I have a friend who's a actually becoming more and more leftist and lately even communist but not yet fully Marxist. I'm trying to help him shed lib ideas. He specifically asked me if we could have a talk at some point on war. He's confused about the war propaganda. Like just a vague "Haven't things changed maybe because of Russia? Maybe we in Europe need to boost defense now etc."
I want to introduce him to Lenins Idea of revolutionary defeatism, because I think it applies to our historical moment. A revolutionary can not but desire the defeat of his imperialist government. Also Liebknechts line:"the main enemy is at home". The main task for leftists in imperial core countries is to fight the imperialists we can actually effect: the ones right here. You can be happy about any success of comrades in Russia fighting their oligarchy, but don't get roped into supporting western oligarchs' NATO wars.
We both care about trans and queer issues a lot, so he will bring up fears of evil Russia conquering part of Europe and rolling back queer rights. I can contextualize by bringing up the moral track record of western countries (like the ongoing genocide). But is there a more direct answer? Also just in general, I'm not sure if I'm missing an obvious angle or argument. Anything you would definitely mention on war? Suggested reading?
I might have to get into the specifics, of how the war developed historically, but there will be a lot of propaganda to unravel, so ideally, I'm looking for a concise argument, that can pierce the propaganda and illuminate the truth. Hope that's not too much to ask ;)
War is not always bad, as in something you must oppose any country participating in. The USSR creating a war economy to fight Nazis was good, for example. Wars for national liberation are necessary for that liberation, particularly on the timelines and in the forms needed. Every revolution becomes a war. The violence and deprivation of war is monstrous, and we do not want war, but we also cannot condemn it against our or others' liberation.
So, for example, with Ukraine, it is important to understand that this is not a war with national liberation on one side and Russian belicosity on the other. Ukraine is not sovereign, it was used by NATO powers (following a color revolution where they picked the successor government) to threaten Russia and commit ethnic cleansing against the predominately ethnic Russians in Donbas and is now being used as a toop to try to hurt and distract Russia, not liberate Ukraine. The West promoted the war and then prevented peace, disrupting early attempts to negotiate. Imperialists are now using racist scare tactics to try to increase militarization of Europe at the expense of social programs, which is to say, the material wealth of the general public. Why did NATO ppwers want to isolate and threaten Russia in the first place? Because after the illegal dissolution of the USSR, Russia was designated to be a poor and exploited country, stripped for parts by the West, and its development into a nation capable of resisting this, and becoming a regional power, is considered a threat to the general world order, as Russia is not at the imperialists' table, so its growth and actions are often opposed to those of imperialists.
This is why their logic on Ukraine is wrong. They are accepting cynical racist propaganda about Russia as part of this set of strategies.