Be very of these false narratives which seek to bend the framework of reality towards a position in accord with the US Empire.
This is not “a conflict between two bourgeois countries”. This is an abstract, undialectical analysis.
It is adapting the framework of Western Imperialists.
This is a complex conflict decades in the making, at it’s core, it is a war between Russia and the Blood Empire.
The Ukrainian people are being used as a weapon by their bloodthirsty American masters.
I hope people here see how deceptive and devious this “both sides bad capitalists” narrative is.
It is poisonous to us communist communities, and it shows that western propaganda is very much able to spread on GenZedong.
Do not allow them to infiltrate our minds.
Godspeed comrades. o7
The way I frame this concept is “regional imperialism”.
So, for example, I am of the opinion that Iran is engaged in regional imperialism. I’m completely sympathetic to why that is the state of affairs for them due to economic and geopolitical reasons (West Asia is a cutthroat continent for obvious reasons and, unfortunately, if Iran isn’t out there projecting power beyond its own borders then it’s only a matter of time before Wahhabi groups like ISIS suddenly “somehow” find themselves armed, trained, supplied, and on Iran’s doorstep snapping at its heels.)
If Iran had the ability to extend its reach I think it’s fair to say based on current evidence that it likely would.
But that’s beside the point.
My reason for framing a country as a regional imperialist power is to cast a clear distinction between them and countries in the NATO axis - global imperialists through and through. This allows for critical analysis of Iran and it helps to avoid the “both sides bad” which all too often ends up carrying water for the side which is very clearly, demonstrably much the greater of two evils.
As I said below:
Imperialism is not when you have a conflict or power struggle.
Imperialism is when you have 800 foreign military bases, control all economic counsels, sanction and starve out human populations, forcing other countries to stay in line with mass murdering sanctions under threat of additional sanctions against themselves.
Russia is not even close to being Imperialist in any regard. It is a state that exists in a world that is dominated by an Imperialist Empire.
The conflict in Ukraine is not a kind of any “small Imperialism”.
That is a ridiculous and abstract position. You are abstracting the meaning of Imperialism and applying it to a country that has been a historic victim of American Imperialism.
You speak of abstractions and ridiculous positions yet you essentialize imperialism to a quantity and to a victim-perpetrator binary. You argue as if imperialism is not something which develops gradually as a process but rather something that emerges fully-formed or which only exists once it surpasses a certain level of intensity.
Would you say that the EU is not imperialist given the fact that it doesn’t meet your definition above? 🤔🤔
“meeting my definition” means nothing because it is not “my definition” that is the center of meaning.
To answer your question, the EU is part of the American Empire, they are synonymous.
The fact that you even pose this question shows how ridiculous your perspective is.
The center of the meaning is having 800 foreign military bases? Just whose definition are you using here buddy?
It’s remarkable that you’d flatten out any materialist analysis of the EU in favor of the terminally-online debatebro take that the EU is simply a part of the American Empire.
Given that there are well over 200 US military bases in the EU and “the EU is a part of the American Empire” then does that mean that the US doesn’t actually reach that magical 800+ number of foreign military bases, thus meaning that the US isn’t imperialist by your measure?
The fact that you can’t actually respond to the content of my question any more than you can help yourself from soapboxing shows more about your perspective than a question, which is intended to highlight the absurdity in your own position and to see if you are capable of addressing the contradictions in your own muddled thinking, does.
Yours is a grim parody of dialectical materialism; I’d call it vulgar DiaMat but that would be too charitable since it’s neither dialectical nor materialist.
I was making clear the real material difference between the realities.
Unlike you, I am not making an abstraction using the definition and then applying it universally across realities inside and outside of the American Empire.
Because I’m not an anarchist, like you.
The “reality” is that:
Imperialism must be global before it’s imperialism
Imperialism is about about many military bases you have internationally
If you have been a subject of imperialism, you cannot be imperialist yourself
Imperialism is a synonym for being a global hegemon
The EU has absolutely zero internal political economy or contradictions that distinguish it from the US; it’s literally just an extension of the US
Anyone who doesn’t immediately agree with everything you say is an anarchist
You’re a real winner, aren’t you?
People are down voting you, but you’re entirely right. Its not like we are saying that Russia must be fought against, we support it critically. This is the critical part of critical support.
I like small imperialist just because its a call back to the petit bourgeois - national bourgeois dynamic but regional imperialist is an entirely fair line to use as well as its mostly a matter of personal preference at this point as no one has really codified this language yet.
Imperialism is not when you have a conflict or power struggle.
Imperialism is when you have 800 foreign military bases, control all economic counsels, sanction and starve out human populations, forcing other countries to stay in line with mass murdering sanctions under threat of additional sanctions against themselves.
Russia is not even close to being Imperialist in any regard. It is a state that exists in a world that is dominated by an Imperialist Empire.
The conflict in Ukraine is not a kind of any “small Imperialism”.
That is a ridiculous and abstract position. You are abstracting the meaning of Imperialism and applying it to a country that has been a historic victim of American Imperialism.
Let’s say for a moment that I run an island nation. There is a country nearby that I can neocolonize because its the modern era, and my country is fully developed while theirs isn’t. This is still imperialism, just smaller scale.
You are correct when you say that Russia is not at the US’ level of imperialism. But it does throw around a lot of weight regionally. Its the difference between domestic/household slavery and a fully developed slave economy. Both still use slaves, the 2nd is just larger scale. Both Russia and the US participate in imperialist activities, but to very different scales.
The petit bourgeois still owns their own business, they just happen to work in it. The difference between the petit bourgeois and the national bourgeois is not one of relation to the means of production so much as it is a question of labor. National and imperialist bourgeois don’t need to actually input any labor while the petit bourgeois do. Still bourgeois, just at different levels.
The Russian participation conflict in Ukraine is objectively for imperialist reasons. The Russia national bourgeois isn’t there for fun, they want to secure their natural gas and oil pipelines and prevent NATO from expanding into them. Imperialists don’t do imperialism because they like seeing people suffer (exclusively) they do so because it is necessary for capital to become imperialist after it develops enough.
Regardless of this selfish intention however, Russia is being forced to compromise with proletarian movements to get anything because the western imperialists already own most everything.
Imagine calling yourself a communist and writing this. Russia having natural resources and selling them is not imperialism.
Correct, Russia invading a neighboring country to secure resources is however definitely a trademark of it.
This is literal fucking Nazi apologia.
?
NATO is the fourth reich. Can you understand why I find your proclamation to be utterly ridiculous?
You’re claiming the conflict is for “Imperialist reasons” and then in the next breath you state it’s to prevent NATO from expanding into them.
You are saying that Russia’s effort to prevent the expansion of the Fourth Reich is Imperialism.
I just… I’m blown away.
In case you didn’t know, Ukraine is not a part of Russia (shocking). They are manipulating the politics of another nation for their own ends and securing natural resources for themselves at the expense of another nation. This is imperialist. Even if there are reasonable reasons attached.
Ah, so I see the issue now.
You believe that imperialism = expanding your sphere of influence.
You are again ignoring that Ukraine lost it’s sovereignty long ago at the hands of the Fourth Reich. It was already a controlled state under the American Empire even not being part of NATO officially.
Your perspective is a product of the perceived ideological intention of the Russian state, which is heavily biased and not connected to material reality.
Imperialism is not conflict or expansion of influence, comrade. The fact that you stated Russia is fighting off the Fourth Reich and then called that Imperialism shows you are not engaging with the dialectics, but rather viewing the conflict through perceived ideological intention.
Is Russia planning to restore its sovereignty without any compensation? Only then is your argument valid, otherwise the Russian national bourgeois saw they had to strike now to prevent NATO from being close by. This is why they let Ukraine do whatever it wanted while it went full nazi post euromaiden. They didn’t suddenly just start caring about Ukrainian sovereignty 8 years after the fact, they just saw recent NATO moves and realized that they couldn’t put off the issue anymore.
So Russia’s fight against the mass murdering US Empire is only valid if Russia pays reparation? I’m not sure they won’t, it’s impossible to know, however this is a ridiculous qualifier to hold a victim of the US Empire to.
I don’t think Russia abstractly cares about Ukraine sovereignty, nor should they. This is not a game. This is civilizational battle against the American Empire, the Fourth Reich.
None of this is Imperialist, comrade. You need to understand the power dynamics and the material reality of this conflict and the state of the world before it.
Wars do not need to be fought “out of the good of one’s heart” to be valid. This conflict is about pushing back the Fourth Reich, period.
This is NOT Imperialism.
Do you see that now?
Russia fighting off the sphere of influence of the Fourth Reich is not Imperialism, comrade.