Exactly right. This sort of arrogant dismissal of any sort of national aspiration – as if every nation on earth were like the USA, an arguably illegitimate project from its founding – is part of the reason fascists end up taking power. If not guided by a communist party, the national aspiration of even oppressed peoples is bound to take unsavory forms. But siding with the imperialists, explicitly or implicitly, is never the answer.

Some further points:

1. As Nameless Partisan said, Russia was devastated by the USA and NATO a mere three decades ago. Let’s call this devastation what it was: a form of genocide by austerity. Other countries besides Russia were targeted, and none, with the possible exception of Belarus, has come out of it quite so well. Contemporary Russia is neither socialist nor a utopia – how could it be? Still, the fact that there is in that country a government which refuses to completely denounce the USSR and which (to a certain extent) refuses to bow to the west, is little short of a miracle. By all rights, Russia should now be a fascist hellhole like Ukraine or the Baltics; instead, we have a figure like Putin, with whom communists and AES states can actually work. This is a lot less than the Russian people deserve, who have such a heroic history and who have contributed so much to the liberation of humanity, but we westerners, at least, should shut up and be grateful.
2. With Putin we are to a certain degree on ground uncharted by prior Marxist theory. Bonapartism is an old phenomenon, but seldom (if ever) have we seen a bonapartist come to power on the ruins of a failed comprador regime, which itself replaced an long-established socialist state. Thus we have a curious contradiction: a government which is (a) ideologically liberal, (b) inherits the geopolitical position of the USSR, and (c ) because it inherits said geopolitical position, is continually driven by material forces back toward socialist or quasi-socialist policies. The basic problem is that which any liberal or third-way anti-imperialist faces: you may want to fight imperialism, but you cannot do it on the basis of a national bourgeoisie. They are simply not strong enough.
3. With regard to so-called “social issues” (I hate the term, since all issues are social): progressive social policy comes about with economic development. This is basic dialectical materialism. That a country like Russia, which underwent near-annihilation at the hands of NATO and is only now starting to claw its way back to some kind of economic sovereignty, should have regressive attitudes towards women and sexual minorities, is inevitable if horrifying. In this regard western countries are just as bad; that they mouth progressive slogans is really the only difference. A country like the US, which uses feminist slogans to legitimize sex work, in order to provide for the millions of women the capitalist economy cannot employ, is really in no position to denounce Russia. The solution, as always, is economic development.
4. One does not – cue that old Lord of the Rings meme – one does not simply overthrow Putin in a vacuum. Materially speaking, a revolution which overthrows the current Russian government will be doing the work of NATO and the west, whatever banner it is fought under. The current Russian communist party knows this, and is working within the government, with the final goal (as I understand it) of forcing Putin to govern in some kind of coalition with the Party. By some accounts, this coalition is to a certain extent achieved already, and was part of the reason for the special military operation (the Communist Party had been calling for it since 2014).

In short: like any communist, I have a laundry list of criticisms when it comes to the current Russian government. But now is not the time we should be airing them. Putin’s government is a problem for the Russian people to solve, not us. Let’s leave the Putin struggle session/circlejerk back in r/genzedong where it belongs.

EDIT: grammar.