It isn’t “fuck the [imperialist/authoritarian nation] government and its enforcers” for most people?
Russia isn’t imperialist. Imperialism isn’t when invasion or when big country is bad
Authoritarian is a useless pejorative as every nation that has been or currently is is “authoritarian”.
That’s a laugh. Putin and his political machine have expressed a desire to return to the days of the Russian Empire and has engaged in acts of conquest to that effect.
Russia is a mirror image of the US. While Anglo-Saxons were pushing west across North America, conquering indigenous peoples, Russians were pushing east out of Europe into Asia conquering indigenous peoples. They’re both dysfunctional countries with dysfunctional world views.
expressed a desire to return to the days of the Russian Empire
Show me. Pull up a shred of evidence for this obvious propaganda. Show me Vladmir Putin expressing the desire to reform the pre-1917 Russian Empire.
I never claimed that modern Russia is progressive, socialist, or something to be defended. I am a communist; Russia today is a capitalist oligarchy. Russia being imperialist and if I support them are separate questions.
Imperialism is not “when a country invades” or “when a big country has bad politics.” Imperialism refers to a specific stage of capitalism characterized by monopoly capital, finance capital dominance, export of capital, and systemic exploitation of dependent nations. By that definition, Russia today does not function as an imperialist power in the same way the US or the rest of the imperial core does. This is a simple statement of facts, not an endorsement.
Pointing to the Russian Empire’s historical expansion is irrelevant to whether the Russian Federation in the 21st century is imperialist. History alone does not determine a country’s position in the current global capitalist system. By that logic, nearly every existing state would be “imperialist” forever and the term would be rendered useless for meaningful analysis.
Likewise, saying Russia “mirrors” the US ignores material reality. The US sits at the core of global finance, enforces dollar hegemony, maintains hundreds of overseas bases, and systematically dominates entire regions. Russia does not occupy that structural position (even if they may wish to). You can criticize Russian nationalism or militarism without flattening all distinctions or redefining imperialism into a catch all for when big countries do bad things or when invasions.
Imperialism refers to a specific stage of capitalism
Then you’ve redefined the term Imperialism.
The term imperialism was coined by
LeninHobson, and it’s definition has remained constant for over a century. It’s actually liberals who have tried to flatten and bastardize it’s definition to hide the inevitable systemic nature of their crimes against humanity. The fact that you were introduced to the wrong definition first doesn’t make it the right one.No. You just don’t know what the word means.
How do you define imperialism if invading other countries with the same explicit intent to annex them isn’t it?
Cowbee means economic imperialism - using the resources / wealth of another country for yourself. So invading another country would not, by itself, be imperialism.
I think this definition is a bit reductionist, but it’s a good starting point to ask ‘is this war for profit or some other reason?’.
but it’s a good starting point to ask ‘is this war for profit or some other reason?’.
Always an important question to ask but if Cowbee does mean that, then they should use the modifier to signify that they are talking about economic imperialism and not about Imperialism Imperialism.
I am talking about what most leftists understand to be imperialism, which is why I called it as such, and explained it so there’s no room for doubt. The vauge concept of influence along international lines popular among apologists for imperialism as I describe it isn’t inherently a bad thing, while imperialism as I describe it is, and is the biggest obstacle to socialism globally.
If you want to rename imperialism to something else, and call imperialism “economic imperialism” then we can do that, I’d rather talk about the actual process itself than argue about nomenclature.
Upper right is similar to lower left - inconsistent values and inconsistent ideology. Pure hypocrisy. Dogs of US vs Dogs of Russia.
Supporting the liberation of Donetsk and Luhansk from the Banderite government they have been trying to secede from for a decade is a good thing, and that’s why the CPRF supports the Russian nationalists in the war. Had the west not supported a far-right coup back in 2014, it’s likely the war never would have happened.
That’s like an onion, just layers of naive. Russia has had imperial ambitions on Ukraine for a while and thinking that they care at all about the “liberation” of Donetsk and Luhansk is crazy talk.
“Material concerns? Physical reality? Oh ho ho, how charmingly naive, my dear boy. The true core of the matter is actually very simple, you see. Pushes glasses up anime-style Russia…is Just Evil.”
Do you actually believe it’s inconsistent? Because it’s really quite straightforward: The US-centered capitalist empire must be stopped, and it’s genocidal proxies need to be eliminated, for the survival of the human race.
The inconsistent part is giving a free pass to Russia when they do everything the US does just not as extensively.
Russia is not stealing the surplus value and resources of the global south on an immense scale, which is the primary reason why its resistance to the US Empire and its European vassals plays a progressive role because of this.
Russia steals the surplus value for within it’s borders, the US steals surplus value from beyond it’s borders. Like I said, Russia does everything the US does just not as extensively.
Russia is indeed capitalist, correct, not imperialist. Glad we can come to an understanding on why the US Empire is the biggest global obstacle to socialism, and that the Russian Federation’s lack of imperialism makes it worthy of critical support in undermining the US Empire.
