Seems to be KPRF, the revisionist parliamentary party that supports the war
The KPRF was the only party that never stopped supporting and materially aid the people and the militias of Donbass over the years. Reminder that Putin wanted to return Donbass to Ukraine to make amends with Europe, and is now only being forced to take the matter into his own hands because he was denied from joining the fascist club of Europe.
Do you have a source for Putin saying he wanted to return donbass to Ukraine? I can’t find it on Google.
I wonder what kind of parallels can be drawn with Ukraine now and China during WW2 (when the communists allied with the nationalists in order to fend off the Japanese). Perhaps strategically it makes sense for Russian communists to “support” Russia in order to stave off NATO. This would give more breathing room for leftist agitation inside of Russia (and eastern Ukraine for that matter, perhaps western Ukraine too I hope).
I get the impression the DPRK’s support boils down to the fact that, if the US is bogged down supporting Ukraine, that’s less resources going to harass the North.
Their support of Russia has zero impact on the status of the war as imperialist or not.
Most of their youth wing literally split over supporting the war. when at best the only people worth supporting even critically was the LPR and DPR (and Putin couped their nascent proto-Socialist governments almost as soon as they formed.)
I mean it’s right there ffs “Revolutionary Defeatism”
Revolutionary defeatism is when I root for NATO to finish what they started in their quest to destroy Russia so they can then move on to China
It’s an anti-imperial war from Russia’s perspective, they are fighting NATO encroachment and resisting imperialism as they did in Syria
No real communist or socialist grouping would support an imperialist war.
Hey at least they helped that Communist guy in Ukraine that lost his eye and had a red star etched into his back by the Nazis there
its in the video linked above lmao
idr what timestamp. they smuggled him out of the country and got him asylum in belarus
What I want to know is why Russia has been obsessed with Ukraine. It seems to be more than just “NATO moving closer”, or “there are neo-nazis there”. Dugin’s book states:
“Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness…”
It argues further that Ukraine should not be allowed independent status or right to exist. Why? Is it because of anti-Russian sentiment from famine, Chernobyl, etc? Is it something else? Was Dugin spurned by a ukrainian? Did a ukrainian art school reject his application? Most of the other ideas make sense from the point of view of one who’s goal is russo-centric global hegemony. But, it seems like a pretty deep-set anti-Ukrainian mindset in Moscow.
I love how they’ve been peddling the “warm water port” thing since the cold war. Soviets were somehow always expanding in order to get that holy land of a “warm water port” and if they got it they would take over the world.
Now it turn out that the port was in ukraine the whole time! Dummy Soviets, you should have looked in your own country!
‘just NATO moving closer’ is blowing off a lot of stuff.
Good point.
dugin is a liar or an idiot
Probably mostly the former, is my assumption, but I can’t rule out the latter. Would make sense to perceive his book (Foundations of Geopolitics) as a mix of doctrine and russo-centrist propaganda, and his statements like that as an approach to manufacturing consent for future (at the time) invasion of Ukraine.
Hasn’t his importance in Russia been exaggerated by western media? My understanding is he’s a relatively fringe figure without much influence.
The donbass region is an important industrial region, eastern ukraine is were most of the black soil is, sevastapol is one of the only 2 warm water ports of russia, and ukraine has high population with prewar amount of 50 million
Its a rich country, dugin is just a fascist that sees all non russians as inferiors aka an idiot
The donbass region is an important industrial region, eastern ukraine is were most of the black soil is, sevastapol is one of the only 2 warm water ports of russia, and ukraine has high population with prewar amount of 50 million
Not trying to start any fights but, if that’s the major set of motivations, wouldn’t that just be imperialism, as much as the West routinely practices? IE, Group X has ownership of resource Y, Group E wants it, so, they invade to take it through force.
(Not JAQing, even with the original question, just honestly trying to understand if there’s something that I’m not getting here.)
yea, if you think russia wants to take over those rich areas then its for sure imperialism, if you think they are doing it to protect the russian speaking people in the east then its not, it would probably fall in something like nationalism.
my point was mostly to show that ukraine is in fact important in a geopolitical strategic way.
Yes it would be. A very strong argument can be made that Russia fits to a T the 5 conditions to be imperialist as set by Lenin. To note also that imperialism is NOT a policy decision, it’s an objective stage of capitalist development, any advanced or semi advanced state with its material base being capitalist will express variations of imperialist tendencies.
I would argue that while the thesis “the war in Ukraine is a provoked (by the west) interimperialist confrontation”, holds a lot of merit, it does fail to account sufficiently for the extent this war was provoked, for the remaining fact the western imperialist alliances and particularly the US, remain hegemonic af, and for the more minute analysis of the Russian economy. That being said, if Russia isn’t an imperialist state, it is at the very least an aspiring-imperialist one (and in certain regions very much already acts as one).
Regardless these two variations of analysis are FAR more accurate than those which aim to posit Russia as ANTI imperialist somehow, that one is just caricatural campist nonsense that isn’t rooten in an honest materialist analysis, and which echo a lot the (erroneous) thesis of “super-imperialism” that Kautsky put forward.
In all the above this doesn’t change the role of communists in the west tho: revolutionary defeatism, fight our own imperialists. It does raise question about those who go further and give concrete support towards Russia (an IMO very damaging position that harms anti-imperialist organizing here), and it does change the attitude for say, Russian and Ukrainian communists ought to have with regards to the war ( attitude being a choice between revolutionary defeatism or critical support).
Wasn’t intending to insinuate otherwise. I’ve been led to believe, that quite possibly incorrectly, that his writing was considered useful by the current regime.
Dugin is basically irrelevant inside of Russia, he’s just beloved by westerners for some reason. He’s sort of like Tom Clancy or Jordan Peterson for Russia.
In one of his books he says that what Russia needs to do is annex northern China. Do you think that’s something that’s part of Russia’s geopolitical plan or are these the ramblings of a crazy person?
Dugin’s book states:
You’re paying more attention to that guy than anyone in russia with decision making power is.
Western “communists”: (sitting on a gamerchair, scoffing contemptuously) “That’s not REAL communism”
How are we exactly? Say the word. I only believes in class war.
