• TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    You ignored 10+ sources (variety of them too; we got western media, aljazeera, grayzone, etc), two infographics (one that was showing purely the demographic split in Ukraine to back up materially what I said as the material conditions that began the outbreak/seperatists)

    Lol, because they aren’t supportive of your argument. It’s always the same tactics, just add an overwhelming amount of titles that seem to support your argument and hope the person doesn’t actually read them.

    When you do actually read the sources, which I doubt you have, as several of them are broken… They don’t actually support the overall argument. The first source is a great example. You are claiming that there is a huge neonazi problem, when in reality the article reports that the far right party wasn’t even able to get the needed 5% of votes to become part of their parliament. Which is ironic, because Russias far right party has nearly 8% of the vote.

    Other articles are critical of some of Ukraine’s far right treatment of lgbtq community, which is valid. However, it’s still a step up from Russia where it’s fucking illegal.

    “Da Russian is just making up excuses! I’m Asian so I can speak on Russians like I’m an expert, I find them funny!” (heavily paraphrasing of course but you aren’t actually comprehending anything I’m saying or something is firing wrong up there) which makes me question your feelings on Russians as a whole.

    Lol, I guess I hit a nerve with the whole not being white thing. What I said is that I think it’s funny they consider themselves eastern… I think being actually eastern may have something to do with that.

    Yeah, none of this happened before “little green men” were being reported on by Western media at all. Once again, proof you didn’t read what I said.

    So if it didn’t happen before Girkin… Then that should leave you to believe Girkin may have had something to do with it? Or do we just not follow logic anymore?

    Critical support. What is it? You seemingly cannot understand the concept.

    Haven’t really heard anything critical… You’re just supporting nationalist propaganda whole heatedly.

    their anti-imperialist actions against the largest hegemony. Second time I’ve repeated this.

    Again, what theory leads you to believe that supporting right winged nationalist is an act of anti-imperialism? Are you coming up with this yourself? Any leftist philosopher or historical accounts that support this view?

    Burden of proof. I offered sources, citations, etc.

    Lol, you offered a small article that didn’t mention ethnic cleansing. Claiming things like burglary and political kidnapping were equivalent to ethnic cleansing.

    But here ya go “Following the invasion, Ukraine brought a case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to challenge Russia’s accusation. During the proceedings of Ukraine v. Russian Federation, the ICJ said it had found no evidence of genocide. The International Association of Genocide Scholars also rejected Russia’s accusation.[2] Further reports by 30 legal and genocide scholars warned that Russia’s accusations are part of the “accusation in a mirror” technique, ultimately revealing the Russian incitement to commit genocide against Ukrainians”.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_v._Russian_Federation_(2022)

    In the references, there’s about 25 different sources you are free to pick through.

    . You need to re-read what I said and definitely read some Lenin if you’re gonna have bouts with communists. You have no idea what I’m even talking about while ignoring half of it.

    Lol, Ive read plenty of lenin. Just because I disagree with your interpretation of how to fight against imperialism doesn’t mean I can the a socialist.

    We don’t have the same definition of “imperialism” not that trying to explain it would matter.

    Yeah, something that come across quite a bit with arm chair communist is that their definition of imperialism changes based on their immediate need.

    Lenins definition of imperialism actually included a competition of the great powers, leading to the domination of their less economically advanced neighbors. Which describes the situation in Ukraine pretty well to me.

    Now please, tell me about the definition of imperialism that precludes imperial competition, or that flames there is only one great nation.

    “Within days of the February 2014 Euromaidan Revolution that culminated with the ouster of President Viktor Yanukovych and ushered in a firmly pro-Western government, the newly appointed head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, reportedly proposed a “three-way partnership” with the CIA and MI6, the UK’s foreign intelligence service. Ukrainian security officials gradually proved their value to the U.S. by feeding the CIA intelligence on Russia, including “secret documents about the Russian Navy,” leading to the establishment of CIA bases in Ukraine to coordinate activities against Russia and various training programs for Ukrainian commandos and other elite units.”

    Lol, this is the article that causes multiple people to quit this particular think tank because "Cirincione said he “fundamentally” disagrees with Quincy experts who “completely ignore the dangers and the horrors of Russia’s invasion and occupation and focus almost exclusively on criticism of the United States, NATO, and Ukraine”.

    The article is proposing that a gladios style CIA project from the 40’ is basically responsible for installing the new government. In reality the nationalist party that that project did support isn’t even popular, it literally only got 1.6% of the vote in 2019.

    You’re literally brain-dead if you think western intervention hasn’t been going on in Ukraine before Maidan/leading up to Maidan and before even separatists and “little green men”.

    And you are brain dead to think that Russia hasn’t been intervening in their government and economics since the country came into independence.

    Just because the CIA has officers basically everywhere doesn’t mean that they are responsible for everything that happens in the country. It’s pretty easy to imagine why ukranians wanted to eid themselves of Russian oligarchs controlling so much of their means of production.

    They do have a monopoly on violence because America has the most military bases around the world, has the largest record of interventions/military actions (compared to the one Russia is being demonized for) and completely controls the financial levers of most of the world through the petrodollar.

    Lol, again. I said total monopoly. The fact that you admit Russia is doing the same but on a smaller scale is my point. I can admit they are both horrible, while you are stuck defending imperialism.

    Also if America has complet control of the financial levers of the entire world the Russian economy wouldn’t be able to go on the war front.

    Russia is in Syria and Africa with small mercenary contingents/PMC groups. America has literal military bases

    Not to mention the separatist colonies they’ve been militaraly supporting all over eastern Europe…

    America has literal military bases strapped with fighters, bombers and garrisons in almost every country. Sometimes multiple.

    And that is bad… therefore another great power doing the same to economically disadvaged countries is…also bad.

    You’re regurgitating their propaganda and taking their views established by the U.S State department. There is no “critical support”. You really believe everything the U.S and Ukraine says about Russia, don’t you? I have yet to see a difference.

    Why would I even critically support a right winged nationalist country? My support goes to the people defending their homeland from an invasion that’s killed tens of thousands of people.

    Plus, it’s not like many countries have really whole heatedly defended the reasons behind Russias invasion anyways.

    Your definition of Imperialism is rooted, repeatedly by what you type, in the definitions of mid-1800s geopolitics. We use Lenin.

    Lol, lenin didn’t talk about imperial cores or a conflict with an overwhelming hegemony that validates empowering right winged nationalist. His definition literally talks about competition between Great nations duking it out to exploit less powerful countries.

    You need to read some lenin yourself it seems.

    person in Christ they removed Lenin statues and replaced them with Bandera.

    And liberals in America tore down statues of the Confederacy… Does that mean America’s no longer racist? There are better metrics to measure the popularity of right winged extremists, you are ignoring them because it suits your narrative.

    There are slews of pictures, from BOTH sides of Ukrainian soldiers having Nazi tattoos beyond just “Azov”.

    And there are plenty of Russian ultras that have the same Nazi tattoos. It’s almost like right winged nationalist reactionary groups are common in post soviet states.

    one group of Nazis has support from the global hegemon’s intelligence agency. The other is a PMC group that got liquidated.

    Lol, by that definition both groups have been liquidated.

    Once again, critical support. Something you keep tossing to the side.

    I don’t think you understand what critical support means…

    Because China isn’t a capitalist country; the entire private industry is completely locked in and guarded by a literal vanguard party that controls the profit-seeking for the building of productive forces to serve national interests.

    My dude, I’m not saying that global systems theory is correct. You are. You are utiliIng the theory to promote the idea that any attack on the imperial core is anti-imperialism.

    My point is that the person who invented global systems theory doesn’t believe in socialism in regards to global economy. The idea of an imperial core is reliant on all nations participating in global trade with self interest being the number one priority.