this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2025
47 points (72.8% liked)
Memes
52421 readers
585 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I wonder when liberals will realize that Marxists really don't care about being called "tankies," just like we don't care about being called "commies."
Lol you are talking to the person who has assembled entire reading lists, you literally could not have picked a worse target for your random stab in the dark
OMG now I wanna know what they said.
i gotta admit my mistake. my anger was directed at OP. apparently i don´t know how lemmy works.
Saying that to Cowbee specifically is so fucking funny lmao
They are clearly very well read and use their knowledge to cite their sources for bullshit internet arguments. Straight up one of the worst targets you could have picked for your flippant comment there
Okay, I looked up a survey of some Russians
Huh, would you look at that
the dissolution of the ussr was the biggest historic disaster in the past 50 years.
i don´t understand how it´s related to this.
It's relevant in that you are still uncritically repeating the propaganda of the empire that did it, using terms you don't understand from books you haven't read, while being a dweeb to people who have. If it was 2002 you would be calling people Saddam-lovers for not believing the US government's line of bullshit.
Oh hey look everybody, the day has come when everyone was always against this
Edited to be less demeaning
the shit i started wasn´t supposed to be directed at cowbee, i got heated and i own up to my mistake. we settled it and realized we actually agree in many places.
as would most liberals if they actually read the material instead of having their misinformation reinforced by "respectable" sources like the new york times; or the guardian; etc.
Sorry I'm too busy reading (non specified) books in order to form a coherent worldview so that big thinkers on the internet won't call me the tankie word anymore
Yeah so I'm not sure what any of this has to do with accusing Cowbee of not reading and how fucking hilarious that is, but hell yeah dawg go off on all those phantom tankies you've got trapped up in your head. You're going to crush them in this debate that only you are having
my frustration was directed at jackeroni. probably got something mixed up. i don´t know cowbee or his views and i can´t judge him :)
I read books, which ones do I need to read to pass your arbitrary test? My views align with the various Marxist-Leninist groups around the world, broadly, are all of them also confused?
You are the one defending NATO, though.
no lol. fuck NATO.
Ok. Prove me wrong. Go ahead and criticise NATO's disinformation the way you do with Russia. Also, if you are against Russia's actions in Ukraine, provide a valid alternative response to NATO's aggression against Russia.
i know my solution is unrealistic. but for the regular worker it just doesn´t matter whether they are wage slaves for an indebted country where western corporations buy all privatized assets or live in an oligarch-led state. the regular worker just doesn´t want to get bombed or get caught in crossfire. the war must end no matter the outcome or which side has to make which concessions.
Okay, so how can Russia unilaterally stop NATO's aggression without a military action that you condemn so much?
Also, still not seeing any condemnation of NATO, NATO's disinformation campaigns, or an actual valid alternative for Russia.
maybe i´m in the wrong but in my research i came to this conclusion: after the fall of the ussr the russian federation didn´t really jive with the idea of it´s neighbouring country being independent. they invaded chechnia and georgia. as a response other neighbouring countries were like "fuck that" and joined NATO for their own security. russia interprets that as aggressive nato expansion which is just one of the reasons why they invaded. the other reasons are as officially stated: -ukraine needs to be denazified -russia wants to save russian speakers from whatever -putin claims ukraine is not a real country
It's more that after the fall of the USSR, the RF tried to cozy up to the west, was denied, and had a large nationalist movement to kick out the foreign plunderers. This started a large chain of NATO expansion, which has been directed to threaten Russia into opening up its capital markets back up for western imperialism. Many of the former SFSRs and SSRs had strong nationalist movements prior to the dissolution of the USSR, and these carried over into far-right movements such as in Estonia, allowing rapid NATO expansion.
It's less about Russia not wanting "independence" from its neighbors, and more Russia not wanting to be encircled by the main imperialist army on the planet. The dissolution of the USSR wasn't a "turn evil" button, it dramatically altered capital relations and how the west deals with Russia. It's also why Russia has strong ties to socialist states despite being capitalist, it's forced into alignment with them due to being strongarmed by the west, same as Iran, or even Brazil to an extent.
Chechnya was a part of Russia. Russia fought separatists. With NATO's approval. The part of the Russian government that supported the Chechen separatists was shelled by pro-NATO forces' tanks.
Also, if you support the Chechen separatists and think that Russia invaded Chechnya, then you should also support the pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine.
Georgia attacked South Ossetian separatists and peacekeepers. Russia responded. As a result of this conflict, the only territory that Russia got was South Ossetia, and the human price of this conflict is very small compared to the atrocities that NATO commits regularly.
Which 'neighbouring countries' did that? And how would any of that justify joining the most evil polity in the world?
The vast majority of Russia's neighbours didn't have military-related issues with Russia. Only Georgia - which was even the de jure aggressor, - and Ukraine - which experienced a coup, with the resulting government immediately trying to bring weapons to the border with Russia's most populated areas.
NATO did promise to not expand past Berlin. This promise has been broken time and time again.
Furthermore, NATO is the most evil polity in the world, and the most prolific invader. The rest of the world has every right to defend itself against it, and its allies do not get to appeal to a moral right to any sort of defense.
you got me a good chunk of stuff i need to research. thx
Where have I said any of that? You're deeply unserious, and deflecting. What Marxist works should I read to pass your test? I'll add em to the list. Are the various ML orgs I agree with also confused in your eyes?
You are fine with invasions. You never condemn things like invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Iran, etc.
Case in point for the meme.
You automatically assume that whatever contradicts the narrative of the 'Iraq has WMDs' people is false. No regard for any of the actual facts.
who said i don´t oppose it? i want to see the us government and it´s military industrial complex burn to free the world from it´s hegemony and the dollar standard. if i say "russia is bad" i´m not implying "NATO is good"
is everything black and white in your world?
You are literally trying to engage in propaganda in favour of the most prolific invader in the world - NATO.
Let's be honest, you do not condemn NATO, you do not bring up NATO everywhere you can the way you do with Russia, and you do want to be a beneficiary of its colonial atrocities.
99.97% of the time, that's exactly what you (plural) do. If you are an exception, then I welcome you to prove me wrong.
My world is a lot less monochrome than the world of people who go 'Russia bad! Everything that contradicts NATO's propaganda is Russian disinfo! Russia should roll over and die for my empire!'
nato propaganda is "we need to send tons of arms so ukrainians can defend their country" but even if they defend it it´s gonna end like this: ukraine - a country with a gdp of 42 billion $ in 2014 took up soo much debt it could never repay it after the war. it´s gonna privatize all assets, multinational corporations come in and swoop everything the state can offer. ukraine will be denied entry into the eu. ukraine will be a financial slave to the imf, america and the eu and it´s gonna get exploited for cheap labour while ukrainians will be treated as 2nd class world citizens due to their non-eu passport.
i got heated up. i apologize if i made assumptions about you. my point still stands: russia is spreading misinfo like crazy and OP keeps reposting it.
Also, 'we need to do a coup in Ukraine'.
Also, 'we need to invade Iraq because reasons'.
Also, 'we need to invade Afghanistan because reasons'.
Also, 'we need to invade Iran because reasons'.
Also, 'we need to do a Lebensraum in Palestine because reasons'.
And so on, and so forth.
The 'Russia bad' sort of propaganda pales in comparison to that, actually, but it is still used to justify NATO's hegemony over the world.
And NATO (along with pro-NATO anti-communists in Ukraine and Russia)
The unpopular privatisation of assets was already underway by 2022, even if we exclude the 1990s that severely damaged the living standards in Ukraine.
NATO has been spreading misinformation much more aggressively, to the point of most people in English-speaking places being convinced that NATO and the Ukrainian nazi state are somehow on the right side of history here.
So you're just lashing out and insulting me personally because I called out how useless an insult like "tankie" is, including inventing a worldview for me and calling me an incoherent Marxist? As you admit, you're just outraged and aren't thinking clearly or coherently, even if I wanted to discuss my views on the Russo-Ukrainian war right now there's no reason I'd expect a good-faith response from you when you're already inventing my responses.
Also, because I am curious at this point, what Marxist works should I read to pass your test? I’ll add em to the list. Are the various ML orgs I agree with also confused in your eyes?
i gotta apologize my anger was directed at op. gotta learn how lemmy works.
Fair enough, apology accepted.
For clarity, I've expressed skepticism that Russia genuinely cares about de-Nazifying Ukraine. Ukraine is run by those who uphold Stepan Bandera, has been since the Euromaidan coup in 2014, and has significant neo-Nazi batallions like Azov, but Russia isn't waging some glorious anti-fascist war for the sake of fighting fascism. At the same time, it fails to meet the definition of imperialism, Russia is largely driven by its own insular production and relies on exports, typically of oil and millitary equipment. It doesn't have the same immense financial capital or domination of the global south that the west has, and as such has no room to be genuinely imperialist.
Russia's real goals aren't really for plunder, but for maintaining control of the land bridge to their territory in the Donbass region. Ukraine exists, and is a real nation, but the Donbass region is ethnically Russian, and is a real seperatist movement. Russia wants the Donbass region not for love of the people, but because Ukraine has been cozying up to the west and increasingly been anti-Russian, and thus Russia wants control of the land-route into the Russian heartland.
Those are my views. I don't hold the strawman views you claimed I did. My views are in line with orgs like PSL's statement and FRSO's statement - NATO provoked the war, Russia is going to win regardless, Ukraine is being hollowed out by the west on one side and losing to Russia on the either, the best outcome is an expedient peace agreement.
we actually have the same viewpoint on that. thank you for accepting my apology. i own up to my mistake, i deleted some of my comments as per your advice so moderation doesn´t have to.
All good!