So explain, then, what point you’re making and what your alternative is? Your initial statement is intentionally vague and seems to have a very direct agenda to make Ukraine look bad by posting this article. And I didn’t claim Ukraine expanding its martial law powers was “right”, because its not, but it is at least understandable considering how their entire country is teetering on the edge of complete civil collapse (and such restrictions are with precedent, most nations do during wars and even America did restrict a lot of liberties during WWII/vietnam/etc). Sticking to your morals is valiant but pointless if it means you get overrun by those without morals.
But your vague statement seem to think this change makes them worse than Russia.
The point I’m making is very simple and should be obvious. When the regime has to grab people off the street and force them to fight, then it has no legitimacy. This isn’t a case of people willingly defending their country, it’s fascist regime backed by the west that’s forcing people to die in a senseless war. If you can’t understand such basic things then what else is there to say to you.
Alright, let’s roll with that logic: A sovereign government that violates the sovereignty of it’s citizens is illegitimate. Since Ukraine is now violating the sovereignty of it’s citizens for wartime mobilization, it is an illegitimate government. That’s a sound premise, actually. In a vacuum this would be true.
However, that completely loses the nuance that Ukraine is not the aggressor in this “senseless war”. Ukraine did not violate it’s citizen’s sovereignty, RUSSIA DID by initiating the war of annexation against the sovereign government of Ukraine. By violating the sovereignty of the government, Russia thus violated the sovereignty of every citizen under that government. None of this would have been necessary had the initial aggression not been committed.
So, now extend your argument: Let’s go ahead and accuse Ukraine of violating human rights with this expansion of power. You must also do so for Russia, who backed Ukraine into this corner in the first place, and who is also committing infinitely worse violations against the civilian territory they have thus far annexed. Are you willing to do that? Because so far, you haven’t.
You seem to be echoing a large number of Russian propaganda points trying to paint Ukraine as some fascist shithole, and not the independent nation being overrun by a expansionist dictatorship that it is. This argument is not in good faith.
However, that completely loses the nuance that Ukraine is not the aggressor in this “senseless war”.
Weird, last I checked Ukraine was involved in a war against Donbas since 2014 as even western media reported at the time.
Ukraine did not violate it’s citizen’s sovereignty, RUSSIA DID by initiating the war of annexation against the sovereign government of Ukraine.
And if people of Ukraine wanted to defend the state then they would be voluntarily fighting to do so.
By violating the sovereignty of the government, Russia thus violated the sovereignty of every citizen under that government. None of this would have been necessary had the initial aggression not been committed.
None of that has anything to do with the western sponsored regime in Ukraine forcing people to fight Russia for western interests.
So, now extend your argument: Let’s go ahead and accuse Ukraine of violating human rights with this expansion of power. You must also do so for Russia, who backed Ukraine into this corner in the first place, and who is also committing infinitely worse violations against the civilian territory they have thus far annexed. Are you willing to do that? Because so far, you haven’t.
The premise the west peddles is that Ukraine is defending western values against Russia which is already presumed to be bad. However, if it turns out that Ukraine is doing the same things you claim are bad when Russia is doing, then what values is Ukraine defending exactly?
Turns out this conflict isn’t about values it all, it’s about whose sphere of influence Ukraine is going to be under.
You seem to be echoing a large number of Russian propaganda points trying to paint Ukraine as some fascist shithole, and not the independent nation being overrun by a expansionist dictatorship that it is. This argument is not in good faith.
Meanwhile, you’re making an incoherent argument that doesn’t make a lick of sense trying to defend literal fascism in Ukraine.
LOL. What a ridiculous take. “Alliances”. You don’t have national alliances, neither do any of us, because we’re people. We have opinions. And the opinions of most of the left globally is that the USA is the greatest scourge of humanity and Russia is in a fight for its existence against an American proxy in the form of Ukraine.
It’s also such a thought terminator when you libs assume the only way people could arrive at this opinion is if you’re paid to do it, as opposed to libs who clearly are free thinkers and don’t get paid for their ideas they just arrive at them fully independently even though it completely aligns with US propaganda efforts, official State Dept narratives, and the clear oligarch-run news media consensus. You could never be paid to have your ideas, but your opponents? Of course they have nothing worthy of arguing because they are paid shills regurgitating from a script.
Weird, last I checked Ukraine was involved in a war against Donbas since 2014 as even western media reported at the time.
It’s almost like Russia has expressed its desire to annex Ukraine for over a decade now and has been sending disguised military units to create a “resistance” to fabricate a justification for “liberating” parts of Ukraine into Russian territory. Weird… It’s not like they explicitly gave that as one of the 20 conflicting reasons for this invasion or anything
Quoting Internationalist 360° as a reliable source isn’t going to win anyone over. And the ‘The Hill’ article you listed concludes something that is the opposite of what you are claiming:
The odious Russian media tried to paint Ukraine as a land of Nazis, though that is patently wrong. Ukraine has a thriving Jewish community, and its far-right is still on the fringe.
We all understand your point of view, everyone’s a Nazi if they are against Russian/Chinese imperialism.
We all understand your point of view, everyone’s a Nazi if they are against Russian/Chinese imperialism.
I don’t think that at all. Being “against” Russia or China doesn’t per-se make someone a fascist. I’m not confused about what fascism is, and I don’t use it as a floating signifier for stuff I don’t like.
But neither Russia nor China is imperialist. The imperial core is imperialist, otherwise known as the Global North.
.
Over 20 years go Russia—at the time lead by Putin—wanted to join the imperialism club, but the US rejected them: Ex-Nato head says Putin wanted to join alliance early on in his rule. Now Russia, rejected by the Global North, has no choice but to join with the Global South as allies instead. This shift in allegiances has been massively accelerated by the sanctions of this war.
Ukraine has a thriving Jewish community
So fascism means hating Jews? What about the fascists genociding Palestinians in Israel as we speak?
So if enough people won’t fight the government should shut down and let the invaders take over? Is that your alternative? Civilisations sometimes need to force people to work for a common good. See also vaccines.
Bourgeois revolution is a term used in Marxist theory to refer to a social revolution that aims to destroy a feudal system or its vestiges, establish the rule of the bourgeoisie, and create a bourgeois (capitalist) state. In colonised or subjugated countries, bourgeois revolutions often take the form of a war of national independence. The Dutch, English, American, and French revolutions are considered the archetypal bourgeois revolutions, in that they attempted to clear away the remnants of the medieval feudal system, so as to pave the way for the rise of capitalism. The term is usually used in contrast to “proletarian revolution”, and is also sometimes called a “bourgeois-democratic revolution”
I don’t mean to imply that Russia isn’t a bourgeoise democracy—it is as well, but at least it’s not under the boot of the imperial core like Ukraine is. Russia emancipated itself from the US neocolonial shock therapy plundering that began with Yeltsin and ended with Putin.
Lmao. They’ve got an army from another country tearing through their land. I reckon they’ve got larger problems than “this isn’t the best form of democracy in the world”. Again, no solution from you apart from lying on their backs.
Yep, and the instant horde of Hexbear users brigading the comments section in their defense is patently obvious as to what’s going on. Astroturfs gonna astroturf.
So basically, a country that is invaded has the option to either roll over and be destroyed or fight back and become “illegitimate” and should be destroyed anyway? Basically an invader has free rein to do destroy any country they feel like? That’s some nice victim blaming there. Incredibly abusive thinking.
Who was Ukraine invaded by? Russia only? Or does it count when the USA foments a coup and even sends its regime change agents to oversee the coup, hand picks the successor, and deliberately hand picks someone that will invite the undemocratic nuclear-armed nazi-led transnational NATO to take it’s land for military installations? Because as Russia sees it, a nuclear armed military has been marching across Europe to it’s Ukrainian border across which Europe has invaded Russia twice. Is NATO allowed to move in as long as the USA coups the leaders who are against it?
Ukraine’s legitimacy in the West is founded on the narrative that it’s a white Christian democratic freedom loving bastion. When it suspends human rights, bans unions, bans communist parties, shells civilians, attacks civilians bridges with civilians on it, enlists Nazis, celebrates Nazis, honors Nazis, and then just starts grabbing men off the street and sending them to die with no training, it loses that legitimacy. Ukraine must surrender and negotiate a peace deal. The only other option is mass murder of its civilian population through forced consignment in a war of attrition that it is badly losing, has always been losing, and has never had a chance of winning.
So explain, then, what point you’re making and what your alternative is? Your initial statement is intentionally vague and seems to have a very direct agenda to make Ukraine look bad by posting this article. And I didn’t claim Ukraine expanding its martial law powers was “right”, because its not, but it is at least understandable considering how their entire country is teetering on the edge of complete civil collapse (and such restrictions are with precedent, most nations do during wars and even America did restrict a lot of liberties during WWII/vietnam/etc). Sticking to your morals is valiant but pointless if it means you get overrun by those without morals.
But your vague statement seem to think this change makes them worse than Russia.
The point I’m making is very simple and should be obvious. When the regime has to grab people off the street and force them to fight, then it has no legitimacy. This isn’t a case of people willingly defending their country, it’s fascist regime backed by the west that’s forcing people to die in a senseless war. If you can’t understand such basic things then what else is there to say to you.
Alright, let’s roll with that logic: A sovereign government that violates the sovereignty of it’s citizens is illegitimate. Since Ukraine is now violating the sovereignty of it’s citizens for wartime mobilization, it is an illegitimate government. That’s a sound premise, actually. In a vacuum this would be true.
However, that completely loses the nuance that Ukraine is not the aggressor in this “senseless war”. Ukraine did not violate it’s citizen’s sovereignty, RUSSIA DID by initiating the war of annexation against the sovereign government of Ukraine. By violating the sovereignty of the government, Russia thus violated the sovereignty of every citizen under that government. None of this would have been necessary had the initial aggression not been committed.
So, now extend your argument: Let’s go ahead and accuse Ukraine of violating human rights with this expansion of power. You must also do so for Russia, who backed Ukraine into this corner in the first place, and who is also committing infinitely worse violations against the civilian territory they have thus far annexed. Are you willing to do that? Because so far, you haven’t.
You seem to be echoing a large number of Russian propaganda points trying to paint Ukraine as some fascist shithole, and not the independent nation being overrun by a expansionist dictatorship that it is. This argument is not in good faith.
Weird, last I checked Ukraine was involved in a war against Donbas since 2014 as even western media reported at the time.
And if people of Ukraine wanted to defend the state then they would be voluntarily fighting to do so.
None of that has anything to do with the western sponsored regime in Ukraine forcing people to fight Russia for western interests.
The premise the west peddles is that Ukraine is defending western values against Russia which is already presumed to be bad. However, if it turns out that Ukraine is doing the same things you claim are bad when Russia is doing, then what values is Ukraine defending exactly?
Turns out this conflict isn’t about values it all, it’s about whose sphere of influence Ukraine is going to be under.
Meanwhile, you’re making an incoherent argument that doesn’t make a lick of sense trying to defend literal fascism in Ukraine.
Removed by mod
I love how you just straw man when being called out on your bullshit and then try to take the high ground. A real class act.
LOL. What a ridiculous take. “Alliances”. You don’t have national alliances, neither do any of us, because we’re people. We have opinions. And the opinions of most of the left globally is that the USA is the greatest scourge of humanity and Russia is in a fight for its existence against an American proxy in the form of Ukraine.
It’s also such a thought terminator when you libs assume the only way people could arrive at this opinion is if you’re paid to do it, as opposed to libs who clearly are free thinkers and don’t get paid for their ideas they just arrive at them fully independently even though it completely aligns with US propaganda efforts, official State Dept narratives, and the clear oligarch-run news media consensus. You could never be paid to have your ideas, but your opponents? Of course they have nothing worthy of arguing because they are paid shills regurgitating from a script.
It’s almost like Russia has expressed its desire to annex Ukraine for over a decade now and has been sending disguised military units to create a “resistance” to fabricate a justification for “liberating” parts of Ukraine into Russian territory. Weird… It’s not like they explicitly gave that as one of the 20 conflicting reasons for this invasion or anything
Wow. Conspiracy mind activated. So you think all the civilians Ukraine burned to death in that office building were crisis actors?
a lot of things are weird when you just make them up
And apparently anything can be made up if you just pretend it didn’t happen
I see you’ve made a self referential comment
Edit to add: Usually someone responds with, yeah well Russia has fascists, too, to which I usually respond:
Quoting Internationalist 360° as a reliable source isn’t going to win anyone over. And the ‘The Hill’ article you listed concludes something that is the opposite of what you are claiming:
We all understand your point of view, everyone’s a Nazi if they are against Russian/Chinese imperialism.
I don’t think that at all. Being “against” Russia or China doesn’t per-se make someone a fascist. I’m not confused about what fascism is, and I don’t use it as a floating signifier for stuff I don’t like.
But neither Russia nor China is imperialist. The imperial core is imperialist, otherwise known as the Global North.
.
Over 20 years go Russia—at the time lead by Putin—wanted to join the imperialism club, but the US rejected them: Ex-Nato head says Putin wanted to join alliance early on in his rule. Now Russia, rejected by the Global North, has no choice but to join with the Global South as allies instead. This shift in allegiances has been massively accelerated by the sanctions of this war.
So fascism means hating Jews? What about the fascists genociding Palestinians in Israel as we speak?
So if enough people won’t fight the government should shut down and let the invaders take over? Is that your alternative? Civilisations sometimes need to force people to work for a common good. See also vaccines.
The “common good” in bourgeois democracies is the good of the capitalist class at the expense of the working class.
Wikipedia: Bourgeois revolution
BBC: [Princeton] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy
I don’t mean to imply that Russia isn’t a bourgeoise democracy—it is as well, but at least it’s not under the boot of the imperial core like Ukraine is. Russia emancipated itself from the US neocolonial shock therapy plundering that began with Yeltsin and ended with Putin.
How to say you don’t understand the concept of democracy.
Lmao. They’ve got an army from another country tearing through their land. I reckon they’ve got larger problems than “this isn’t the best form of democracy in the world”. Again, no solution from you apart from lying on their backs.
If people wanted to defend their land they would do it voluntarily. Evidently this is a hard concept for liberals to wrap their heads around.
Hey man, there’s no point arguing with this guy, he’s a Russian shill.
He’s all over lemmy spreading this shit all the time
Ah yes, anybody pointing out the obvious is a Russian shill. Amazing how McCarthyism is still alive and well.
Yep, and the instant horde of Hexbear users brigading the comments section in their defense is patently obvious as to what’s going on. Astroturfs gonna astroturf.
Ah yes people demonstrating that you’re full of shit with sources are the ones astroturfing. Go home little turd.
Orc hordes at Hexbear, their meat waves astroturfing.
You got 8 downvotes. Hexbears can’t even downvote
So basically, a country that is invaded has the option to either roll over and be destroyed or fight back and become “illegitimate” and should be destroyed anyway? Basically an invader has free rein to do destroy any country they feel like? That’s some nice victim blaming there. Incredibly abusive thinking.
Who was Ukraine invaded by? Russia only? Or does it count when the USA foments a coup and even sends its regime change agents to oversee the coup, hand picks the successor, and deliberately hand picks someone that will invite the undemocratic nuclear-armed nazi-led transnational NATO to take it’s land for military installations? Because as Russia sees it, a nuclear armed military has been marching across Europe to it’s Ukrainian border across which Europe has invaded Russia twice. Is NATO allowed to move in as long as the USA coups the leaders who are against it?
Ukraine’s legitimacy in the West is founded on the narrative that it’s a white Christian democratic freedom loving bastion. When it suspends human rights, bans unions, bans communist parties, shells civilians, attacks civilians bridges with civilians on it, enlists Nazis, celebrates Nazis, honors Nazis, and then just starts grabbing men off the street and sending them to die with no training, it loses that legitimacy. Ukraine must surrender and negotiate a peace deal. The only other option is mass murder of its civilian population through forced consignment in a war of attrition that it is badly losing, has always been losing, and has never had a chance of winning.