• BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      What exactly are you seeing as pro-russia?

      As communists we’re staunchly anti-NATO and against the US imperialist order. There’s a degree of critical support for the Russian Federations struggle against NATO, but thats not really pro-russia, or at least how we would define being pro-russia.

      Similarly we have critical support for Iran in its struggle against the US led imperial order, and we support when they do things like engaging in trade with AES like Venezuela. Thats not the same as direct support for the theocracy there or all their domestic policies for example

        • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          40
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          How does communism inform your perspective?

          NATO aid and their not allowing Ukraine to negotiate peace is what is prolonging this war. We aren’t arguing for all of Ukraine to become Russian territory, which hasn’t been the position of the Russian Federation either.

          We would like a negotiated peace that alllows the Donbas republics to leave Ukraine and join the Russian Federation as they’ve voted to do, and a promise for Ukraine to not become part of NATO. That senario is not the alternative you’re talking about, or what you’re implying we support.

            • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              26
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The quickest way to achieve peace is for Putin yo withdraw.

              And then get couped and have the war continue under the leadership of a right wing hardliner

              Please look up critiques of great man theory as it seems relevant to your line of thinking on this matter.

                • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  25
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  No, if he didn’t he would have been couped and the invasion launched anyway. Russia is a dictatorship of capital. Putin answers to the national bourgeoisie of Russia.

                  Also hypotheticals like that aren’t really relevant to discussing actual exit strategies. Unless you’ve found a way to hop realities.

            • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              24
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I don’t even know what this means because it has no grounding in reality.

              They can’t negotiate peace because they are in a war? How is it possible to resolve this conflict in any realistic way if thats the criteria?

                • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  30
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Your way of conceptializing this is so childlike as to be useless.

                  I want the war in Ukraine to end. I want them to negotiate the best and most obvious solution to this conflict for the parties involved. I want the war to end because then people will not be getting killed.

                  You want NATO to keep supporting Ukraine, to keep Ukraine away from negotiating. You want this, because… i don’t know why.

            • CriticalResist8 [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              19
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              do you sincerely think Ukraine will be like “it’s all good you were a good sport we’re gonna end the match here, everyone go home” if Russia suddenly decided to up and leave.

            • edge [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              17
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Even if Russia were to withdraw to pre-war borders, Ukraine would keep fighting because they insist on taking Crimea which is a large majority Russians who want to be part of Russia.

              Crimea has never truly been Ukrainian. It was internally transferred to the Ukrainian SSR in the 1950s, but its population was Russian then and stayed Russian the whole time since. But Ukraine insists on having it back.

              And if they did somehow get it back, they would start ethnically cleansing it of Russians. I hope you understand how that’s a bad thing.

        • PorkrollPosadist [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          40
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Without NATO aid, Ukraine will just plainly be taken over by Purine Russia.

          The war would end, a whole lot of people would stop getting killed, and it would open a sliver of space to organize on class lines instead of nationalist ones.

          As it is, it is basically illegal to be a communist or an anarchist in Ukraine, and the country is under martial law with NATO-armed and trained fascist brigades doling out summary justice. Could it get worse? Why should the left advocate for people to die on the hill of a country which arrests communists, dismantles labor unions, and liquidates public infrastructure on internet auctions for foreign investors?

          If you take the most vulgar Anarchist approach, all states are bad, full stop. Political practice doesn’t even operate on that paradigm. You struggle to undermine oppressive hierarchical systems that you come in direct contact with through direct action. If you take the vulgar Leninist approach, the Proletariat should struggle for the overthrow of their Bourgeoisie (this would include the proletariat of Ukraine and Russia respectively, as well as the proletariat of Western countries which see this conflict only as a means to strengthen their military alliances and diplomatic positions). Of course, the situation is too nuanced to apply such a vulgar approach, but that should be the STARTING POINT for anybody who considers themselves anti-capitalists. You should be able to justify any deviation from those bedrock positions.

        • Maoo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          35
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Im no fan of US imperialism, but you all conveniently leave out the alternative to NATO aid in Ukraine right now.

          Nope it’s mentioned all the time: diplomacy, peace talks, and to make that even possible, establish legitimacy by abiding by your own agreements. The undermining of all of these things has been discussed at length. They don’t really need to be rehashed in our spaces for the benefit of new people that don’t ask questions, though.

          Without NATO aid, Ukraine will just plainly be taken over by Purine Russia.

          lol RF could take over UA any time they wanted to if they took the NATO approach of completely destroying civilian life and essential resources via bombing. Military “aid” to Ukraine just keeps Ukrainian soldiers getting killed en masse, which is characterized by Russia as their compromise version of Denazification.

          As far as Im concerned, Putins expansion is really helping NATOs by giving them a justification to exist

          NATO obviously requires no credible justification to exist. This doesn’t matter.

            • Maoo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              30
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              I find it completely unreasonable to request a peace talk whilst in a neighboring sovereign nation invading.

              You have a very funny idea about the realities of war. By your logic most could never end. Wars are resolved through diplomacy or full collapse and loss. Your sociopathic ideas about what is “reasonable” devalues the lives and well-being of Ukrainians living through war.

              This is liberal “moral victory” nonsense that no serious person believes.

              That’s lunacy to think Ukrainians are being the unreasonable ones here in regards to a peace talk.

              Thank you for conceding my point and implicitly retracting the claim I replied to.

            • edge [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              When in the history of ever did a nation willingly withdraw from its enemy before even holding peace talks?

              Did the US withdraw from Mexico before they started hashing out Guadalupe Hidalgo?

              Did Germany withdraw from Russia before negotiating Brest-Litovsk?

              Even the ‘we do not negotiate with terrorists’ US negotiated with the Taliban before leaving Afghanistan.

              It’s a deal, and withdrawal is one of the terms. You don’t do it before the deal has been made. That gives up all leverage.

              And Ukraine has already demanded they get absolutely everything, including Crimea. If you want a deal to be everything you want and nothing you don’t, you need an unconditional surrender, not peace talks. Good luck getting Ukrainian tanks into Moscow.

        • ComradeCmdrPiggy [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          What if I told you that in March 2022 the Ukrainians and Russians came this close to closing a deal that would end the war… that is, before the Ukrainians decided to accept effectively unlimited NATO aid in exchange for scrapping said deal?

        • edge [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Without NATO aid, Ukraine will just plainly be taken over by Purine Russia.

          No it wouldn’t. At most they would take the southern half, Novorossiya. The rest they just want a guarantee won’t align with the West.

          • SeaJ@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Putin has started multiple times that he does not consider Ukraine a legitimate country. If he does not think they should exist, where would the other portion of it go?

        • Flaps [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          As far as Im concerned, Putins expansion is really helping NATOs by giving them a justification to exist.

          You have that backwards and are welcome to learn about the context behind the conflict, just ask

        • BodyBySisyphus [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Without NATO aid, Ukraine will just plainly be taken over by Purine Russia

          Ah, I think I’ve found the issue. Here at Hexbear we only support Pyrimidine Russia. We hate fuckin’ cytosine, don’t we folks?

    • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Pointing out propaganda is not being pro-russia. Wanting an end to the American empire is not being pro-russia

        • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I think you are being reductive. One can simultaneously be anti Russia and Anti US imperialism.

          Yes we agree.

          Idk why America being bad means oligarchic Russia is good.

          So pointing out American lies shouldn’t be an issue, right? Pointing out propaganda shouldn’t be an issue, right?

          There’s no nuance in your ideology.

          I’m not the one boiling this down to good guys and bad guys being on “the right side”.
          I support Russia in this conflict insofar as a defeat of Ukraine would be a defeat of the American empire, which would help usher in a multi-polar world - as we are seeing now - which aids national self-determination (as we are starting to see around the world, from the west African countries throwing off the yoke of France and the IMF, south American countries collaborating and throwing out US stooges, and middle eastern countries seeking peace with each other).

          The US generally sucks. They happen to be in the correct side of this conflict.

          If the US sucks, and the us has been shown to lie, and the us continues to lie, then ask yourself why the us supports Ukraine and to what end. Ask yourself why NATO felt the need to sabotage peace talks. Ask yourself why NATO felt the need to make Zelensky maintain an idea that Ukraine would join NATO, after being told it wouldn’t happen behind closed doors.

          They arent always, but here they are.

          Lmao is this your idea of nuance? “Well all the other times they were shown to be ghouls, but this time where I’m bought in, they’re definitely not”

            • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Are you implying NATO is just the US? That no other NATO nation has sway, and that they are all US puppet?

              NATO is and has always been an extension of the US political apparatus. NATO is a void husk of ghouls initially staffed by ex-nazis like Adolph heusinger.
              NATO is allegedly a defensive alliance but has so far only been involved offensively.
              When has NATO ever gone against the will of the US?

              This isnt a US vs Russia issue. Its the majority of Europe as well.

              The current Ukrainian government was installed by the US, the US president and his predecessor are both embroiled in corruption scandals in Ukraine, and the US is sending an inordinate amount of resources to Ukraine. The US is fighting a proxy war.

              tend to trust them as a collective before Id trust Russia.

              Why would you trust what Europe does more than Russia? Why is your skepticism a one way street? I trust neither, I observe the material conditions and the verifiable facts. That is what should lie to grounds for your belief, not vibes about “slavs being untrustworthy” or whatever. Why exactly does it matter how many parts a population is parted up in? Would you trust the Russian federation more if it was The Russian federation and it’s puppet states?
              Besides - Far more countries are netural/pro-russia than opposed.

              Again. I think you are being reductive and turning this into a US bad issue when the US isnt even the most important player here.

              You keep coming back to this statement, this is now the third time I argue it. As before I do not think it is a question of “us bad”, however it is striking to me that you 1. Part this up into “good” and “bad” sides 2. Insist you’re on the “good” side 3. Discount any notion of nuance as wanting to make this about the us.
              Seeing as how you keep returning to this way of dismissing me and seeing how you choose to avoid answering my questions It is clear you are not actually interested in a good faith discussion.

              America centric.

              As I’ve clearly illustrated it is about the US. You refusing to engage with this point does not make it less true.

              Edit: you keep speaking of nuance, yet I see none from you. You reduce this to a question of right and wrong, good and bad, and then declare “were on the good side”. How is this nuanced? How is it nuanced to complain about added context? The fact that I am unwilling to mindlessly go “putler bad, zlava Zelensky” somehow makes me the unnuanced one? The fact that I think questions of NATO encroachment, breaches of treaties and economic interests are relevant to the discussion is somehow unnuanced?
              Your willingness to reduce it all to “invasion wrong, all other doesn’t matter” is somehow nuanced? Please do some self-crit.