support and need the paycheck, this is a really senseless way to lose that.

>>2806936
>the petit bourg are destined to be proletarianised by the actual bourgeoisie anyway.
3rd world bourgs are petit bourg when compares to multinational firms, 3rd world.vourgs are destined to disappear, glad you finally understand why campism is anti-materialist.

>>2806779
>You're putting the cart before the horse
None of this really adresses anything I said. I've established that Euromaidan was bad, that the Ukrainian government has thrown away neutrality and that it's resulted in war, but none of this has managed to convince me that the Russian invasion of Ukraine was a good idea or that it was justified. You're functionally repeating what I've mentioned to be factual but acting like it's a rebuttal to what I posted. Existing escalations in Ukraine do not justify further escalations. The war in Donbas had a decreasing rate of casualties and Russia said "Fuck it" and turned it into the largest war in Europe since 1945.
>As for "constant threat of invasion", that's every country at all times
I did not defend the concept of having guns everywhere in Ukraine. Nonetheless, Ukraine is obviously more paranoid about invasion from Russia than say, Costa Rica being invaded by Panama because Russia is literally doing that right now.
>>2806795
I truly do not give a fuck about the bullshit Kruschev was saying in the 50's to justify Ukraine being part of the USSR (Not that I oppose Ukraine having been in the USSR, it's just that this historical claim is obviously nonsense).
>>2806863
3rd world bourgeoisie are obviously also evil but you should prefer that wealth is less concentrated in the 1st world. A richer 3rd world does NOT solve the problems of Capitalism but it does improve living conditions and that's undeniably a good thing. This isn't about wanting your boss to get richer, it's about prefering your boss getting richer over the CEO of Hitler Inc. in Oakland California getting richer. Your boss is still your enemy and you should prioritize assraping him and ushering in Communism over transferring wealth from 1st world bourgs to him.
>>2806876
>I will keep voting for communist parties that the bourg in my country dislike, I will keep wasting time and resources at work, I will keep attending communist marches and I will keep spreading anti-bourgeois communist propaganda online.
Okay, nothing wrong with that. Nobody is asking for you to work harder, stop pushing for Communism or not waste resources at work. I think it's great that you do that. Godspeed o7.
>>2806923
The fact that it's better for wealth to be less concentrated in the 1st world does not mean that he has to become a cuck for his job. That wouldn't even change anything, the reason wealth is concentrated in the 1st world has little to do with that. His actions are entirely performative but whatever.
>>2806925
It's so petty that you kind of have to respect it, though. Will it do anything? No. But it's funny as fuck.
>>2806927
You should do other shit to him too, like hide his stuff while he's not around and use up all of the toilet paper in the bathroom. Just be an absolute fucking nuisance at all times. Furthermore, you should take pictures and videos and give us updates on his freakouts. You know, for Communism or something.

>>2806953
>Khrushchevite revisionism
>1954
LMFAO
Just kill yourself. Pereyaslav Agreement was celebrated even during the 1940s, the city of Pereyaslav was renamed to Pereyaslav-Khmelnitsky to celebrate Khmelnitsky pledged allegiance to the Tsar there.

>>2806953
>but you should prefer that wealth is less concentrated in the 1st world
Why? Do you believe the trickle down neoliberal nonsense or something? I can fuck with the 3rd world bourg by voting for parties that reduce their profits and sabotaging them, so I will, if that means 1st world bourg takes over his business then so it be. Comrades in the first world should do the same, at the end only transnational capital will remain.

>A richer 3rd world does NOT solve the problems of Capitalism but it does improve living conditions and that's undeniably a good thing.
So you believe in trickle down nonsense, you are a Reaganite.

>>2806966
>Pereyaslav Agreement was celebrated even during the 1940s
I know. I'm not attributing it to "Kruschevite Revisionism", I am fully aware that the USSR celebrated the agreement before that. This was retarded and anti-Marxist.

>>2806953
>but none of this has managed to convince me that the Russian invasion of Ukraine was a good idea or that it was justified.
You've got the natural bias of judging the situation based only on how history actually played out and not factoring in what was potentially avoided.
>You're functionally repeating what I've mentioned to be factual but acting like it's a rebuttal to what I posted.
While saying things like "euromaidan was bad" and "lots of guns are bad" provides an image of balance to the conflict with Russia, you're not really considering any of this as contextualising what might have been if Russia acted otherwise. You're pointing them out to suggest you don't think Ukraine is perfect. But that's as far as it goes, that Zelensky and his public understand exactly what becoming "Big Israel" entails ideologically is just discarded and passed off as a bit of a whoopsy he made when sucking up to Israel. It's the same as when people were swearing blind that the constant imagery of SS iconography and Nazi salutes in Ukraine weren't indications of ideology, just a tactless form of insulting the Russians.

I understand that one can go hog wild with alternative histories, but there's no reason to be this disinterested in what Ukraine's ideology is, what its goals are and where that may have led in a timeline where Russia made it absolutely clear that they're hands off. Being content with Russia invading and working backwards from there to explain away Ukraine's ideology is a really flawed way of understanding any conflict.

>>2806975
This is not trickle-down economics, it is basic immiseration. Marx wrote in Wage Labour and Capital (1847):
>If capital grows rapidly, wages may rise, but the profit of capital rises disproportionately faster. The material position of the worker has improved, but at the cost of his social position. The social chasm that separates him from the capitalist has widened.
If this were not the case, then the FIRST WORLD would have the WORST living standards on account of it having the richest bourgs.
>>2806979
>natural bias of judging the situation based only on how history actually played out and not factoring in what was potentially avoided
We can judge how history would have played out based on what has happened. Far-Right groups in Ukraine did not have the power to unilaterally declare genocide on all Russian minorities in Ukraine, otherwise they would have done it already. They are absolutely dangerous and evil, but the Russian invasion has killed far more people and destroyed way more lives in its supposed "protection" of Russian minorities than the continued status quo would have.
>Zelensky and his public understand exactly what becoming "Big Israel" entails ideologically is just discarded and passed off as a bit of a whoopsy he made when sucking up to Israel
I don't think it was a mistake at all, I think he communicated exactly what he wanted to. It's simply that I do not believe they have intentions to slaughter all Russian minorities in Ukraine. In order to justify the invasion you would have to believe that Ukraine was about to kill hundreds of thousands of Russian minorities in an enormous national genocide as if this is some kind of widespread, popular idea among the population and can even remotely be accomplished. Do some Ukrainians support that? Yes, but that doesn't mean that it's going to happen.
>where that may have led in a timeline where Russia made it absolutely clear that they're hands off
You cannot honestly, genuinely believe that we'd be seeing a degree of evil comparable to the evil we've seen in this war if Russia didn't invade.

>>2806922
Your actions are irrelevant in the face of the financialization and deindustrialization of third-world countries. All the reactionary tendencies of the past have already been integrated to serve financial capital. Furthermore, control of your own currency and national bank is a requirement to facilitate the socialization of the economy. The communist position depends on acting collectively to advance the workers of the whole world and gain power; this is the opposite of submitting to financial capital when the bourgeoisie in your own country is already integrated into global financialized capitalism.

A country subjugated by financial capital typically has its economy geared towards being a primary-exporting economy of commodities, with a government that exists only to pay off speculators of public debt, with more austerity that destroys the country's capacity to collect revenue, resulting in punishments if there is no more austerity, further punishing the workers.

Because capitalists are united when they subjugate a country to financial capital as a puppet, there will be more stability in the capitalist system to intensify exploitation and punish communists. Therefore, accepting subjugation to financial capital leads to the prolongation of the capitalist system. It's important to remember that communist revolutions only began with the division of several capitalist states competing against each other, not with the subjugation of countries to a single capitalist country in a unipolar world.

>>2806988
>You cannot honestly, genuinely believe that we'd be seeing a degree of evil comparable to the evil we've seen in this war if Russia didn't invade.
I do, worse even, because Ukraine and Israel have the exact same issue of receiving borders drawn up by some other state which already had existent nationalities within them, but whose continued existence therefore undermines the integrity of those borders now the "founding" states are no longer existent (The USSR, the British Empire).

It's therefore no coincidence that Zelensky picked Israel as the model of a victorious Ukraine. Like Israel, these conflicts born of that desire to ensure the continued veracity of their borders via ethnonationalism and the struggle against it, retroactively justify going beyond apartheid laws and into shelling people's homes. If Crimea's annexation was justification for draconian laws and a bit of home shelling, then the invasion could be justification for genocide just as October 7th would become for Israel.

Likewise, they've both got endless military and diplomatic backing by NATO states for the same reason that they're wilful cudgels against NATO's primary opponents in their respective regions. Ukraine is a launchpad for NATO against Russia, Israel is a launchpad against Iran. Thus, they both have a blank cheque for war crimes, their usefulness is as a vector for destabilisation and thus the more child murders the better.

When it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck (and says it wants to be a Big Duck), then it's probably a duck.

>>2807015
i'm pretty sure russia is a bigger supporter of israel than any nato country sans usa

i'm also pretty sure zelensky quote was a bid to secure israel's support. at the time israel refused to support ukraine, to sanction russia in any way or even condemn russian invasion.

>>2807015
>If Crimea's annexation was justification for draconian laws and a bit of home shelling, then the invasion could be justification for genocide just as October 7th would become for Israel.
Israel was already committing genocide, Ukraine is not. Does this not just reinforce the argument that the invasion is a dumb idea?

>>2807024
>Israel was already committing genocide, Ukraine is not.
Israel is an older state than Ukraine, moreover Russia invaded Ukraine (partially) to avoid genocide.

Like come on man my post contained quite a lot to just be dismissed with
>yh but Ukraine didn't get the chance to become Big Israel… soooo I win?

>>2807032
Because the rest of what you said is just trying to draw some kind of equivalence between Ukraine and Israel, which is obviously nonsense. "Ukraine's borders were drawn up by another country!", "Ukraine gets support from NATO and so does Israel" and any variety of baseless accusations extrapolated from one quote that illuminates a completely different problem with post-war Ukraine. Look, here is the focal point of the argument: What Ukraine would have done over the past few years would never have been as deadly or destabilizing as the invasion. At the end of the day, everything else is just orbiting that.

This has gone on long enough, either make a convincing argument against it or shut up. In order to prove that Ukraine was about to commit some kind of genocide, you must prove that they had the ability to do so, that they had intention to do so and that there was any actual indication that they were gearing up for it when Russia invaded. You have given me nothing conclusive or even that I did not already know. Give me conclusive evidence and I'll join you in masturbating to Ukrainian kids dying.

>>2807042
>"Ukraine's borders were drawn up by another country!"
>obviously nonsense
>shut up
>I'll join you in masturbating to Ukrainian kids dying.

You know what, I’m not convinced you’re approaching this with an open mind.

>>2804238
The government of Ukraine is the idealized epitome of anti-communism in Brazil, where a coup d'état was used to persecute all communist, socialist and workers' union movements in Ukraine with the Maidan coup in 2014.

In this coup regime of fascist reactionary puppets of finance capital several militias of the right sector together with the Azov battalion terrorize, kidnap and silence who they consider a threat to the buyer government with an organization called The Peacemaker ( Myrotvorets ) which is used by neo-Nazis with names, data personal and family members to intimidate, silence and eliminate outlaw journalists and citizens who are considered a "threat to national security" with neo-Nazi paramilitary groups. Just so you know, the president of Brazil Lula himself and several left-wing DCM journalists who are Brazilian have their names noted there. Remembering that they scratch the name on the list as the individual passes away as if it were a people elimination list. Don't forget the various white supremacist neo-Nazi organizations that have a direct connection to Ukraine in the world.

The role of the reactionaries was to depoliticize the population so that a false opposition that uses only the discourse against corruption financed by the bourgeoisie in a puppet party of imperialism with Zelensky as a friendly figure for the international propaganda starts the destruction and privatization for the financial capital of the agricultural cooperatives that it was unpopular to just hint at this kind of action before the coup, but Zelensky's opposition party is not opposed and hides this from the public, all public property is being destroyed and labor rights are being attacked. The various reactionary groups are integrated throughout the Ukrainian government in all sectors of the state and Zelensky just put the reactionary henchman on the line to attack anyone who opposes neoliberalism and the Ukrainian supremacy policy against non-Ukrainian language minorities living in the country and have been repressed since the coup.

The communist party of Ukraine had 13% of the vote before the coup at the time, where the left was seen as the main enemy immediately even though that party was in protests at the time no ukrainian chauvinism and racism against russians, no glorification of the european union, NATO and the IMF, with the defense of the country's economic sovereignty, public enterprises, cooperative sector, workers' rights, legacy of the Soviet Union and solidarity among the workers of other countries come together with neutrality and a desire to restore the Soviet Union. Party general secretary Petro Symonenko has been in exile in Belarus for a long time due to persecution.

This speech is the same coup speech that was had in Bolivia pretending that it is not a coup and the same scenario in Brazil where they tried to persecute and banish the left after the impeachment of Dilma Rousseff with the anticommunism of the lackeys servants of financial capital.

Russia does not participate in the export of finance capital like the IMF according to Lenin's description. The fall of dollar hegemony is boosting the financial sovereignty of third world countries so they may not have to follow the international rules of sanctions and patents that keep them indebted and dependent.

Here is an archived Communist Party of Ukraine opinion link:

https://web.archive.org/web/20220219162903/https://kpu.life/ru/101027/petr_symonenko_ynytsyatyva_ukrayny_po_sozdanyju_trojstvennogo_sojuza_uhodyt_kornjamy_v_nedra_my6_y_tsru

Here is an article with a narrative against the coup-plotters' capitalist innocence propaganda from Ukraine:

https://web.archive.org/web/20171107144346/https://lorenzoae.wordpress.com/2017/10/11/on-russia-todays-liberals

To answer the question about the perspective of Russian capitalism, you have to understand that US and European imperialist capitalism decided that Russia could not be respected and integrated like the United Kingdom to exploit Third World countries together. Instead, for Western capitalists, Russia should be a neocolony to be plundered just like the other Third World countries. This led to the circulation of capital ceasing to function due to Ukrainian nationalist chauvinism serving imperialism, which consolidated itself in Ukraine. This was financed as a continuation of the capitalists who financed reactionaries in Eastern Europe to serve as puppets of finance capital against the Soviet Union. These puppets now serve the project of making Russia a deindustrialized, financialized neocolony and enriching capitalists linked to privatizations, the arms industry, the financial sector, technology, financial speculation, reconstruction, and other activities that profit from war. The Marxist position is to cut funding, arms sales, aid, and debt to all the puppets of finance capital so that their governments collapse for the benefit of the communist cause, receiving concessions from post-collapse governments that cannot use chauvinism.

>>2806977
So you were in fact lying when you said
>No Marxist would EVER claim that Ukraine being part of the Russian Empire was somehow historically progressive for it
What you really meant was, "we must throw out actual Marxism-Leninism in favor of my misunderstandings of Marxism".
Sorry! I follow Marxism-Leninism, maybe you want to throw it out for the sake of defending your favorite fascist state, but I don't see why anyone else should respect that.

>Ziggers ITT now arguing that Lenin is fascist since he BTFO the retarded Russian nationalit revisionist history that claims Ukraine never ever existed
Scratch a zigger and a fascist capitalist bleeds.