8

https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/2135509

this is practically a child’s view of the world. good guy vs bad guy. Russia = bad, NATO = good. plus, someone should tell her she has it completely backwards: ending russia is kinda natos entire thing

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] mar_k@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you’re anti soviet union then you’re pro nazi germany

ending the soviet union is kinda the nazis thing clueless

load more comments (40 replies)
[-] Krause@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[-] jackmarxist@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

Even Stalin tried a little to join NATO

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] ZoomeristLeninist@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

in the year 885, shortly after founding Kievan Rus, Oleg the Wise proclaimed, “ending nato is kinda our whole thing”

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] pooh@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you’re pro-piss then you're anti-shit. Makes perfect sense.

smuglord

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] duderium@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

If we can support Syria and Iran critically, we can do the same for Russia in its fight against American imperialism.

[-] ZoomeristLeninist@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

amen. emphasis on critically tho. too many liberals think “critical support” means “super extra support”. all of us here understand that Russia is capitalist and pretty horrible on LGBTQ rights (not rlly worse than amerika tho). the difference is that NATO represents western empire: an institution that suppresses most of the world and extracts $10 trillion every year from the global south. Russia’s imperial ambitions are strictly regional, thus much easier to curtail by AES states. the global empire is infinitely more harmful to the proletariat of the world than a regional empire. im preaching to the choir here but i hope lemmy libs read this and understand

[-] duderium@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I agree on all your points except for the existence of Russian imperialism. By Lenin’s definition—correct me if I’m wrong—imperialism is when finance capital is consolidated enough in a given country for that country to begin exporting capital abroad. This might have been the case before the war since so many Russian oligarchs had their billions stashed in western banks, but the contradictions of imperialism itself—its need to grow and consume itself from the inside—now mean that this is no longer the case. Those Russian billions are either frozen or withdrawn as far as I know. Russia’s alignment with China and the BRICS, its long history of fighting for the global south (consider the images we’ve seen for years now of African protestors waving Russian flags), suggest to me that Russia is not actually imperialist and that it is indeed fighting for its life and existence (as it says). Putin is an opportunist appointed by Yeltsin (himself appointed by Clinton!), but opportunism can sometimes point in the right direction because there is no other way for it to survive. (The current president of South Africa is a criminal who likewise deserves our critical support due to his alignment with the BRICS, although none of us are going to be complaining if the EFF takes over next year.) All of us likewise know that a NATO victory in this war will just begin another nightmarish chapter of imperialism in eastern Europe, while a NATO defeat will present opportunities for workers around the world to throw off the American yoke.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Tachanka@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I wonder how Libyans feel about this:

NATO gave informal promises to Gorbachev to not expand eastward (Gorbachev was stupid to believe these promises and not get them in writing as formal, legally-binding promises)

The Soviet Union tried to join NATO in 1954 but wasn't allowed

Meanwhile NATO kept expanding

and including "former" nazis in its ranks

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] TrashGoblin@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

I remember back in 2003, when liberals were able to call Bush out on his "with us or against us" shit. I swear something badly broke liberals (more than usual) in the last decade.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
8 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15902 readers
409 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS