New Ukrainian Government Full of Genuine Fascists [Archive]

Raquin

1st March 2014, 17:14

Ukrainian ultra-rightists given major Cabinet posts in government (http://www.peoplesworld.org/ukrainian-ultra-rightists-given-major-cabinet-posts-in-government/)

The ultra-right Svoboda Party has scored six major cabinet ministries in the government of Arseniy Yatsenyuk approved by the Ukrainian parliament on Thursday. Svoboda is an ultra-right, anti-Semitic, Russophobic party with its base of support in the Western Ukraine.
The most important post was claimed by a co-founder of Svoboda, Andriy Parubiy. He was named Secretary of the Security and National Defense Committee, which supervises the defense ministry and the armed forces.
The Parubiy appointment to such an important post should, alone, be cause for international outrage. He led the masked Right Sector thugs who battled riot police in the Independence Maidan in Kiev.
The Right Sector is an openly fascist, anti-Semitic and anti-Russian organization. Most of the snipers and bomb throwers in the crowds were connected with this group.
Right Sector members have been participating in military training camps for the last two years or more in preparation for street activity of the kind witnessed in the Ukraine over the last few months (http://www.peoplesworld.org/right-wing-playing-role-in-ukraine-protests/).
The Right Sector, as can be seen by the appointment of Parubiy, is now in a position to control major appointments to the provisional government and has succeeded in achieving its long time goal of legalizing discrimination against Russians. The new parliament has passed legislation that declares Russian speakers no longer have equal rights with Ukrainians.
He is also associated with Prime Minister Yatsenyuk's Fatherland Party. Dmytro Yarosh, leader of the Right Sector delegation in parliament, was named Parubiy's deputy. These appointments of open fascists to control of the armed forces are particularly alarming given the possibility of provocations against the Russian naval base in Sevastopol.
Oleksandr Sych, a Svoboda parliamentarian from Ivano-Frankivsk best known for his attempts to ban all abortions in Ukraine, including those resulting from rape, was named deputy prime minister for economic affairs. Svoboda was also rewarded with the Education Ministry under Serhiy Kvit, as well as the Ecology Ministry and the Agriculture Ministry under Andriy Makhnyk and Ihor Shvaiko, respectively.
Earlier in the week Svoboda member of parliament Oleh Makhnitsky was named prosecutor-general of the Ukraine.
Others with ultra-right associations with the Ukrainian National Assembly - Ukrainian National Self Defense (UNA-UNSO) also received cabinet posts. Tetyana Chernovol, portrayed in the Western press as a crusading investigative journalist without reference to her past involvement in the anti-Semitic UNA-UNSO, was named chair of the government's anti-corruption committee. Dmytro Bulatov, known for his alleged kidnapping by police, but also with UNA-UNSO connections, was appointed minister of youth and sports.
Yaysenuyk's Fatherland Party, and figures close to it, obtained ten cabinet posts, including deputy prime minister for EU integration, interior, justice, energy, infrastructure, defense, culture, social issues, and a minister without portfolio. Yegor Sobolev, leader of a civic group in Independence Maidan and politically close to Yatsenyuk, was appointed chair of the Lustration Committee, charged with purging followers of President Yanukovych from government and public life.
In a society where oligarchs play such an important political and economic role it is unsurprising that Volodymyr Groysman, mayor of Vinnytsa and close associate of oligarch Petro Poroshenko, was chosen as deputy prime minister for regional affairs. Groysman was also close to former President Viktor Yushchenko. The new finance minister, Oleksander Shlapak, is a representative of oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskiy, the second wealthiest man in the Ukraine.
The remaining cabinet posts went to technocrats, a doctor who organized medical services for the Maidan protestors, and a retired police general.
The interim cabinet matches exactly the government which U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland recommended in her intercepted call with the U.S. ambassador in Kiev where she revealed the U.S. plan for a coup in Ukraine (http://www.peoplesworld.org/ukrainian-communists-defend-constitution-vs-ultra-right-privatizers/).
Vitali Klitschko and his UDAR party are excluded, likely because of their close relationship with German chancellor Angela Merkel. Yatsenuyk's Fatherland Party receives the majority of portfolios. And as Nuland demanded, so long as Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok did not receive a major cabinet post, Svoboda could receive several ministries.
In the eyes of many these facts are indicative of U.S. involvement in what has essentially been a coup against the elected government of the Ukraine.
In other developments in Ukraine, President Viktor Yanukovych was reported to be in Moscow, where it was announced that he was receiving protection from the Russian security service because of threats on his life by political "extremists."
He will reportedly appear at a press conference in Rostov-on-Don later today. Clashes between the Crimean Tartar minority and ethnic Russians occurred outside the Crimean parliament building in Simferopol, while armed pro-Russian demonstrators continued to hold the parliament building itself.
Photo: Russian speaking demonstrators in Crimea protesting the decision by the Ukrainian coup "government" to remove rights of Russian speaking Ukrainians. Darko Vojinovic/AP

Hey, Sasha: are you still gonna parrot that Western corporate media line about the Right Sector being politically marginal? Their leader, the famed fascist Dmitro Yarosh, is now Deputy Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine.

RedHal

4th March 2014, 01:23

when cosplaying insignificant american neo nazi's like NSM get beat up by a bunch of black clad teenagers, they scream "SMASH THE FASH!"

when more sophisticated fascists hold genuine political power, Right Sector are just marginal?:rolleyes:

aristos

4th March 2014, 02:59

Those who think that the right sector is just a marginal group in Ukraine are either deluding themselves or are paid shills.
There are openly fascist violent gangs roaming free in Ukraine now (about 20 000 in number and growing). Since Kiev is now theirs, as well as western Ukraine, they are now sending their gangs (nothing less than the modern version of the Hitlerite SA)
to the southern and eastern regions. These people are equipped with baseball bats, metal rods and assault rifles. They are masked and wear armour. Wherever they appear they attempt, and at times succeed, to take the administrative buildings, establish checkpoints in the cities where they search people and cars at random under threat of violence and hunt down anti-fascists.

In the city centres they create rallies with own armed guards (they pretend to be natives to each city but either arrive in expensive cars with non-local number plates or when captured are revealed to be residents from other regions) and even bring token police from Kiev with them (these are most likely Right Sector members, who have now been dressed into police uniforms and given full impunity and legitimacy by the junta
in Kiev.) This token police is there to guarantee a veneer of legality as well as officially detain those who dare oppose the fascists.

What we are witnessing today in Ukraine is basically a true to life re-enactment of the Nazi occupation in the 40s. The only difference being that they don't have German tanks
behind them (yet). It is imperative for any leftists left in Ukraine to organize their own combat groups to destroy the Nazi scum. Make no mistake time is their friend, once they are able to get more willing recruits and professional arms there will be a blood bath (they are already killing, robbing and kidnapping people wherever they appear). It is imperative to first cleanse the Russian dominant regions of the fascists (since it is easier there
and worker's self-defense groups have sprung up spontaneously in many southern and eastern cities) and then to roll towards Kiev and beyond into western Ukraine and kill/drive them out of there as well.

These people understand only violence.
These are real by the book fascists - this is no cosplay or confused "students".

ckaihatsu

5th March 2014, 00:30

How and why the U.S. government aided a coup led by neo-Nazis in Ukraine

Home Subscribe Forward this email Contact us Donate

UKRAINE:
How and why the U.S. government
aided a coup led by neo-Nazis

Why U.S. imperialism continues to target Russia

http://www2.pslweb.org/images/content/pagebuilder/fascists.jpg
Neo-Nazi leader Dmytro Yarosh [center] speaking at Maidan protest. Yarosh was recently appointed as Deputy Secretary of the National Security and National Defense Committee (RNBOU), in control of Ukraine's armed forced and law enforcement. He was appointed as second-in-command to Andriy Parubiy, Neo-Nazi party founder, serving as head of the RNBOU.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Forward this Email
The following is a statement of the Party for Socialism and Liberation (U.S.)

http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/assets/images/content/neo-nazi-svoboda-leader-oleh.jpg
Oleh Tyahnybok, leader of the Neo-Nazi
Svoboda party.

The people of the United States are being deliberately misled and misinformed about the leading role played by the U.S. State Department, intelligence agencies and neoconservative leaders in bringing neo-Nazis to power in Ukraine.

The same neoconservative politicians and strategists that drove the country to war against Iraq in 2003, against Libya in 2011 and nearly against Syria in 2013 have been neck-deep in a protracted regime change effort in Ukraine as part of a larger geo-strategic struggle against Russia. The fact that they have worked hand in glove with armed neo-Nazis in Ukraine—with Sen. John McCain and Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland literally joining the protests—speaks volumes about the political nature of the events.

The Maidan protest movement was launched in Kiev in November 2013 when Ukrainian President Yanukovych rejected a European Union economic plan that would have imposed a harsh austerity regime on Ukraine as the price for admission into the economic sphere dominated by German banks. The U.S. and E.U.-backed street protests, supported most fervently by neoconservative elements inside and outside the Obama administration, began when Yanukovych instead accepted a $15 billion loan from Russia and an economic plan that did not require austerity measures but did include discounted prices for Russian natural gas.

Another case of imperialist-backed regime change – this time with neo-Nazis

http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/assets/images/content/john-mccain-in-ukraine.jpg
Sen. John McCain in Kyiv, Ukraine, alongside
neo-Nazi leader Tyahnybok, declares his support
for the Maidan movement

The U.S. government has engineered, financed and fully supported a classic coup d'état that overthrew a corrupt but democratically elected government in Ukraine. Joining in the destabilization of the Ukrainian government were Germany, France, Britain and other NATO powers.

The U.S. State Department funds an international network of non-governmental organizations and media outlets that are used to create political opposition and conduct regime change against targeted countries from Venezuela to Bolivia to Syria to Ukraine and other countries. A principal vehicle for these U.S. operations is the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

A recent article by Robert Parry reports: “NED, a $100 million-a-year agency created by the Reagan administration in 1983 to promote political action and psychological warfare against targeted states, lists 65 projects that it supports financially inside Ukraine, including training activists, supporting ‘journalists’ and promoting business groups, effectively creating a full-service structure primed and ready to destabilize a government in the name of promoting ‘democracy.’”

The new coup-led government was selected by a rump session of the parliament when many elected members could not show up to vote for fear of physical attack. It is filled with fascist and semi-fascist forces, as well as powerful billionaire oligarchs. The fascist forces promote hatred toward Russians, Jews, Poles and other minorities.

http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/assets/images/content/victoria-nuland-in-ukraine.jpg
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland,
a neoconservative, smiles with Ukrainian
fascist leaders

During the past year these forces have been vandalizing the anti-fascist monuments and memorials that honor the Ukrainian and other Soviet military veterans who gave their lives to defeat Nazism in World War II. The new coup government immediately initiated laws to ban the Communist Party of Ukraine as many of its offices were torched around the country. The new government also banned the use of Russian, Hungarian, Romanian, Greek, Tatar and others as officially recognized minority languages.

The Maidan movement took shape in the form of street protests in November 2013 demanding that the now toppled government of Yanukovych sign onto an agreement that would “integrate” Ukraine into the economic sphere of influence of Germany and the other E.U. countries.

The Maidan movement started as a broad-based politically eclectic mix of fascist, centrist and some leftist organizations. The fascist and semi-fascist organizations, specifically the armed wings of the Svoboda Party and Right Sector, became the dominant political force as the protest movement was sustained over several months. Both Svoboda and Right Sector use the iconography of the pro-Nazi Ukrainians who fought with Hitler’s divisions in the invasion of the Soviet Union and carried out massacres of Jews, Poles and communists. After the ouster of Yanukovych, Svoboda Party leaders were appointed to the deputy prime minister position — now held by a notorious anti-woman bigot — and four other ministries. A founder of the Social-National Party, which became Svoboda, is now Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, which controls Ukraine’s armed forces, and his top deputy is from the Right Sector.

Imperialist Strategy toward the former Soviet Republics

The right-wing coup government in Ukraine is trying to integrate the country into an E.U./IMF-sponsored austerity regime that will lead to the deep impoverishment of the Ukrainian working classes. The tremendous resources of Ukraine are seen as a huge prize for the enrichment of the biggest banks and corporations in Western Europe and the United States. These resources include major deposits of coal, iron ore, manganese, nickel and uranium. It holds the largest sulfur and second-largest mercury reserves in the world, and vast, rich agricultural lands and forests. In addition, Ukraine has large-scale heavy industry, particularly in the eastern part of the country.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union most of the former socialist bloc countries of Central and Eastern Europe have been integrated into a NATO and E.U. sphere of influence. Of the 28 member nations of the E.U., 22 so far have been incorporated into NATO.

All the countries in Eastern Europe the other non-Russian former Soviet republics, including Ukraine, have been targeted for incorporation into a U.S. and NATO-led sphere of influence that is designed to exploit the land, labor and resources of the targeted countries, while containing and weakening Russia economically and militarily.

The Crimea and Russia

http://www2.pslweb.org/images/content/pagebuilder/Bh1slIvCcAA5YCF.jpg
Ukrainians in Crimea form citizens' blockades
to defend monuments and government
buildings from fascist gangs.

The Crimean Peninsula was historically an important part of Russia. In 1954, Crimea was transferred as an administrative unit in the Soviet Union from the Russian Republic to Ukraine but both were part of one country – the Soviet Union. The administrative transfer of the Crimea had little significance and no geo-strategic significance until the counter-revolutionary overthrow of the Soviet Union in 1991. Then, all of Ukraine and the Crimea became a primary target for absorption by the U.S. and NATO powers into their sphere of influence. This was a great threat to Russia. The Crimea was the headquarters for the Soviet Black Sea Naval Base which became the Russian Black Sea Naval base after 1991.

The imperialist governments of the world have united to denounce and condemn the Russian Federation’s decision to send military forces into the Crimea in the aftermath of the semi-fascist coup that threatens millions of ethnic Russians living in Ukraine and threatens to turn all of Ukraine into a NATO staging ground against Russia. Russia denies that the forces deployed in the Crimea are Russian special forces, suggesting that they are Russian-trained local defense forces working in tandem with Crimea’s established security personnel. Crimea’s governor says he is coordinating with the Russian troops at the Sevastopol base on security matters.

Russia today no longer has a socialist government, nor does it operate according to a socialist planned economy based on publicly-owned property. The Russian capitalist class has its own narrow economic interests and the Russian government protects those interests.

But Russia is not part of the small club of imperialist countries — the former colonizers of Asia, Africa and Latin America who continue to control the world financial system, hold a preponderance of military and political power in global affairs, and stage interventions and regime change efforts as they please.

In fact, Russia is routinely targeted by this Western imperialist club because it functions, due to its size and military power, as an obstacle to their complete hegemonic control over the former Soviet Republics. It also presents itself as a military, economic and diplomatic counter-weight in other critical areas, especially in the Middle East and Asia, not to mention at the United Nations where it maintains a veto within the Security Council.

It is completely understandable that Russia would project a show of force in Crimea, not as a premeditated plan of aggression but rather as a defensive counter-move to the dynamic offensive of Western imperialism and the pro-Western, fascist gang that seized the state power in Ukraine.

The pro-Russian military presence has been welcomed by huge numbers of people in Ukraine, both in the south and eastern regions of the country, where the coup government lacks legitimacy and is seen as a grave danger. Ukrainian civilians in these areas have been forming their own security blockades defending government buildings and anti-fascist monuments from being attacked by ultra-right nationalists. The presence of the pro-Russian military forces has been a relief to many targeted by the ascending fascist forces.

War-mongers like John Kerry and John McCain condemn Russia for “aggression” when it defensively acts to blunt the NATO offensive against Ukraine and Russia. Yet these very figures, and others of their ilk, provoked this crisis. They worked closely with the most disgusting neo-Nazi forces in toppling a democratically-elected government in a large country that exists on Russia’s border. The hypocrisy of their rhetoric is hard to match. These were the cheerleaders for the massive bombing of Libya in 2011, the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and the massive aerial bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999. Yet, today, they feign concern over Ukraine’s sovereignty. No one should be deceived.

As for German imperialism, this constitutes the third attempt to forcibly swallow up Ukraine into their sphere of influence. The German army annexed Ukraine from Russia in 1918. Ukraine only regained its sovereignty when the German war effort collapsed in 1918. But 23 years later, Nazi Germany invaded again. Twenty-seven million Soviet citizens died, including millions in Ukraine. Hitler and the German ruling class wanted Ukraine to be transformed into a slave society and colony. Because of Russian, Ukrainian and Soviet heroism, the plans of German imperialism were thwarted. But the prize of incorporating Ukraine into a zone for super-profits for German, U.S. and other imperialist bankers and industrialists has always remained a fixed objective.

Washington and its allies have thus far threatened Russia with “sanctions” and “costs.” But economic sanctions are in fact warfare. There is a very real danger that the current crisis could escalate into a military war—a war with unforeseeable consequences—were there to be a U.S.-NATO military intervention. The anti-war movement and all progressive people should stand against any U.S. intervention in Ukraine, refuse to join the U.S.-NATO distortion and propaganda campaign, and demand an immediate end to U.S.-EU support for fascist forces in Ukraine.

Content may be reprinted with credit to LiberationNews.org.

Please help us share this statement widely
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Forward this Email

Follow us
Find out more about joining the PSL and apply today.

Questions? Comments? Contact us.

Update your personal information
Update your email subscriptions or unsubscribe

powered by Blackbaud
nonprofit software

AmilcarCabral

5th March 2014, 04:09

synthesis

5th March 2014, 05:43

Russia is routinely targeted by this Western imperialist club because it functions, due to its size and military power, as an obstacle to their complete hegemonic control over the former Soviet Republics. It also presents itself as a military, economic and diplomatic counter-weight in other critical areas, especially in the Middle East and Asia, not to mention at the United Nations where it maintains a veto within the Security Council.

It is completely understandable that Russia would project a show of force in Crimea, not as a premeditated plan of aggression but rather as a defensive counter-move to the dynamic offensive of Western imperialism and the pro-Western, fascist gang that seized the state power in Ukraine.

The pro-Russian military presence has been welcomed by huge numbers of people in Ukraine, both in the south and eastern regions of the country, where the coup government lacks legitimacy and is seen as a grave danger. Ukrainian civilians in these areas have been forming their own security blockades defending government buildings and anti-fascist monuments from being attacked by ultra-right nationalists. The presence of the pro-Russian military forces has been a relief to many targeted by the ascending fascist forces.

War-mongers like John Kerry and John McCain condemn Russia for “aggression” when it defensively acts to blunt the NATO offensive against Ukraine and Russia. Yet these very figures, and others of their ilk, provoked this crisis. They worked closely with the most disgusting neo-Nazi forces in toppling a democratically-elected government in a large country that exists on Russia’s border. The hypocrisy of their rhetoric is hard to match. These were the cheerleaders for the massive bombing of Libya in 2011, the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and the massive aerial bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999. Yet, today, they feign concern over Ukraine’s sovereignty. No one should be deceived.

What the fuck is wrong with the PSL? Is class analysis just no longer trendy or something? This is really the perfect demonstration of the difference between "anti-imperialism" and working class politics.

Let's hope that the anti-fascists also cheer on Russian imperialism, so we can kill two class-collaborationist birds with one stone.

Die Neue Zeit

5th March 2014, 06:06

Russia takes "protective measures" against putschist revolutionaries in Ukraine, Crimea: Melenchon (http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_03_03/Russia-takes-protective-measures-against-putschist-revolutionaries-in-Ukraine-Crimea-French-politician-1064/)

Mélenchon emphasized the importance of the Black Sea port for Russia, adding it was only natural that Russians won't let anyone deceive them. He said Moscow has been taking "protective measures" against putschist revolutionaries who are heavily influenced by the local neo-Nazis.

The Left Party chief opined that "legitimate discontent" of the Ukrainian people was hi-jacked by individuals who are financed by "North-Americans," including the "most despicable and dangerous" among them. He cited the so-called "Freedom" (Svoboda) Party as one of the forces that has been mounting an anti-Russia campaign.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon said that "NATO and North-Americans" were using Ukraine's "corrupt and evil" regime in their tug-of-war against Russia. He called on Russia not to give in to provocations and said it couldn't let the alliance to sneak up on it.

"The French have nothing to do in this," he added.

Per Levy

5th March 2014, 10:17

What the fuck is wrong with the PSL? Is class analysis just no longer trendy or something? This is really the perfect demonstration of the difference between "anti-imperialism" and working class politics.

Let's hope that the anti-fascists also cheer on Russian imperialism, so we can kill two class-collaborationist birds with one stone.

well class analysis is hard and supporting the soviet union...i mean russia has a big tradition in the left. but yeah the psl line is pretty darn weak, russia good west evil, with thinking like that they can also support former, right wing, president yanukovych and support russian imperialism.

Tim Cornelis

5th March 2014, 10:59

Jesus christ, that PSL article is ridiculous for so many reasons.

FSL

5th March 2014, 11:28

Russia today no longer has a socialist government, nor does it operate according to a socialist planned economy based on publicly-owned property. The Russian capitalist class has its own narrow economic interests and the Russian government protects those interests.

But Russia is not part of the small club of imperialist countries — the former colonizers of Asia, Africa and Latin America who continue to control the world financial system, hold a preponderance of military and political power in global affairs, and stage interventions and regime change efforts as they please.
Russia wasn't a colonizer but it was an empire. It might not control the financial system (and why should we be focusing there?) but it does control many resources it uses as a bargaining tool, has a ton of military power and rutinely stages interventions.
Immigrants in Russia coming from former soviet countries are blamed for rising criminality by the official state and are targeted by nationalists and nazi thugs as well as the police. In fact Russia Today came to Greece to prepare a story on the Golden Dawn and used the opportunity to have them spew out their extremely pro-russian stance on Ukraine and just about any other subject as well.

Something else I wanted to point out. See how all these nationalist, nazi organizations have their base of support in western ukraine and how vehemently anticommunist they are?
Someone will think this is because of the "holodomor", right?

Well, western ukraine wasn't even part of the Soviet Union before world war 2. Ukraine was split in 1921 with the treaty of Riga.
The part of the Ukraine that was in the Soviet Union is the eastern one, where people gather to protect Lenin monuments and where communists have support but Svoboda and the Right Sector don't. Kharkiv was the first place to declare a socialist republic outside of Russia doing so in late 1917.

Nationalism is stronger in the western part and anticommunism is widespread, not because these people "suffered" from communism but because they were taught to be like that. That they're using holodomor as an excuse when they weren't even part of the country at the time speaks volumes. Much like the stance of the people in eastern Ukraine.

erupt

5th March 2014, 15:57

If you can read through that article's and the PSL'S obvious biases, it's still useful, in my opinion.

Neo-Nazi leader Dmytro Yarosh [center] speaking at Maidan protest. Yarosh was recently appointed as Deputy Secretary of the National Security and National Defense Committee (RNBOU), in control of Ukraine's armed forced and law enforcement. He was appointed as second-in-command to Andriy Parubiy, Neo-Nazi party founder, serving as head of the RNBOU.

This was just a caption, and most already know it, but the information is still vital.

Once again, I in no way support the PSL's statements, and I most definitely don't support Russian or Western imperialism. I hope for the best for the workers and oppressed of the Western world, Ukraine, and Russia. Hopefully, mechanized warfare doesn't happen, in which case even more suffering of the masses will occur.

Also, I heard here, http://rt.com/news/ashton-maidan-snipers-estonia-946/?utm_source=browser&utm_medium=aplication_chrome&utm_campaign=chrome (http://rt.com/news/ashton-maidan-snipers-estonia-946/?utm_source=browser&utm_medium=aplication_chrome&utm_campaign=chrome), that both the protestors and police who were killed at Maidan, ballistics-wise, were shot with the same caliber rounds, from the same guns (judged by relative force behind round, from what I assume), and even from the same direction I believe. The article went on to say protest leaders hired the snipers themselves. I really don't know anything about RT as far as reliability or bias goes, however.

ckaihatsu

5th March 2014, 23:55

Many people in America and in the whole world are not paying attention at all to the critical dangerous situation in Ucraine, and they think that nothing might happen. But even Noam Chomsky predicted some years ago the rise of the ultra-right wing parties, the rise of fascism and the rise of the popularity of ultra-right wing political ideology in the whole world, as an alternative for many people to the failed promises of social-democratic reformist parties. Who knows if another Hitler might rise in Ucraine. We must pay attention to Ucraine and that part of the world

.

Agreed. We're seeing a pattern here with U.S. / NATO aggressive interventions into Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, attempts within Syria, and now Ukraine -- all of which foment and encourage puppet-terrorists on the ground in each case.

---

Russia is routinely targeted by this Western imperialist club because it functions, due to its size and military power, as an obstacle to their complete hegemonic control over the former Soviet Republics. It also presents itself as a military, economic and diplomatic counter-weight in other critical areas, especially in the Middle East and Asia, not to mention at the United Nations where it maintains a veto within the Security Council.

It is completely understandable that Russia would project a show of force in Crimea, not as a premeditated plan of aggression but rather as a defensive counter-move to the dynamic offensive of Western imperialism and the pro-Western, fascist gang that seized the state power in Ukraine.

The pro-Russian military presence has been welcomed by huge numbers of people in Ukraine, both in the south and eastern regions of the country, where the coup government lacks legitimacy and is seen as a grave danger. Ukrainian civilians in these areas have been forming their own security blockades defending government buildings and anti-fascist monuments from being attacked by ultra-right nationalists. The presence of the pro-Russian military forces has been a relief to many targeted by the ascending fascist forces.

War-mongers like John Kerry and John McCain condemn Russia for “aggression” when it defensively acts to blunt the NATO offensive against Ukraine and Russia. Yet these very figures, and others of their ilk, provoked this crisis. They worked closely with the most disgusting neo-Nazi forces in toppling a democratically-elected government in a large country that exists on Russia’s border. The hypocrisy of their rhetoric is hard to match. These were the cheerleaders for the massive bombing of Libya in 2011, the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and the massive aerial bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999. Yet, today, they feign concern over Ukraine’s sovereignty. No one should be deceived.

What the fuck is wrong with the PSL? Is class analysis just no longer trendy or something?

(Heightened emotional expressions really add impact to one's statements -- !!) (grin)

It's just that class analysis isn't always going to describe all the particulars of every situation -- just because someone turns their attention to simply describe objective geopolitical dynamics for the moment doesn't mean that they've automatically forfeited their revolutionary leftist credentials.

I only mean to say that there's a difference between *information* and *analysis*.

philosophical abstractions

http://s6.postimage.org/i7hg698j1/120404_philosophical_abstractions_RENDER_sc_12_1.j pg (http://postimage.org/image/i7hg698j1/)

This is really the perfect demonstration of the difference between "anti-imperialism" and working class politics.

Russia *is* a geopolitical counterweight to the West, as we saw in 2008 with the Georgia thing.

I think you're overanalyzing here.

Let's hope that the anti-fascists also cheer on Russian imperialism, so we can kill two class-collaborationist birds with one stone.

How dramatic...(!)

well class analysis is hard and supporting the soviet union...i mean russia has a big tradition in the left. but yeah the psl line is pretty darn weak, russia good west evil, with thinking like that they can also support former, right wing, president yanukovych and support russian imperialism.

The PSL article doesn't apologize for Yanukovich, and doesn't encourage any involvement from Russia -- it's strictly objective.

The Estonian FM has described the whole sniper issue as “disturbing” and added, “it already discredits from the very beginning” the new Ukrainian power.

I certainly hope that's what happens.

Sea

6th March 2014, 00:19

This makes my fucking blood boil.

Anybody not feel potent enough when discussing how the US supported fascist regimes in the 1960s?

Yeah well now you can talk about how they did it in 2014.

synthesis

6th March 2014, 03:44

It's just that class analysis isn't always going to describe all the particulars of every situation -- just because someone turns their attention to simply describe objective geopolitical dynamics for the moment doesn't mean that they've automatically forfeited their revolutionary leftist credentials.

You're working from a reductionist conception of class analysis; I can expand on this later if you want. Really though, don't take the criticism of the article you posted as criticism of you personally. There's subtext that you wouldn't necessarily see if you weren't aware of it or looking for it. It would be a different matter if you were a PSL member or strong apologist.

aristos

6th March 2014, 03:47

The PSL article doesn't apologize for Yanukovich, and doesn't encourage any involvement from Russia -- it's strictly objective.

Couldn't agree more - factual and no-nonsense.
But I guess some people are just too preoccupied with ideological purity. Akin to medieval monks they are more interested in the significance of a semi-colon at page so and so of some obscure Marxist than in what is going on in the real world. Counting the number of angels fitting on a pinhead indeed.

The Putschists have also shown themselves from their "humanitarian" side at the UN summit yesterday - demanding that the international condemnation of their ideol Stepan Bandera and his OUN organisation, to which "Svoboda" are ideaological successors, be lifted, so they can be openly celebrated as Ukrainian liberators. Thee OUN are of course the honourable gentlemen who gave us THIS (http://warfiles.ru/show-44831-ne-dlya-slabonervnyh-zverstva-oun-upa-foto-fakty.html)and THIS (http://rossia3.ru/quotes/5714)bit of "fun".
(the sites are in Russian - a quick google search in English made me realize I would have to post dozens of links to provide concise photographic evidence - but the pictures speak for themselves).

The current reincarnation of that "honourable" freedom-loving organization is all too willing to follow in the footsteps of their predecessors. It is only thanks to the leaking of reliable information of their machinations, their inability to keep their promises to their non-fascist (maidan)supporters, the anti-maidan activists and above all Russia's swift and well coordinated intervention that their planned ethnic/political cleansing on a mass scale has been somewhat halted for now.

But of course - they have marginal influence. Just as marginal as the presence of Salafists in the Syrian opposition ;)

synthesis

6th March 2014, 12:31

Couldn't agree more - factual and no-nonsense.
But I guess some people are just too preoccupied with ideological purity.

Yes, it's very factual and no-nonsense in presenting arguments in favor of Western socialist support for Russia's interests in Ukraine, to fight the "global colonial hegemonic bloc" or whatever. The Crimea section is basically a propaganda piece written on behalf of the Russian Foreign Ministry.

"The pro-American military presence has been welcomed by huge numbers of people in Iraq... where the government lacks legitimacy and is seen as a grave danger. Iraqi civilians in these areas have been forming their own security blockades defending government buildings from being attacked by ultra-right nationalists. The presence of the pro-American military forces has been a relief to many targeted by the ascending Islamist forces."

Akin to medieval monks they are more interested in the significance of a semi-colon at page so and so of some obscure Marxist than in what is going on in the real world. Counting the number of angels fitting on a pinhead indeed.

I wish I had the slightest clue about what you are going on about here. This isn't "obscure theory," this is reminding socialists that the working class has no dog in this fight, aside from avoiding the devastation of a civil war, as opposed to the preordained duty of the class-collaborationist "left" to support Russia for anti-imperialist and/or anti-fascist reasons.

Onecom

6th March 2014, 16:37

Yes it has been establish already that neo Nazis have/are playing a big part in Ukraine. The west keeps flat out ignoring that simple fact.

IIRC during the protests one town had over 150 000 members out.

fractal-vortex

6th March 2014, 19:46

Slavic

6th March 2014, 20:19

comrades! First, Neither Russia nor Ukraine are "capitalist" states. I advice you study carefully the empirical evidence: the economies and societies of these two former repulics. If you do, you'll see that a large part of it remains in state hands, especially in Russia. The key industries, such as machine building sector, the oil sector, etc. Second, none of these states has had yet a counterrevolution that would break the state machine inherited from the Soviet times. For example, if you look carefully at the flag of the Ukrainian army, you'll see 2 flags - one, red, and one yellow-blue. That is a manifestation of a "transitional" nature of the army, and hence the state.

Comrades! Your support for our struggle here means your struggle against your own government - the U.S. and NATO imperialism. Do your share and we'll do ours! Long live the international revolution!

State control non-state control, it doesn't matter if the proletariat have no control over the means of production. The only difference between state and non-state control industries is one gets tax breaks and the other gets taxes.

Per Levy

6th March 2014, 20:21

comrades! First, Neither Russia nor Ukraine are "capitalist" states. I advice you study carefully the empirical evidence: the economies and societies of these two former repulics. If you do, you'll see that a large part of it remains in state hands, especially in Russia. The key industries, such as machine building sector, the oil sector, etc.

aha, if we go by this "evidence" most of the world isnt capitalist since most states have stateownerships over certain industries, banking sectors and what not. maybe you should read up on what captalism is and stateownership of industries goes very well with capitalism, just as an info.

For example, if you look carefully at the flag of the Ukrainian army, you'll see 2 flags - one, red, and one yellow-blue. That is a manifestation of a "transitional" nature of the army, and hence the state.

just look at that "evidence" the army of a bourgois state has 2 flags, one of wich is red. a piece of cloth can decide if something is capitalist or not. the best marxist analysis ever.

Comrades!

we are not comrades.

Your support for our struggle here means your struggle against your own government - the U.S. and NATO imperialism.

what is "your struggle", supporting russian imperialism and the ukranian bourgoisie?

Do your share and we'll do ours!

so what are you doing? do you want to help the working class to emancipate itsself or do you just want to help russia to gain more territory?

Long live the international revolution!

long live russian imperialism!

aristos

6th March 2014, 20:40

To all those obsessing over Russian imperialism, to all those who critically supported Maidan as a genuine working-class protest - CONGRATULATION FUCKERS!

It is now official that the Ukrainian army will be subordinated to the Right Sector.
Right Sector thugs who have shown particular fervour (aka aggression) at the Maidan protests will now be dispatched as political commissars to all Ukrainian army units. They're task is to enforce obedience to all orders coming from above and to makes sure the officers have "high moral fortitude" and "do not suffer from cowardice". They have full rights to dismiss any commanders who refuse orders.
Three generals have been dismissed for not supporting this government decision.

I hope you are happy now with the new Wehrmacht!

ckaihatsu

6th March 2014, 21:17

What the fuck is wrong with the PSL? Is class analysis just no longer trendy or something?

It's just that class analysis isn't always going to describe all the particulars of every situation -- just because someone turns their attention to simply describe objective geopolitical dynamics for the moment doesn't mean that they've automatically forfeited their revolutionary leftist credentials.

You're working from a reductionist conception of class analysis; I can expand on this later if you want.

I disagree. I know what reductionism is -- I'm simply saying that any discussion of major geopolitical national powers is entirely about the capitalist camp, and is simply not-including a proletarian factor within it.

Of course there *is* still class, and a full class analysis would be there, somewhere -- just not necessarily in *every* article from a socialist press, that's all.

Really though, don't take the criticism of the article you posted as criticism of you personally.

I don't see how anyone could conclude that I was taking it personally -- all of my remarks have been about the subject matter at hand, solely.

There's subtext that you wouldn't necessarily see if you weren't aware of it or looking for it. It would be a different matter if you were a PSL member or strong apologist.

Okay, you have my attention....

tachosomoza

6th March 2014, 21:29

Yatsenyuk is jewish. Strange bedfellows.

ckaihatsu

6th March 2014, 21:35

Yes, it's very factual and no-nonsense in presenting arguments in favor of Western socialist support for Russia's interests in Ukraine, to fight the "global colonial hegemonic bloc" or whatever. The Crimea section is basically a propaganda piece written on behalf of the Russian Foreign Ministry.

"The pro-American military presence has been welcomed by huge numbers of people in Iraq... where the government lacks legitimacy and is seen as a grave danger. Iraqi civilians in these areas have been forming their own security blockades defending government buildings from being attacked by ultra-right nationalists. The presence of the pro-American military forces has been a relief to many targeted by the ascending Islamist forces."

I wish I had the slightest clue about what you are going on about here. This isn't "obscure theory," this is reminding socialists that the working class has no dog in this fight, aside from avoiding the devastation of a civil war, as opposed to the preordained duty of the class-collaborationist "left" to support Russia for anti-imperialist and/or anti-fascist reasons.

There's the key point: "[T]he working class has no dog in this fight, aside from avoiding the devastation of a civil war [...]."

This situation, then, parallels that of Syria, where the working class has no interest in either Assad or the SNC, or ISIS (etc.), but *does* have an interest in a relative degree of stability, albeit bourgeois.

I think this is the source of dissonance around here -- it's easy to see that any revolutionary leftist arguing for conventional integrity of a nation-state (instead of civil war) could be *wrongly accused* of backing whatever local rulers (Assad) or external countries (Iran, Russia) may also have their own interests in that country's stability.

'Politics makes for strange bedfellows.'

PhoenixAsh

6th March 2014, 21:38

Yatsenyuk is jewish. Strange bedfellows.

He is of Jewish heritage but is a Greek Orthodox.

synthesis

6th March 2014, 21:40

Of course there *is* still class, and a full class analysis would be there, somewhere -- just not necessarily in *every* article from a socialist press, that's all.

Historical materialism means that class analysis is applicable to all political developments. And it seems strange that in 2013, there is still someone who believes in the possibility of an "objective political analysis." Consciously or not, all political analyses contain a worldview and therefore an agenda; here the agenda is the PSL's support of Russian imperialism in Ukraine for what they believe to be "anti-imperialist" reasons.

I think this is the source of dissonance around here -- it's easy to see that any revolutionary leftist arguing for conventional integrity of a nation-state (instead of civil war) could be *wrongly accused* of backing whatever local rulers (Assad) or external countries (Iran, Russia) may also have their own interests in that country's stability.

Please elaborate on this concept of the "conventional integrity of a nation-state," why you would argue for it and how it relates to internationalist working class politics.

PhoenixAsh

6th March 2014, 22:07

From a purely anti-fascist approach currently the support of Russian involvement might make sense. But it is highly opportunistic real politics rather than based on a revolutionary left wing analysis. It is certainly a lesser of two evils reductionism.

If we look at it from a class analysis both sides simply serve capital. One uses open fascist collaboration...and the other one does too. but we don't hear of it. Analysing the situation inside Russia however will show this to be the case.

From a parliamentary democracy / human rights approach supporting the EU might make sense. But again...that is opportunistic real politics and lesser of two evils reductionism.

So don't take sides except the side of the workers.

aristos

6th March 2014, 22:15

http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-secretive-neo-nazi-military-organization-involved-in-euromaidan-snyper-shootings/5371611

cyu

6th March 2014, 22:22

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arseniy_Yatsenyuk

According to Chief Rabbi of Ukraine Yaakov Bleich, Yatsenyuk is not Jewish. The Guardian reported that "He has played down his Jewish-Ukrainian origins, possibly because of the prevalence of antisemitism in his party's western Ukraine heartland."

ckaihatsu

7th March 2014, 00:39

I disagree. I know what reductionism is -- I'm simply saying that any discussion of major geopolitical national powers is entirely about the capitalist camp, and is simply not-including a proletarian factor within it.

Of course there *is* still class, and a full class analysis would be there, somewhere -- just not necessarily in *every* article from a socialist press, that's all.

Historical materialism means that class analysis is applicable to all political developments. And it seems strange that in 2013, there is still someone who believes in the possibility of an "objective political analysis."

Again, the purpose of the article is not to put forth a class analysis. It's about *journalism* -- the basic facts of who, what, where, when, why, and how. This aspect, aside from the choice of subject material itself, *can* be very 'objective', in terms of covering all of the main aspects and players involved around a specific event.

You keep insisting on having scope provided that simply was never included in the first place.

Consciously or not, all political analyses contain a worldview and therefore an agenda; here the agenda is the PSL's support of Russian imperialism in Ukraine for what they believe to be "anti-imperialist" reasons.

I'll firmly disagree with your assessment of Russia's intent -- the country was looking for amicable trade relations, and you're imputing hegemonic intentions that just aren't there.

I think this is the source of dissonance around here -- it's easy to see that any revolutionary leftist arguing for conventional integrity of a nation-state (instead of civil war) could be *wrongly accused* of backing whatever local rulers (Assad) or external countries (Iran, Russia) may also have their own interests in that country's stability.

'Politics makes for strange bedfellows.'

Please elaborate on this concept of the "conventional integrity of a nation-state," why you would argue for it and how it relates to internationalist working class politics.

I'll let *you* go first, with the offer you've already made:

There's subtext that you wouldn't necessarily see if you weren't aware of it or looking for it. It would be a different matter if you were a PSL member or strong apologist.

Okay, you have my attention....

synthesis

7th March 2014, 02:25

I'll firmly disagree with your assessment of Russia's intent -- the country was looking for amicable trade relations, and you're imputing hegemonic intentions that just aren't there.

So Russia isn't imperialist? That seems to be the logical conclusion of what you're saying.

I'll let *you* go first, with the offer you've already made:

To be fair, the "offer" was made when I was assuming that you were just naively posting the PSL's analysis without recognizing their class-collaborationist agenda.

aristos

7th March 2014, 02:38

The Right Sector have now been given control of the Kiev morgue and crematorium.
Take from this what you will...

Tim Cornelis

7th March 2014, 02:39

To all those obsessing over Russian imperialism, to all those who critically supported Maidan as a genuine working-class protest - CONGRATULATION FUCKERS!

Yeah, that'd be no one. I've never heard this uttered, not even by the IST whom are usually very supportive of dubious popular movements. Right-communists and bourgeois socialists fronting as communists often create these phantom socialists that don't actually exist.

Sea

7th March 2014, 03:14

Such a mystery how all the papers (look at The Economist for fuck's sake) are making such a big sting over this while having been so quiet about the whole Iraq thing.

I suspect Russian papers damned the invasion of Iraq to hell while being hush-hush about this. Any evil ol' Russkies here to verify my suspicion? Or did we ban them already?

DaringMehring

7th March 2014, 03:18

Russia is playing an imperialist game, same as USA. Their regime is oligarchical capitalism. There is no way to stand up for this as "the lesser of two evils." Even at this moment, Putin's capitalist police state is putting left leader Sergei Udaltsov on trial in a frame up. No support to Imperialist capitalist police states, who imprison and execute leftists like Sergei Udaltsov!

And no support to western bourgeois capitalist states who only play at democracy, who repress and Imperialize, and ally with fascists!

Per Levy

7th March 2014, 10:37

To all those obsessing over Russian imperialism, to all those who critically supported Maidan as a genuine working-class protest - CONGRATULATION FUCKERS!

guess what, no one here would've write so much about russian imperialism if there wouldnt be so many supporters/apologists of russian imperialism on here. we have to remind those that russia is capitalist/imperialist and an enemy of the working class since people like you seem to forget that.

ckaihatsu

7th March 2014, 19:58

So Russia isn't imperialist? That seems to be the logical conclusion of what you're saying.

Yes, I would say that the former USSR was *expansionist*, but not imperialist -- and today Russia isn't either, except to whatever extent it benefits from trade, etc. -- the whole regular bourgeois economics and finance thing.

To be fair, the "offer" was made when I was assuming that you were just naively posting the PSL's analysis without recognizing their class-collaborationist agenda.

No on that one from over here.

You're continuing to be dramatic and sectarian -- which certainly seems to be your inclination, so I doubt I'll be relieving you of it, but it's worth noting, as a casual bystander, that neither that article, nor the PSL itself, is "class-collaborationist".

Your whole allegation is based on your imputing that favoritism-towards-Russia is a PSL position, and I (and others) just don't see the evidence for that allegation.

ckaihatsu

7th March 2014, 20:43

Russia is playing an imperialist game, same as USA.

Standard *economic* imperialism -- 'business' -- and not so much militarily, especially compared to the U.S. It's really apples-and-oranges to begin with, and Russia isn't even adventurist. (The way Morsi became, once in power, towards Syria -- for example.)

Their regime is oligarchical capitalism.

Yes.

There is no way to stand up for this as "the lesser of two evils."

No, of course not, on the whole, but we also need to recognize real-world events going on, ones that are inter-national, or geopolitical, in nature.

No revolutionary leftist is going to raise a finger in support of Russia, but, still, what happens to be on the plate in front of us at the moment is an expedient force stationed in the Crimea, to counter this nascent fascism.

No one is waving any country's flag here.

Even at this moment, Putin's capitalist police state is putting left leader Sergei Udaltsov on trial in a frame up. No support to Imperialist capitalist police states, who imprison and execute leftists like Sergei Udaltsov!

And no support to western bourgeois capitalist states who only play at democracy, who repress and Imperialize, and ally with fascists!

Absolutely.

aristos

7th March 2014, 21:24

ckaihatsu

7th March 2014, 22:15

The leader of the Right Sector (apparently not satisfied with Right Sector's political control of the army which I mentioned before) announced today that he is disappointed with the central government's "conservative approach" to the anti-maidan protesters in the southern and eastern Regions. He has demanded that the Right Sector fighters be equipped with military hardware from the army's armouries (so that they can use tanks and BMPs/BPRs and machine-guns) as well as giving them direct control of several army bases to be used as training camps so that they can quell the protests themselves (aka industrial genocide SS style).
Moreover the Right Sector feel themselves so secure in their position that he threatened should these demands not be met there will be hard consequences.

Looks like the "moderate nationalists" have awoken a hungry beast (was predictable from the start) whose appetite just keeps on growing. They have tried feeding it more and more sections of state power but it looks like they will be swallowed whole.

This is looking more and more like Syria....

In this day and age separatism only sidesteps the larger issues, at best.

As the global economy continues to stagnate, fractiousness is emerging everywhere, which is no good for the world and humanity. It's easy for *anyone* to 'think small' and only look after their own immediate turf, but then that's how local and neighborly conflicts get started.

The Syria question is particularly important because it's a proto-world-war in-the-making. [...]

http://www.revleft.com/vb/syria-newsfeed-here-t151574/index16.html

synthesis

7th March 2014, 23:01

Yes, I would say that the former USSR was *expansionist*, but not imperialist -- and today Russia isn't either, except to whatever extent it benefits from trade, etc. -- the whole regular bourgeois economics and finance thing.

Let's read between the lines a little here. If Russia isn't an empire, would Russian intervention hurt the Ukrainian working class? Wouldn't it benefit the left, from an anti-imperialist and anti-fascist perspective?

ckaihatsu

7th March 2014, 23:17

Let's read between the lines a little here. If Russia isn't an empire, would Russian intervention hurt the Ukrainian working class?

Russia *isn't* an empire, and *any* government military intervention *anywhere* is substitutionist for the working class' own activity, *at best*.

Wouldn't it benefit the left, from an anti-imperialist and anti-fascist perspective?

You mean the soft-left -- the NGO types -- ?

I suppose so, and Russian intervention *would* be tacitly anti-imperialist and anti-fascist, though substitutionist.

synthesis

7th March 2014, 23:22

Russia *isn't* an empire, and *any* government military intervention *anywhere* is substitutionist for the working class' own activity, *at best*.

...

You mean the soft-left -- the NGO types -- ?

I suppose so, and Russian intervention *would* be tacitly anti-imperialist and anti-fascist, though substitutionist.

So you don't see any element of this:

Russia is routinely targeted by this Western imperialist club because it functions, due to its size and military power, as an obstacle to their complete hegemonic control over the former Soviet Republics...

The pro-Russian military presence has been welcomed by huge numbers of people in Ukraine, both in the south and eastern regions of the country, where the coup government lacks legitimacy and is seen as a grave danger. Ukrainian civilians in these areas have been forming their own security blockades defending government buildings and anti-fascist monuments from being attacked by ultra-right nationalists. The presence of the pro-Russian military forces has been a relief to many targeted by the ascending fascist forces.

That could be interpreted as creating sympathy for Russian intervention among leftists that read it and implying that, in a worst-case putsch scenario, Russian intervention would be the most preferable outcome for Ukrainians "targeted by the ascending fascist forces"?

(I don't even know where to start in terms of convincing you that Russia is an imperialist force, so I'll put that to the side for now.)

aristos

7th March 2014, 23:25

Let's read between the lines a little here. If Russia isn't an empire, would Russian intervention hurt the Ukrainian working class? Wouldn't it benefit the left, from an anti-imperialist and anti-fascist perspective?

Well it might, if successful (by which I mean swift and with minimum bloodshed) liberate the Ukrainian workers from their fascist overlords (unless, of course, one argues that the collective will of the Ukrainian workers is actually to side with reaction and ought to be respected).
It will certainly prevent ethnic cleansing reaching monstrous proportions (think Balkan wars scale).

Then again it depends on which working class we are talking about. The Ukrainian population is pretty much split on the issue, with the vast majority of the Southern and Eastern regions, and almost the entire Crimean population being against their central government that they feel is a result of a shameless coup d'état. Even to the point that they themselves feel if the worst comes to worst they are ready to join the Russian federation. It is quite telling that even large numbers of cops (who are almost always cowardly mercenaries eager to please whoever currently occupies the seat of power) have not quite made up their mind on the issue.

One also has to take into consideration the almost mind-numbing amount of pro-Junta and outright pro-Nazi propaganda that is being used on the population. All the media are under effective Junta control, Russian TV and radio channels have been disconnected and today I even read that they have blocked youtube and many Russian internet sites.

Finally is it really the working class itself that is against Russian troops? The loudest voices are coming from the politicians, TV celebrities and announcers and the Right sector gangs that are made up almost entirely of criminal violent youth - lumpen-proles in other words.

synthesis

7th March 2014, 23:32

Well it might, if successful (by which I mean swift and with minimum bloodshed) liberate the Ukrainian workers from their fascist overlords

So why would the Russian bourgeoisie "liberate the Ukrainian workers from their fascist overlords"? Out of the goodness of their hearts?

And, by the way, this notion that the Ukrainian working class's interests are the same as the Russian bourgeoisie is the very definition of class-collaborationism.

Tim Cornelis

7th March 2014, 23:35

Tankie fucks on facebook backing Russian imperialism making my blood boil. I wish I could meet one of those dumb fucks in real life.

ckaihatsu

7th March 2014, 23:36

So you don't see any element of this:

That could be interpreted as creating sympathy for Russian intervention among leftists that read it and implying that, in a worst-case putsch scenario, Russian intervention would be the most preferable outcome for Ukrainians "targeted by the ascending fascist forces"?

Again, I think it's simply *reporting* it -- while the mainstream media doesn't even shine the flashlight there -- and the article is not *selling* Russian intervention.

aristos

7th March 2014, 23:45

Tankie fucks on facebook backing Russian imperialism making my blood boil. I wish I could meet one of those dumb fucks in real life.

I don't consider myself a Tankie but go on, let's meet face to face and we'll see how well you fare. :grin:

aristos

7th March 2014, 23:59

So why would the Russian bourgeoisie "liberate the Ukrainian workers from their fascist overlords"? Out of the goodness of their hearts?

And, by the way, this notion that the Ukrainian working class's interests are the same as the Russian bourgeoisie is the very definition of class-collaborationism.

No definitely not from the goodness of their hearts but chiefly for two reasons.

1) Putin's power is in part based on his popularity. The outrage among the citizens in Russia about genocidal remarks and thuggish actions of the current Ukrainian government, together with the well grounded fear for their relatives in Ukraine, and a LOT of Russians have relatives in Ukraine, means that Putin has to pander to these feelings, unless he wants to be unseated in a violent revolution himself.

2) Geo-political necessity. As is perfectly clear, NATO is encroaching more and more on the Russian sphere of influence - to the point where it might very well end up with Russia loosing all allies. This is not profitable for the Russian bourgeoisie.
Moreover there is a genuine fear that Russia itself will be the next target of NATO aggression (both overt and covert) and the Russian nuclear arsenal on its own is no guarantee of the sustainability of Russian sovereignty. With NATO anti-missile shield surrounding Russia from all sides the prospect of launching a successful nuclear attack to repel an invading force becomes rather low, and in the case of a NATO first strike plunges to almost zero.

Let's be clear if Putin and his cronies could make more money by abandoning the Russian Federation altogether and and severing any ties with it, they would do it without hesitation (although I guess the psychological factor of both the "will to power", as well as nationalist self-indoctrination might play a constraining role).

ckaihatsu

8th March 2014, 00:07

---

Russian troops in the Crimea and other moves are essentially defensive. Russia is attempting to send a message that they will not allow a parliamentary coup to disrupt the status quo and forever alter the region’s political and military alignments.

The Russian military and other local self-defense militias are at present the only check to curtail the authority of the far-right, pro-Western Kiev government over Ukraine’s entire national territory. What appears superficially as the “peaceful” scenario—immediate Russian withdrawal, which is the main objective of Western governments—would at present embolden fascist forces and undoubtedly accelerate NATO militarism in the region.

Military escalation, on the other hand, would likely stimulate ultra-nationalist sentiments in both Ukraine and Russia, threatening national minorities, Jews, Tatars and others.

For progressive people and anti-imperialists, the current situation underlines the central importance of the leadership of mass movements. In our current era, with the weakness of the left, the far-right has reaped the fruits of populist uprisings. Revolutionary organizations—built on broad class solidarity and internationalism, not reactionary forms of nationalism— must be built.

It is folly for anti-imperialists to join in the chorus of condemnation against the Russian military so long as they are obstructing the EU-NATO-fascist takeover of all of Ukraine. During this rapidly changing situation, as the U.S. capitalist media howls and misleads, we must remain vigilant and precise in our message. The poor and working people of the United States and of the world have no interest in another regime change operation or imperialist war. All anti-fascist activity in the Ukraine, of which there is a militant historical tradition, must be whole-heartedly supported.

Analysis: Understanding the crisis in Ukraine

Background on the growing conflict

By Eugene Puryear
MARCH 6, 2014

http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/news/analysis-understanding-the.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=partial&utm_campaign=Liberation%20Newsletter

Tim Cornelis

8th March 2014, 00:27

I don't consider myself a Tankie but go on, let's meet face to face and we'll see how well you fare. :grin:

But apparently you do support Russian imperialism, given your reply to me talking about people that support Russian imperialism and wanting to meet these dumb fucks in real life.

aristos

8th March 2014, 02:06

But apparently you do support Russian imperialism, given your reply to me talking about people that support Russian imperialism and wanting to meet these dumb fucks in real life.

It was a tongue-in-cheek reply based on your previous accusations.

DaringMehring

8th March 2014, 04:28

Standard *economic* imperialism -- 'business' -- and not so much militarily, especially compared to the U.S. It's really apples-and-oranges to begin with, and Russia isn't even adventurist. (The way Morsi became, once in power, towards Syria -- for example.)

How can you say this when Russian troops have literally marched into Ukraine? Not to mention, Chechnya twice, and Georgia.

Sure, Russia isn't a big fish in the Imperialist game, as it can barely dominate small, weak neighboring nations, but that doesn't mean it's not Imperialist.

DaringMehring

8th March 2014, 04:36

Russia *isn't* an empire, and *any* government military intervention *anywhere* is substitutionist for the working class' own activity, *at best*.

Russia is an Empire, if you're going to apply that term to mean modern Imperialist power. Russia "the prison-house of nations" was build on conquering indigenous people straight across Siberia and all over the place. Today, Russian capital seeks to dominate wherever it can get assistance from Russian military force, mainly in the former Soviet Republics. That's the definition of Imperialism.

It may have lost some of its conquests due to the breakup of the USSR (which was not Imperialist) but to say that makes it not Imperialist, is like saying that France stopped being Imperialist after losing territories in the Franco-Prussian war. It just means you've got a down-on-its-luck Imperialist power.

Sea

8th March 2014, 09:03

But apparently you do support Russian imperialism, given your reply to me talking about people that support Russian imperialism and wanting to meet these dumb fucks in real life."I'm not a tankie. I just want to send the tanks in." :rolleyes:

ckaihatsu

8th March 2014, 15:49

How can you say this when Russian troops have literally marched into Ukraine? Not to mention, Chechnya twice, and Georgia.

Sure, Russia isn't a big fish in the Imperialist game, as it can barely dominate small, weak neighboring nations, but that doesn't mean it's not Imperialist.

Russia is an Empire, if you're going to apply that term to mean modern Imperialist power. Russia "the prison-house of nations" was build on conquering indigenous people straight across Siberia and all over the place. Today, Russian capital seeks to dominate wherever it can get assistance from Russian military force, mainly in the former Soviet Republics. That's the definition of Imperialism.

It may have lost some of its conquests due to the breakup of the USSR (which was not Imperialist) but to say that makes it not Imperialist, is like saying that France stopped being Imperialist after losing territories in the Franco-Prussian war. It just means you've got a down-on-its-luck Imperialist power.

Okay, I do concede these points and will adjust my understanding accordingly.

aristos

8th March 2014, 17:42

How can you say this when Russian troops have literally marched into Ukraine? Not to mention, Chechnya twice, and Georgia.

Sure, Russia isn't a big fish in the Imperialist game, as it can barely dominate small, weak neighboring nations, but that doesn't mean it's not Imperialist.

Well to be fair, Russian troops have not actually "marched into Ukraine". The entire contingent of their troops in Crimea is far less than what they are allowed to have according to the Kharkov Agreement. The check points, the city patrols and reinforced artillery positions are all manned and operated by the Crimean self-defence force created by Crimeans in the wake of the Maidan protests. The Ukrainian military stationed there have almost unanimously defected to the regional government.

Now, if Russian troops do formally invade Ukraine - sure it might be for imperialist reasons, but it still doesn't mean that it won't coincide with the wishes of the Russian speaking inhabitants of Ukraine in the latter's struggle for survival.

fractal-vortex

8th March 2014, 18:26

Comrades! We in Kiev, Ukraine, have organized "an open microphone" project. https://www.facebook.com/openmicrophone.xxi
The idea is that anyone from the people can come up and talk and express their opinion on the crisis. In the process, we're getting organized. That's what we're doing. On the page above you can see some photos of the process (go to the bottom). If you do your share - overthrow your own capitalism, imperialism, - we will do ours. Promise.

aristos

8th March 2014, 20:21

FSL

8th March 2014, 21:52

Now, if Russian troops do formally invade Ukraine - sure it might be for imperialist reasons, but it still doesn't mean that it won't coincide with the wishes of the Russian speaking inhabitants of Ukraine in the latter's struggle for survival.
Why does it matter what the wishes of the russian speaking inhabitants are?
If the russian speaking inhabitants believe capitalist Russia or capitalist eastern Ukraine or capitalist Ukraine can help them, they're wrong.
Why shouldn't we say this? We can certainly say that the ukrainian speaking population of Ukraine who put their faith in the EU are wrong. We should say at least as much to the other half.

When Greece invaded Turkey in the 1920s it did so with the greek speaking population there supporting it.
When Turkey invaded Cyprus in the 1970s it did so with the turkish speaking population there supporting it.

Does it make any difference? Weren't these two countries trying to enlarge their market?
If people haven't developed class conciousness and still put their faith with one or the other capitalist, is it okay for that capitalist to exploit them?

Russia wants to eat the ukrainian workers up. The EU wants to eat the ukrainian workers up. It doesn't get simpler than that.

And it's ridiculous to even argue on whether Russia is imperialist, when all the wealth of the country is divided into a handful of monopolies, owned by oligarchs and the bourgeois state.
What does a country need to do to enter the imperialist stage of capitalist development? It would seem there are less imperialist countries today than there were 150 years ago, despite all the growth and wealth concentration these 150 years brought with them!

Tim Cornelis

8th March 2014, 21:59

Well to be fair, Russian troops have not actually "marched into Ukraine". The entire contingent of their troops in Crimea is far less than what they are allowed to have according to the Kharkov Agreement. The check points, the city patrols and reinforced artillery positions are all manned and operated by the Crimean self-defence force created by Crimeans in the wake of the Maidan protests. The Ukrainian military stationed there have almost unanimously defected to the regional government.

Now, if Russian troops do formally invade Ukraine - sure it might be for imperialist reasons, but it still doesn't mean that it won't coincide with the wishes of the Russian speaking inhabitants of Ukraine in the latter's struggle for survival.

Oh please tell me you're not referring to the 'Russian troops - insignia = self-defence units', because if you are, at this point, you are just reiterating Russian propaganda verbatim. You're a caricature.

aristos

8th March 2014, 23:08

Oh please tell me you're not referring to the 'Russian troops - insignia = self-defence units', because if you are, at this point, you are just reiterating Russian propaganda verbatim. You're a caricature.

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know you are a military intelligence officer and have classified info at your disposal.

aristos

8th March 2014, 23:31

Why does it matter what the wishes of the russian speaking inhabitants are?
If the russian speaking inhabitants believe capitalist Russia or capitalist eastern Ukraine or capitalist Ukraine can help them, they're wrong.
Why shouldn't we say this? We can certainly say that the ukrainian speaking population of Ukraine who put their faith in the EU are wrong. We should say at least as much to the other half.

When Greece invaded Turkey in the 1920s it did so with the greek speaking population there supporting it.
When Turkey invaded Cyprus in the 1970s it did so with the turkish speaking population there supporting it.

Does it make any difference? Weren't these two countries trying to enlarge their market?
If people haven't developed class conciousness and still put their faith with one or the other capitalist, is it okay for that capitalist to exploit them?

Russia wants to eat the ukrainian workers up. The EU wants to eat the ukrainian workers up. It doesn't get simpler than that.

And it's ridiculous to even argue on whether Russia is imperialist, when all the wealth of the country is divided into a handful of monopolies, owned by oligarchs and the bourgeois state.
What does a country need to do to enter the imperialist stage of capitalist development? It would seem there are less imperialist countries today than there were 150 years ago, despite all the growth and wealth concentration these 150 years brought with them!

I have not argued anywhere that Russia is not imperialist. It is.
Every country is, at least potentially, imperialist for that matter.
However, if acting in the interests of Russian imperialism helps, at this moment in time, to reduce the amount of workers in Ukraine getting killed and maimed, then so be it. So regardless of who actually secured the military hardware in the Crimea and prevented it from falling into the hands of either Nazis or some autonomous criminal gangs - it still is a good thing.
Even if the Russian government sent in their Spetsnaz troops and destroyed Ukrainian military hardware all over Ukraine, while the hardware was still sitting idly at Ukrainian military bases, thereby technically violating Ukrainian sovereignty (not that I give a damn about any state sovereignty and neither should you if you are an actual communist) - it would still be a good thing.

Nazis getting their hands on weapons is not a good thing.

Simple as that.

Not everything is about Marxism, frequently it is only about naked survival.

Tim Cornelis

9th March 2014, 00:26

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know you are a military intelligence officer and have classified info at your disposal.

... Are you kidding me? I was really hoping you were talking about something else.

If it's "complete nonsense" that there are Russian troops in Crimea, in the recent words of Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, then who are these soldiers outfitted with the latest Russian military uniforms, guns, and armored cars?

The "local defense forces" currently occupying Crimea are wearing unmarked uniforms that look a hell of a lot like the ones that Russian designer Valentin Yudashkin made for the Russian army. They're carrying Kalashnikovs and Russian Dragunov sniper rifles, RGD-5 grenades, and NSV machine guns. They're riding around in Russian "Tiger" and "Lynx" armored cars. And yet, according to the Kremlin, they do not exist.

Russia is allowed to have 25,000 troops in Ukraine, per an agreement with the Ukrainian government. But those troops must stay on their bases. Russia has previously explained sending forces to Crimea by saying they were going to join the Black Sea Fleet, which is based in Sevastopol. But it continues to pretend that the unmarked troops besieging Ukrainian military bases aren't theirs—Putin said so in his press conference on Wednesday, and Shoigu echoed that message yesterday. Russia Today even dedicated a whole segment to ridiculing the western "media frenzy" that went "so far as to report that Russia is invading Ukraine:"

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116904/soldier-ukraine-admits-hes-russian-video

You are delusional. Lay off the Russian propaganda, it's screwing with your brain. I didn't even think there were people that actually believed Putin, but here you are... Unbelievable -- maybe you receive your paychecks from the Kremlin. Where did these militias even get sufficient money to be outfitted in the newest Russian gear and vehicles. Thousands of well equipped forces with identical uniforms, more advanced than most of the world's armies, it's beyond implausible that these are not Russian troops. No ragtag militia can manage to mobilise that many supporters in such a short period of time with such uniforms and equipment and vehicles.

I have not argued anywhere that Russia is not imperialist. It is.
Every country is, at least potentially, imperialist for that matter.
However, if acting in the interests of Russian imperialism helps, at this moment in time, to reduce the amount of workers in Ukraine getting killed and maimed, then so be it. So regardless of who actually secured the military hardware in the Crimea and prevented it from falling into the hands of either Nazis or some autonomous criminal gangs - it still is a good thing.
Even if the Russian government sent in their Spetsnaz troops and destroyed Ukrainian military hardware all over Ukraine, while the hardware was still sitting idly at Ukrainian military bases, thereby technically violating Ukrainian sovereignty (not that I give a damn about any state sovereignty and neither should you if you are an actual communist) - it would still be a good thing.

Nazis getting their hands on weapons is not a good thing.

Simple as that.

Not everything is about Marxism, frequently it is only about naked survival.

Really now? Invading a country prevents bloodshed how? It has brought Ukraine to the brink of war. In fact, it plays into the hands of Right Sector since now they have a pretext to demand arms: defend the motherland.

8hIr2L5l2tM

What? Oh these guys? Nah, just self-defence groups assembling in Russia. They bought the APCs with donations.

Honestly, the only people that deny the Russian troops in the Crimea are Russian troops are those that work for the Kremlin. Revleft is a safespace and therefore I aristos should be banned.

Raquin

9th March 2014, 01:14

Unbelievable -- maybe you receive your paychecks from the Kremlin.
lmfao this forum is hilarious

I wonder how many trained FSB agents the Russian government has hired to skew public opinion against Kiev on a little forum populated primarily by Euro-American adolescents. Did the Kremlin infiltrate the administration yet? Comrades, stay vigilant! Kremlinite infiltrators are lurking.

Really now? Invading a country prevents bloodshed how? It has brought Ukraine to the brink of war. In fact, it plays into the hands of Right Sector since now they have a pretext to demand arms: defend the motherland.By blocking and fortifying all the roads that connect the Crimean Peninsula to the Ukrainian mainland, the Russians have effectively blocked any anti-Crimean group(specifically the Right Sector and their affiliated militias) from entering Crimea and cracking down on the secession movement and deposing the Crimean Parliament. Hundreds of innocent lives have been saved already. Crimea has been saved from the bloodshed, anarchy, destruction, and violence of Maidan. This is the only important thing.

This is not an "invasion", by the way. It's a peacekeeping operation. Invasions don't look like this:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BhzAIaHCYAIQ1_O.jpg:large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BhsQ341CEAAxX3k.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BhqpDPSIAAA1GLY.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bhtg3VDIQAAEd6D.jpg

How many people have the Russians killed? How many have they injured? Where is the damage to Crimean civilian and military infrastructure done by Russian air bombardment and artillery shelling? If there was an invasion, then where is the war and the fighting?

Clown.

synthesis

9th March 2014, 01:55

Tim Cornelis

9th March 2014, 03:34

lmfao this forum is hilarious

I wonder how many trained FSB agents the Russian government has hired to skew public opinion against Kiev on a little forum populated primarily by Euro-American adolescents. Did the Kremlin infiltrate the administration yet? Comrades, stay vigilant! Kremlinite infiltrators are lurking.

It was a joke, trying to highlight aristos' mind boggling stupidity.

By blocking and fortifying all the roads that connect the Crimean Peninsula to the Ukrainian mainland, the Russians have effectively blocked any anti-Crimean group(specifically the Right Sector and their affiliated militias) from entering Crimea and cracking down on the secession movement and deposing the Crimean Parliament. Hundreds of innocent lives have been saved already. Crimea has been saved from the bloodshed, anarchy, destruction, and violence of Maidan. This is the only important thing.

I don't think that was a realistic scenario. The far-right was incredibly marginalised in the East.

This is not an "invasion", by the way. It's a peacekeeping operation. Invasions don't look like this:

http://www.dailystormer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/sud.jpg
http://www.johndclare.net/images/sudeten.gif

>peacekeeping operation

Who are you kidding, really? It's altruism on Russia's part surely :rolleyes: . "Humanitarian imperialism".

How many people have the Russians killed? How many have they injured? Where is the damage to Crimean civilian and military infrastructure done by Russian air bombardment and artillery shelling? If there was an invasion, then where is the war and the fighting?

Nope. It OBJECTIVELY is an invasion. Look up the definition. It does not involve "armed clashes".

Honestly, at Raquin and Aristos. You are two unbelievable fucking idiots. I cannot even put into words the stupidity you display here. If the USA had done the exact same thing you would be painting Hitler mustaches on Obama's picture and waving them hysterically in front of US embassies calling them evil imperialists.

aristos

9th March 2014, 04:04

If it's "complete nonsense" that there are Russian troops in Crimea, in the recent words of Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, then who are these soldiers outfitted with the latest Russian military uniforms, guns, and armored cars?

The "local defense forces" currently occupying Crimea are wearing unmarked uniforms that look a hell of a lot like the ones that Russian designer Valentin Yudashkin made for the Russian army. They're carrying Kalashnikovs and Russian Dragunov sniper rifles, RGD-5 grenades, and NSV machine guns. They're riding around in Russian "Tiger" and "Lynx" armored cars. And yet, according to the Kremlin, they do not exist.

Russia is allowed to have 25,000 troops in Ukraine, per an agreement with the Ukrainian government. But those troops must stay on their bases. Russia has previously explained sending forces to Crimea by saying they were going to join the Black Sea Fleet, which is based in Sevastopol. But it continues to pretend that the unmarked troops besieging Ukrainian military bases aren't theirs—Putin said so in his press conference on Wednesday, and Shoigu echoed that message yesterday. Russia Today even dedicated a whole segment to ridiculing the western "media frenzy" that went "so far as to report that Russia is invading Ukraine:"

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116904/soldier-ukraine-admits-hes-russian-video

You are delusional. Lay off the Russian propaganda, it's screwing with your brain. I didn't even think there were people that actually believed Putin, but here you are... Unbelievable -- maybe you receive your paychecks from the Kremlin. Where did these militias even get sufficient money to be outfitted in the newest Russian gear and vehicles. Thousands of well equipped forces with identical uniforms, more advanced than most of the world's armies, it's beyond implausible that these are not Russian troops. No ragtag militia can manage to mobilise that many supporters in such a short period of time with such uniforms and equipment and vehicles.

You're embarrassing yourself now.
I never said it was "complete nonsense", at least have the graciousness not put words in my mouth. I said that formally Russians troops have not occupied Crimea. Which they haven't - this is a fact. Are there Russian troops in Crimea? Yes. Have they attacked or destroyed anything? Have they even detained anyone? No and no. Again, I might be wrong and you have fresh classified info lying on your desk that says otherwise, but until then let's be objective.
If it was an invasion, as you put it - it seems a very meek kind of invasion. One would think the Russians would be in Kiev by now had hostilities opened. It certainly doesn't make any sense militarily to invade a tiny part and then just sit around waiting as the enemy pulls up their entire mechanized armour.

Now the second, even more shameful issue. Seeing as you are a communist, it oughtn't really bother whether one made up geo-political entity penetrates the made-up borders of another made-up geo-political entity. Workers have no country - remember that? What does matter though, unless you are an ivory tower "intellectual" (and I'm using this term here generously) whose one track mind is fixed on abstract discourse, are real flesh and blood people. The party programme and the underpinning ideology of the Right Sector, UNA-UNSO and Svoboda are no secret. Do you seriously believe that they hold torch rallies, carry swastika-like insignia, chant xenophobic slogans and idolize the genocidal regime of Bandera just for shit and giggles? If they are not stopped there will be blood. Rivers of it. And you can bet that all those "humanitarian" western politicians will keep quiet as long as they can do business together. In addition to this already formidable menace because of a power vacuum many peaceful residents (and most people are peaceful to the point where they are rather be killed than kill) are in danger of robbery, bodily harm and murder. Do think this state of affairs should not be stopped? Moreover, if there is a general chaos and a lot of high impact military gear lying around you can bet that it won't be lying around for long. Already there are reports that several dozen Igla systems have disappeared from two army bases in central Ukraine. Each of these things can easily down a civilian airliner. These things have to be controlled. You cannot simply wish this deplorable situation away.

8hIr2L5l2tM

What? Oh these guys? Nah, just self-defence groups assembling in Russia. They bought the APCs with donations.

Really low of you. Really, really low of you. Those troops are indeed assembling in Russia (as in not Ukraine). They are presumably moving out to the border. Oh no how dare they! Obviously the best thing to do here is just dissolve the entire army of the Russian Federation and hope for the best. I'm sure others will get the hint and suddenly we will have a world without weapons and armies. The Ukrainian Nazis will even join in in our peace parade and drop their ideology in celebration.

Really now? Invading a country prevents bloodshed how? It has brought Ukraine to the brink of war. In fact, it plays into the hands of Right Sector since now they have a pretext to demand arms: defend the motherland.

No, the Kiev Junta and their US/EU puppeteers brought Ukraine to the brink of war. That's what you get when you wake the Nazi monster that sees mortal enemies both inside and across the border. Or do you seriously think had Putin said "nah, none of our business, do what you want" everything would have been hunky-dory in Ukraine? A life-disavowing Nazi regime together with an economic collapse only breeds violence. If that violence can be constrained by using a credible threat of overwhelming counter-violence (because as of now no bullets have flown, don't forget that) then so be it.
But then again you are sitting in comfortable, peaceful Netherlands - so easy to give advice from over there.

Would I prefer a working class revolt and subsequent working class victory. Sure, who wouldn't. And indeed class-conciousness is waking up in Ukraine. But if it is not protected until it can fully spread its wings then consequently it can't win. Against their own wishes the Russian bourgeoisie is at the moment inadvertently protecting that very working class that is waking up, because the greatest immediate assault on the workers in this particular situation is coming from the West and the Junta in Kiev. Once they oust the Junta and the Nazis the working class will deal with the rest. You have to pick and choose your battles. You can't be fighting everyone at the same time.

Moreover I have read a very interesting analysis how this situation with Moscow's support of the Crimean and South-Eastern revolts might very well lead to a change of regime in Moscow and possibly even to a full-fledged socialist revolution in Russia. The line of reasoning goes that because of inevitable sanctions and subsequent worsening of the quality of life of the Russian proletariat, against the backdrop of making sacrifices in solidarity with their Ukrainian brothers and sisters, the Russian proletariat will demand from the Putin regime drastic economic changes. Solidarity abroad necessitates solidarity at home. However, capitalists cannot compromise their wealth and profits, thus Putin's regime cannot rearrange Russian economy along more equitable lines. This in turn may very well lead to workers getting rid of the regime that demands so much of them but gives them so little.

Honestly, the only people that deny the Russian troops in the Crimea are Russian troops are those that work for the Kremlin. Revleft is a safespace and therefore I aristos should be banned.

Hmm, seems you enjoy making threats. I think you should be banned for your misanthropy.

aristos

9th March 2014, 04:10

Wow, well, I guess these developments have a silver lining in that they bring all the apologists for the (Russian) bourgeoisie out of the woodwork. It's always these supposed "lesser evil" situations that bring these people out, whether it's voting for a center-left party in an election, supporting right-wing capitalist billionaires over billionaires further to the right, or some other event where apparently there exists a bourgeoisie that is looking out for working class interests.

Maybe you can then point out those people who verbatim think "there exists a bourgeoisie that is looking out for working class interests"? Something tells me you will not be able to find a single quote to that effect.

Yeah we all get it you detest "lesser evil", you , of course, prefer "greater evil" instead. Right? Because that's how one reads what you wrote.
I guess you must have lead a very charmed life if you have never had to settle for a lesser evil until you could banish that lesser evil as well.
Let them eat cake! Right?

aristos

9th March 2014, 04:35

I don't think that was a realistic scenario. The far-right was incredibly marginalized in the East.

And yet immediately after the putsch they started sending their boys to the East and South to make sure the populace remains compliant. Oh and don't forget how they started making more and more demands for state power from day one. First give them the official status of police. Then let them send political commissars to the army. Then let them arm themselves from the army bases. In an unstable coalition between "moderate" nationalists and Nazis, given enough time, Nazis always end up controlling everything. Add to this the rabid russophobia promoted by all pro-maidan parties. Add to this the appointment of oligarchs to governor positions with practically carte blanche to do whatever they need to keep peace and order in a country ever increasingly squeezed to intolerable conditions for the working class by foreign debts and the "eternal Jew" that has to suffer as a cathartic release and redirection of anger for the moaning working class is easily found. Those damned Muscovites, they did it all, they stabbed us in the back, yadda, yadda, yadda...

If the USA had done the exact same thing you would be painting Hitler mustaches on Obama's picture and waving them hysterically in front of US embassies calling them evil imperialists.

Nope. Never done that, never will. Had the situation been the same in reverse I would certainly have supported it if US troops could stop bloodshed. But interestingly enough try as I may, somehow I cannot recall even one instance where the US troops have prevented bloodshed through mere threats and non-violent display of military potency. Maybe you can help out?

Seriously though, so that you cannot accuse me of being pro-Putin, or Russian nationalism or whatever nonsense you may come up with I am stating explicitly that I am not cheering on the Russian army, I don't give a shit about the Russian bourgeois state and its imperialist ambitions and that I instead, until the working class can get their act together will simply support that side that I analytically find in any specific situation gives the workers the better deal.
Or in other words, until perfection can be attained (if such is ever possible at all) improving things is better than not improving them.

If you are more comfortable taking the role of a passive disinterested observer then that's your choice, misanthrope.

FSL

9th March 2014, 04:58

Yeah we all get it you detest "lesser evil", you , of course, prefer "greater evil" instead. Right? Because that's how one reads what you wrote.
I guess you must have lead a very charmed life if you have never had to settle for a lesser evil until you could banish that lesser evil as well.
Let them eat cake! Right?
No, let them behead the Queen.

I'd like you to show me people who have had charmed lives by settling for lesser evils.
In any case, he was right in what he said. To you russian imperialism is a lesser evil. To someone else, it's american imperialism that is the lesser evil because at least it provides a relative freedom of expression and free elections!

The rest of us reserve the right to consider both these opinions to be practically the same.

synthesis

9th March 2014, 05:19

Maybe you can then point out those people who verbatim think "there exists a bourgeoisie that is looking out for working class interests"? Something tells me you will not be able to find a single quote to that effect.

The simple fact that you demand that quotations be verbatim signals to me that this avenue is a dead end and you're not actually interested in engaging with the idea that class collaboration has never ended well for the working class, because we'll be reduced to arguing whose words meant what at which time; I suspect that's actually your goal. Or you could actually try to engage the ideas instead of this worn-out game of semantics and pedantry.

Yeah we all get it you detest "lesser evil", you , of course, prefer "greater evil" instead. Right? Because that's how one reads what you wrote.
I guess you must have lead a very charmed life if you have never had to settle for a lesser evil until you could banish that lesser evil as well.
Let them eat cake! Right?

I envy your childlike innocence, I really do. The historical lesson of class collaboration is that in situations such as these, for the working class there is no lesser evil. I do realize that's a lot harder to stomach than having the option of simply throwing in your lot with whichever imperialist bourgeoisie seems to have interests most aligned with your own, so maintain your illusions of the trustworthiness and magnanimity of the "anti-imperialist" bourgeoisie du jour at your leisure.

aristos

9th March 2014, 05:24

No, let them behead the Queen.

I'm totally down with that. Got any practical advise how we can do that? No abstract amorphous theories, but a specific plan of operations how to get from point A to point B. Please be generous and share.

I'd like you to show me people who have had charmed lives by settling for lesser evils.
You must have been hurrying when you wrote this. No biggie, just look at what I wrote before and what you wrote here and compare. I'm sure you'll find the error.

In any case, he was right in what he said. To you russian imperialism is a lesser evil. To someone else, it's american imperialism that is the lesser evil because at least it provides a relative freedom of expression and free elections!

Never said a word about free elections.
It does in this particular case seem to be providing at least protection from unwelcome death. Once it ceases to do that there will certainly be nothing to support (at least for me, can't speak for anyone else)

[QUOTE]
The rest of us reserve the right to consider both these opinions as practically one.

You can not merely reserve but even fully exercise the right to consider anything you want here (unlike in Nazi-infested Ukraine ;) ).

I see the opposing powers in this conflict as one, as much as I see Nazi Germany and USSR with Allies during WWII as one, or a bully that tortures a person and the individual who forcibly makes the bully stop as one - that is to say NOT AT ALL. Yes, the saviour might not be a nice person generally, he/she might even be bullying other people at other times as well, but to the victim of this particular bully, in that particular situation that person represents something good.

I guess this is a general difference in our outlook on life. I am an opportunist in this respect - if something helps use it, if it doesn't discard it.
Nothing is true, everything is permitted ;)

Thirsty Crow

9th March 2014, 05:25

It's a peacekeeping operation.

Is this sentence really possible outside the OI subforum here, in relation either to potential NATO involvement or actual Russian one?

synthesis

9th March 2014, 05:30

...I instead, until the working class can get their act together will simply support that side that I analytically find in any specific situation gives the workers the better deal.
Or in other words, until perfection can be attained (if such is ever possible at all) improving things is better than not improving them.

This is, again, literally the same justification used to defend pseudo-communist parties' support for the Democrats. With both electoralism and this shallow "anti-imperialism," we can see that encouraging the working class to collaborate with any given bourgeoisie is historically irresponsible at best, and class treason at worst, and indicates a stunning lack of awareness of what working class internationalism entails.

Honestly, at Raquin and Aristos. You are two unbelievable fucking idiots. I cannot even put into words the stupidity you display here. If the USA had done the exact same thing you would be painting Hitler mustaches on Obama's picture and waving them hysterically in front of US embassies calling them evil imperialists.

This bears repeating.

aristos

9th March 2014, 05:45

The simple fact that you demand that quotations be verbatim signals to me that this avenue is a dead end and you're not actually interested in engaging with the idea that class collaboration has never ended well for the working class, because we'll be reduced to arguing whose words meant what at which time; I suspect that's actually your goal. Or you could actually try to engage the ideas instead of this worn-out game of semantics and pedantry.

I envy your childlike innocence, I really do. The historical lesson of class collaboration is that in situations such as these, for the working class there is no lesser evil. I do realize that's a lot harder to stomach than having the option of simply throwing in your lot with whichever imperialist bourgeoisie seems to have interests most aligned with your own, so maintain your illusions of the trustworthiness and magnanimity of the "anti-imperialist" bourgeoisie du jour at your leisure.

Which lessons would that be?

For example, I take it you view the USSR to have been capitalist, right?
Well interestingly enough, had a leftcomm group ever instigated a revolution anywhere (unfortunately history shows leftcomms are too preoccupied with discussions instead of practical actions - their entire philosophy of passivity and thinking up all the ways how not to do anything) this big bad capitalist USSR would have sponsored and provided you with the means to lead you revolution to fruition. You see in a multipolar world there is competition. And both opponents will materially support anyone and anything that hurts their adversary. Since the USSR were at a disadvantage (as well as at the very least paying lip-service to communist ideology), they were ready to be very lenient with anyone willing to ally with them. Then, for example, had your revolution grown and you expanded your territories at the expence of the opposing camp so that you and the USSR were the only big fish left, then you could have taken on the USSR. But trying to fight everyone at the same time because no one is ideologically pure enough for you is sheer idiocy. Pick your battles and play your adversaries against each other.

Or to take another example. During the American War of Independence both the US and the British Empire were two equally heinous regimes (although I guess one could make a case that at least the Northern States afforded a slightly better quality of life and more personal freedom than Britain). Yet objectively for the Native Americans the British side was worthy of allying themselves with, because for its own selfish reasons at that particular point in history Britain was engaged in a struggle with the immediate enemy of the Native Americans. This didn't make the British any less murderous or exploitative, but it was expedient for the Native Americans to use them to get an upper leg on the conflict (it didn't work out only because the British quit the fight too early)

However I feel this is a discussion for another topic. It seems we have derailed a thread called "New Ukrainian Government Full of Genuine Fascists".

Raquin

9th March 2014, 05:46

It was a joke, trying to highlight aristos' mind boggling stupidity.
Lying to hide your shame isn't going to improve the impression you already made.

I don't think that was a realistic scenario. The far-right was incredibly marginalised in the East. Not realistic? So the new fascist-including government wouldn't have taken steps to depose the Crimean Parliament and crackdown on the secessionists in Crimea if they had the chance to? They would have simply allowed Crimea to secede, eh? Haha, right.

http://www.dailystormer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/sud.jpg
http://www.johndclare.net/images/sudeten.gifThese are Wehrmacht troops in Sudetenland in 1938, entering German-majority territories seceded by Czechoslovakia to Germany with Franco-British and American agreement. So, not an invasion. Nice try though.

>peacekeeping operation

Who are you kidding, really? It's altruism on Russia's part surely :rolleyes: . "Humanitarian imperialism". Can you make a single argument without resorting to stuffing shit I didn't say into my mouth? Altruism? Who said anything about altruism? Who said anything about humanitarianism? What are you rambling about?

Nope. It OBJECTIVELY is an invasion. Look up the definition. It does not involve "armed clashes". Sure thing buddy. Here is a definition of "invasion" from Wikipedia:

An invasion is a military offensive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offensive_(military)) in which large parts of the armed forces (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_forces) of one geopolitical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geopolitics) entity aggressively enter territory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territory_(country_subdivision)) controlled by another such entity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entity), generally with the objective of either conquering, liberating or re-establishing control or authority over a territory, forcing the partition of a country, altering the established government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government) or gaining concessions from said government, or a combination thereof. An invasion can be the cause of a war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War), be a part of a larger strategy to end a war, or it can constitute an entire war in itself. Due to the large scale of the operations associated with invasions, they are usually strategic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy) in planning and execution.
In the case of Crimea, the "aggressive" part is missing. There has been no aggressive entering of territory. Rather, the Russians were invited by the Crimean authorities. If there has been aggression, where are the bodybags and the injured?

Russia no more invaded Crimea than the UN invaded the Golan Heights.

Honestly, at Raquin and Aristos. You are two unbelievable fucking idiots. I cannot even put into words the stupidity you display here. If the USA had done the exact same thing you would be painting Hitler mustaches on Obama's picture and waving them hysterically in front of US embassies calling them evil imperialists. Accusations of idiocy from a man/clown of your caliber I consider compliments instead. So, thank you, sir.

If the US stationed their troops in Crimea to prevent the Maidanists from bringing violence to the peninsula and to help Crimeans exercise their nature-given right of self-determination, I would congratulate Obama for doing at least this one right thing in his entire career. I am not a fan of unnecessary violence and bloodshed, preventing such things I consider progressive and worthwhile.

Raquin

9th March 2014, 05:56

It's a peacekeeping operation.

Is this sentence really possible outside the OI subforum here, in relation either to potential NATO involvement or actual Russian one?
If they are keeping the peace, they are peacekeepers. It's right there in the word. Peace. Keeping. See?

synthesis

9th March 2014, 05:57

Which lessons would that be?

For example, I take it you view the USSR to have been capitalist, right?
Well interestingly enough, had a leftcomm group ever instigated a revolution anywhere (unfortunately history shows leftcomms are too preoccupied with discussions instead of practical actions - their entire philosophy of passivity and thinking up all the ways how not to do anything) this big bad capitalist USSR would have sponsored and provided you with the means to lead you revolution to fruition. You see in a multipolar world there is competition. And both opponents will materially support anyone and anything that hurts their adversary. Since the USSR were at a disadvantage (as well as at the very least paying lip-service to communist ideology), they were ready to be very lenient with anyone willing to ally with them. Then, for example, had your revolution grown and you expanded your territories at the expence of the opposing camp so that you and the USSR were the only big fish left, then you could have taken on the USSR. But trying to fight everyone at the same time because no one is ideologically pure enough for you is sheer idiocy. Pick your battles and play your adversaries against each other.

Or to take another example. During the American War of Independence both the US and the British Empire were two equally heinous regimes (although I guess one could make a case that at least the Northern States afforded a slightly better quality of life and more personal freedom than Britain). Yet objectively for the Native Americans the British side was worthy of allying themselves with, because for its own selfish reasons at that particular point in history Britain was engaged in a struggle with the immediate enemy of the Native Americans. This didn't make the British any less murderous or exploitative, but it was expedient for the Native Americans to use them to get an upper leg on the conflict (it didn't work out only because the British quit the fight too early)

You seem to have a very, let's say, "curious" conception of historical materialism and class analysis - meaning, none whatsoever. You conceive of the world as a set of warring nation-states rather than as governed by any sort of class contradictions. I think it's very telling that you didn't mention the working class once in this whole diatribe.

However I feel this is a discussion for another topic. It seems we have derailed a thread called "New Ukrainian Government Full of Genuine Fascists".

"We"? Speak for yourself. If you really feel the need to divert the discussion to Native Americans in the Revolutionary War to defend class-collaborationism, that's your prerogative. I'm almost out of patience trying to tackle the breathtaking stupidity of people who defend, tooth and nail, Russia's right and mandate to defend its interests in Crimea on the one hand, and then insist they're not supporting imperialism on the other. I think it's beyond clear that both you and Raquin should be restricted to OI, at the very least.

aristos

9th March 2014, 05:58

This is, again, literally the same justification used to defend pseudo-communist parties' support for the Democrats. With both electoralism and this shallow "anti-imperialism," we can see that encouraging the working class to collaborate with any given bourgeoisie is historically irresponsible at best, and class treason at worst, and indicates a stunning lack of awareness of what working class internationalism entails.

Okay, then tell us honestly, without evasions, where have your categorical rejection of everything too impure got us? Where is this glorious leftcomm revolution that is about to sweep all across the planet? Or maybe it's already in the making? You sure are a sneaky bunch, what with your invisible revolution.

What is YOUR specific plan in this particular situation to get nearer a global proletarian revolution, or at least a local one in Ukraine and/or Russia and/or EU?
Can you even use this situation to kick off a proletarian revolution? And if not, if a proletarian revolution is not on the cards this time how can we alleviate the situation for the inhabitants of that region? Are you even interested in any of this or is it simply an academic issue for you?

Something tells me you will only come up with ways to evade answering these questions.

Raquin

9th March 2014, 06:03

synthesis

9th March 2014, 06:06

Okay, then tell us honestly, without evasions, where have your categorical rejection of everything too impure got us? Where is this glorious leftcomm revolution that is about to sweep all across the planet? Or maybe it's already in the making? You sure are a sneaky bunch, what with your invisible revolution.

What is YOUR specific plan in this particular situation to get nearer a global proletarian revolution, or at least a local one in Ukraine and/or Russia and/or EU?
Can you even use this situation to kick off a proletarian revolution? And if not, if a proletarian revolution is not on the cards this time how can we alleviate the situation for the inhabitants of that region? Are you even interested in any of this or is it simply an academic issue for you?

Something tells me you will only come up with ways to evade answering these questions.

My specific plan is to articulate an analysis based on working class politics, on what will further the interests of the international working class in the context of the imperialist conflict over Crimea. To believe that the outcome of major world events hinges on my ability, or your ability, to do anything else is the height of hubris, to put it charitably.

synthesis

9th March 2014, 06:09

I think it's telling that you think there is a class component to the issue, synthesis. There isn't. It's 2014, not 1954. There is no more communist bloc. There is no more communist movement. There is no more organised proletarian class. There is no relevant force fighting for proletarian interests. So "class collaborationism"? Hah. What are you talking about? Are you people so deluded as to think that there is a "proletarian side" in the Ukrainian events?

I don't even know what to say to this. First, the "proletarian side" is obviously in opposition to both Western and Russian imperialism and Ukrainian nationalism, to prevent the Ukrainian working class from suffering the consequences of an imperialist-instigated civil war. You're looking for "easy answers" and here there aren't any.

Second, are you sure you're on the right forum?

aristos

9th March 2014, 06:11

You seem to have a very, let's say, "curious" conception of historical materialism and class analysis - meaning, none whatsoever. You conceive of the world as a set of warring nation-states rather than as governed by any sort of class contradictions. I think it's very telling that you didn't mention the working class once in this whole diatribe.

Are you seriously implying that no antagonisms other than class-antagonisms exist in the real world and deny that due to historical circumstances people have been forced to act as groups even when there are clear internal antagonisms within those groups?
What should the Soviet soldiers sitting in the trenches before an impending attack have done in that situation? Should they have shot their officers and then got out to fraternize with the German soldiers sitting right across the field? Because you have to be crazy to even entertain the notion that the German soldiers would not have immediately gunned down the fraternizing Soviets.
Really, your Gandhiism doesn't seem either practical or revolutionary. Let's suicide ourselves into communism - what a great plan.

"We"? Speak for yourself. If you really feel the need to divert the discussion to Native Americans in the Revolutionary War to defend class-collaborationism, that's your prerogative. I'm almost out of patience trying to tackle the breathtaking stupidity of people who defend, tooth and nail, Russia's right and mandate to defend its interests in Crimea on the one hand, and then insist they're not supporting imperialism on the other. I think it's beyond clear that both you and Raquin should be restricted to OI, at the very least.

Banning instead of answering my questions, how non-authoritarian of of you.
You guys have been sticking your head in the sand for over a century now and yet the problem just doesn't go away. Who could have thought! I guess you just haven't waited long enough. Yeah, that would be it.

Thirsty Crow

9th March 2014, 06:17

If they are keeping the peace, they are peacekeepers. It's right there in the word. Peace. Keeping. See?
Yeah, I can see it.
Too bad that the fucking idiot you are you can't.

synthesis

9th March 2014, 06:20

Are you seriously implying that no antagonisms other than class-antagonisms exist in the real world and deny that due to historical circumstances people have been forced to act as groups even when there are clear internal antagonisms within those groups?

I'm saying that these "antagonisms" (i.e., national, ethnic, electoral and religious conflicts) exist in large part to direct attention away from class antagonisms, and when you pick a side in one of these other paradigms, you're bolstering and contributing to the narrative that ruling classes use to further their own interests.

Raquin

9th March 2014, 06:22

I don't even know what to say to this. First, the "proletarian side" is obviously in opposition to both Western and Russian imperialism and Ukrainian nationalism, to prevent the Ukrainian working class from suffering the consequences of an imperialist-instigated civil war. You're looking for "easy answers" and here there aren't any.

Second, are you sure you're on the right forum?
Can you tell me approximately how many Ukrainians consider themselves supports of this "proletarian side", can you tell me about the leaders of this side, and of the organizations associated with it, please?

It seems like you are speaking of a hypothetical proletarian side that might exist if there was a communist movement in existence in Ukraine. Which there isn't. So all this wanking here amounts to is sharing fantasies with each other. These fantasies are not grounded in reality and they have no influence whatsoever on real events in the real world so why are you people so angry about imaginary bullshit?

aristos

9th March 2014, 06:24

My specific plan is to articulate an analysis based on working class politics, on what will further the interests of the international working class in the context of the imperialist conflict over Crimea. To believe that the outcome of major world events hinges on my ability, or your ability, to do anything else is the height of hubris, to put it charitably.

Wow, so in other words you will just mince even more words, engage in even more sophistry and empty sloganeering, and that is supposed to help bring about the revolution somehow? Great achievement there.

No, I have no illusions about being able to influence major (or most probably even minor) world events. But simply regurgitating the same cliches certainly is non-productive. At least you could formulate a plan of sorts. Maybe in some distant future a group of really dedicated revolutionaries could put it to good use and make something out of it.... Oh wait, I forgot, your "faith" forbids such things. Well I guess demagoguery it is then - changing the world with words (that barely anyone even hears), that's all we are left with. Pathetic.

Raquin

9th March 2014, 06:24

Yeah, I can see it.
Too bad that the fucking idiot you are you can't.
Thank you for your intelligent and not-at-all-rule-violating input, Mr. Internet Tough Guy Moderator.

aristos

9th March 2014, 06:36

You also seem to either not understand or willfully ignore that the anti-maidan resistance movements in Southern and Eastern Ukraine are actually proletarian movements (unlike the astro-turfed Maidan, BUT WAIT - it was sponsored by the US and EU bourgeoisie - OH NO, NOW ACCORDING TO YOUR LOGIC YOU CAN'T EVEN SUPPORT MAIDAN EITHER [seems like the whole world has conspired against you]). And these movements have the potential to actually become openly socialist (they already have an embryonic anti-capitalist angle). And, here's the kicker, simply by threatening the use of overwhelming force, inadvertently, against their own interests, the Russian government is safeguarding those movements. The Russian government has to, because geo-politicaly it has been forced into that corner. It doesn't want to, but it has to if it is to survive.

Sure maybe nothing comes out of it. Maybe Ukraine will just split and both sides will openly embarrass nationalism instead of proletarian internationalism. Nothing is guaranteed. But you can't win if you try. And you sure can't win if everyone is against you.

aristos

9th March 2014, 06:39

I'm saying that these "antagonisms" (i.e., national, ethnic, electoral and religious conflicts) exist in large part to direct attention away from class antagonisms, and when you pick a side in one of these other paradigms, you're bolstering and contributing to the narrative that ruling classes use to further their own interests.

I'm not saying to pick sides just for the sake of picking sides, I'm talking of exploiting them to own advantage. Just like spaceships traveling long distance use gravity of the planets they pass to propel themselves forwards.

synthesis

9th March 2014, 06:42

It seems like you are speaking of a hypothetical proletarian side that might exist if there was a communist movement in existence in Ukraine. Which there isn't. So all this wanking here amounts to is sharing fantasies with each other. These fantasies are not grounded in reality and they have no influence whatsoever on real events in the real world so why are you people so angry about imaginary bullshit?

Wow, so in other words you will just mince even more words, engage in even more sophistry and empty sloganeering, and that is supposed to help bring about the revolution somehow? Great achievement there.

No, I have no illusions about being able to influence major (or most probably even minor) world events. But simply regurgitating the same cliches certainly is non-productive. At least you could formulate a plan of sorts. Maybe in some distant future a group of really dedicated revolutionaries could put it to good use and make something out of it.... Oh wait, I forgot, your "faith" forbids such things.

My god, are either of you remotely capable of engaging with ideas that challenge your view of the world, or do you always just give up and throw these little temper tantrums?

Can you tell me approximately how many Ukrainians consider themselves supports of this "proletarian side", can you tell me about the leaders of this side, and of the organizations associated with it, please?

Yes, let's respond to a lack of class consciousness by ridiculing suggestions that we should try to create class consciousness instead of defending Russian imperialism - sorry, Russia's "right to self-defense."

Raquin

9th March 2014, 08:32

[QUOTE=synthesis;2728460
Yes, let's respond to a lack of class consciousness by ridiculing suggestions that we should try to create class consciousness instead of defending Russian imperialism - sorry, Russia's "right to self-defense."[/QUOTE]
You make less and less sense with every post. What in the devil's name would lead you believe that some Euro-American internet leftie circlejerk has any effect on class consciousness in the Ukraine? And who are you making these suggestions to? I see only one Ukrainian on RevLeft and he's already a communist. 45 million people live in Ukraine...

American and European Leftists making suggestions to create class consciousness in Ukraine on an English-language forum is about as productive as shouting loudly in a forest devoid of even animals.

You should try sending an email of your suggestions to the leaders of this "proletarian side" in the Ukrainian conflict instead.

Tim Cornelis

9th March 2014, 13:03

You're embarrassing yourself now.

On the contrary, you are.

I never said it was "complete nonsense", at least have the graciousness not put words in my mouth. I said that formally Russians troops have not occupied Crimea.

Which is utter sophism.

Which they haven't - this is a fact.

Which is irrelevant - which is common sense.

Are there Russian troops in Crimea? Yes. Have they attacked or destroyed anything? Have they even detained anyone? No and no.

I again refer you to the Nazi invasion of Sudetenland.

Again, I might be wrong and you have fresh classified info lying on your desk that says otherwise, but until then let's be objective.
If it was an invasion, as you put it - it seems a very meek kind of invasion.

Regardless, it's an invasion.

One would think the Russians would be in Kiev by now had hostilities opened.

Not relevant. They have no intent of capturing Kiev, and armed clashes or hostilities are not a requirement for something to qualify as invasion.

It certainly doesn't make any sense militarily to invade a tiny part and then just sit around waiting as the enemy pulls up their entire mechanized armour.

No, this doesn't make sense. Clearly they've done this. They have invaded, moved armed forces into territory of another sovereign nation with the intent of annexing.

Now the second, even more shameful issue. Seeing as you are a communist, it oughtn't really bother whether one made up geo-political entity penetrates the made-up borders of another made-up geo-political entity.

This is ridiculous. I'm not making an ought-statement, I'm making an is-statement. I don't care about national sovereignty or self-determination, but these categories are relevant in defining invasion.

Workers have no country - remember that? What does matter though, unless you are an ivory tower "intellectual" (and I'm using this term here generously) whose one track mind is fixed on abstract discourse, are real flesh and blood people.

I suppose then it makes sense to back the Russian ruling class and its imperialist agenda which have brought Ukraine and Russia to the brink of war.

The party programme and the underpinning ideology of the Right Sector, UNA-UNSO and Svoboda are no secret. Do you seriously believe that they hold torch rallies, carry swastika-like insignia, chant xenophobic slogans and idolize the genocidal regime of Bandera just for shit and giggles? If they are not stopped there will be blood. Rivers of it.

And likewise if Golden Dawn is not stopped there'll be blood, but neither do I support a, to use the ridiculous euphemism, a favourite sophistic veil of the ruling class, "peacekeeping operation" by Turkey annexing some Greek islands under the guise of "protecting ethnic minorities", or the USA invading Venezuela for a "peacekeeping operation" to protect US nationals there under the pretext that they anticipate blood.

And you can bet that all those "humanitarian" western politicians will keep quiet as long as they can do business together. In addition to this already formidable menace because of a power vacuum many peaceful residents (and most people are peaceful to the point where they are rather be killed than kill) are in danger of robbery, bodily harm and murder.

I refer you to the murder rate in Venezuela, and then see of it warrants a US invasion, pardon me, a peacekeeping operation.

Do think this state of affairs should not be stopped?

Of course.

Moreover, if there is a general chaos and a lot of high impact military gear lying around you can bet that it won't be lying around for long. Already there are reports that several dozen Igla systems have disappeared from two army bases in central Ukraine. Each of these things can easily down a civilian airliner. These things have to be controlled. You cannot simply wish this deplorable situation away.

Again, invading one small part of Ukraine (which does nothing to protect the vast majority by the way) only makes this situation more deplorable as it creates the pretext for fascist gangs and thugs to arm themselves against the Russian invader! Common sense really. Of course, they wish to be armed regardless but have now "legitimatised" (in the eyes of the many) the reason to do so.

Really low of you. Really, really low of you. Those troops are indeed assembling in Russia (as in not Ukraine).

With identical vehicles, uniforms, gear as the self-defence units, ergo it's reasonable to presume these are likewise self-defence units. Or, more logically Russian troops, which you so naively denied, buying into the narrative that the Kremlin has prepared for you and other Russian speakers to legitimise an invasion.

No, the Kiev Junta

How is it a Junta? I suspect you obfuscating the nature of the present regime in Kiev, and rebranding it a Junta as the Minister of Defence is a member of Svobodo and therefore the circle of calling Ukraine "Nazi Ukraine" or "Fasist Ukraine" fits. How is it a Junta?

and their US/EU puppeteers brought Ukraine to the brink of war.

smh. Russia invading a country with thousands of troops, blame the US. I say again, I do not believe for a second that had the US done something similar or identical you would play apologetics for US imperialism.

That's what you get when you wake the Nazi monster that sees mortal enemies both inside and across the border. Or do you seriously think had Putin said "nah, none of our business, do what you want" everything would have been hunky-dory in Ukraine? A life-disavowing Nazi regime together with an economic collapse only breeds violence. If that violence can be constrained by using a credible threat of overwhelming counter-violence (because as of now no bullets have flown, don't forget that) then so be it.

I'm not yet convinced that this "Nazi monster" is what you say it is.

But then again you are sitting in comfortable, peaceful Netherlands - so easy to give advice from over there.

Ah, the appeal to emotion.

http://libcom.org/news/internationalists-issue-declaration-against-war-ukraine-02032014

Would I prefer a working class revolt and subsequent working class victory. Sure, who wouldn't. And indeed class-conciousness is waking up in Ukraine. But if it is not protected until it can fully spread its wings then consequently it can't win. Against their own wishes the Russian bourgeoisie is at the moment inadvertently protecting that very working class that is waking up,

They are protecting their geopolitical interests. The working class has to bleed and die for their interests.

because the greatest immediate assault on the workers in this particular situation is coming from the West and the Junta in Kiev. Once they oust the Junta and the Nazis the working class will deal with the rest. You have to pick and choose your battles. You can't be fighting everyone at the same time.

Moreover I have read a very interesting analysis how this situation with Moscow's support of the Crimean and South-Eastern revolts might very well lead to a change of regime in Moscow and possibly even to a full-fledged socialist revolution in Russia. The line of reasoning goes that because of inevitable sanctions and subsequent worsening of the quality of life of the Russian proletariat, against the backdrop of making sacrifices in solidarity with their Ukrainian brothers and sisters, the Russian proletariat will demand from the Putin regime drastic economic changes. Solidarity abroad necessitates solidarity at home. However, capitalists cannot compromise their wealth and profits, thus Putin's regime cannot rearrange Russian economy along more equitable lines. This in turn may very well lead to workers getting rid of the regime that demands so much of them but gives them so little.

I don't believe any of that. There's very little class consciousness in Russia and Ukraine and loads of chauvinism, authoritarian sentiment (e.g. preferring a strong leader over certain civil liberties).

And yet immediately after the putsch they started sending their boys to the East and South to make sure the populace remains compliant. Oh and don't forget how they started making more and more demands for state power from day one. First give them the official status of police. Then let them send political commissars to the army. Then let them arm themselves from the army bases. In an unstable coalition between "moderate" nationalists and Nazis, given enough time, Nazis always end up controlling everything.

And now Russia has given them the perfect excuse to demand more!

Nope. Never done that, never will. Had the situation been the same in reverse I would certainly have supported it if US troops could stop bloodshed. But interestingly enough try as I may, somehow I cannot recall even one instance where the US troops have prevented bloodshed through mere threats and non-violent display of military potency. Maybe you can help out?

I don't find it implausible that the US has invaded some tiny Caribbean island without bloodshed, but may I infer from this that you'll stop supporting the Russian troops as soon as fire is exchanged?

Seriously though, so that you cannot accuse me of being pro-Putin, or Russian nationalism or whatever nonsense you may come up

I doubt you are. Any such accusations I will make in the future wouldn't be accurate, but would be the result of frustration and tongue in cheek remarks.

with I am stating explicitly that I am not cheering on the Russian army, I don't give a shit about the Russian bourgeois state and its imperialist ambitions and that I instead, until the working class can get their act together will simply support that side that I analytically find in any specific situation gives the workers the better deal.
Or in other words, until perfection can be attained (if such is ever possible at all) improving things is better than not improving them.

I don't think it improves one bit.

If you are more comfortable taking the role of a passive disinterested observer then that's your choice, misanthrope.

Now that's a false dichotomy and a non-sequitur.

Hmm, seems you enjoy making threats. I think you should be banned for your misanthropy.

That doesn't even make sense. I hate misantrophists. Maybe I have a wrong definition of it, but I think it means contempt for humanity, which has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

Lying to hide your shame isn't going to improve the impression you already made.

I actually thought it was pretty clever, but you are not clever so I can understand your difficulty grasping the concept.

Not realistic? So the new fascist-including government wouldn't have taken steps to depose the Crimean Parliament and crackdown on the secessionists in Crimea if they had the chance to? They would have simply allowed Crimea to secede, eh? Haha, right.

No of course not. But the Constitution of Ukraine does permit succession through referendum.

These are Wehrmacht troops in Sudetenland in 1938, entering German-majority territories seceded by Czechoslovakia to Germany with Franco-British and American agreement. So, not an invasion. Nice try though.

On this day, Hitler's forces invade and occupy Czechoslovakia--a nation sacrificed on the altar of the Munich Pact, which was a vain attempt to prevent Germany's imperial aims.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/nazis-take-czechoslovakia

Invasion of Czechoslovakia

Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia was the end of appeasement:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/ir1/endofappeasementrev1.shtml

Sudetenland Invasion, October 1938

By March 1938, Hitler had successfully invaded Austria without a shot being fired. With one major German-speaking territory under his control he then turned his attention to another - the Sudeten area of Czechoslovakia.

Hitler wanted to use the Sudeten Germans to create trouble in Czechoslovakia and, as he had in the Rhineland and Austria, use this as a pretence for invading and "restoring order". ("It's not an invasion guize, promise! It's a peacekeeping operation" -- Hitler)

"peacekeeping operation" (Incidentally, before you point out that Hitler never said such a thing, you're right, it's a joke of sorts. I thought I'd clarify that for you since I know how difficult you find these things).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/history/roadwar/munich/revision/1/

http://historymad.stmaryscollegehull.co.uk/TempPages/Interwar/OI6F_Anschluss2.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1988-119-04A,_Anschluss_%C3%96sterreich.jpg
http://www.news.at/_storage/asset/3175401/storage/newsat:key-visual/file/31240401/german-soldier-accepting-crowd-adulation.jpg

An invasion branded as a sort of peacekeeping operation without a single shot being fired with cheerful people posing with the invading soldiers... You said none of that could happen, or that invasions don't look like that.

Can you make a single argument without resorting to stuffing shit I didn't say into my mouth? Altruism? Who said anything about altruism? Who said anything about humanitarianism? What are you rambling about?

Apparently you are unfamiliar with the concept of implying.

Sure thing buddy. Here is a definition of "invasion" from Wikipedia:

In the case of Crimea, the "aggressive" part is missing. There has been no aggressive entering of territory. Rather, the Russians were invited by the Crimean authorities. If there has been aggression, where are the bodybags and the injured?

Actually, I invite you to look up the word "aggression" as well then.

"the action of a state in violating by force the rights of another state, particularly its territorial rights; an unprovoked offensive, attack, invasion, or the like: The army is prepared to stop any foreign aggression."

Russian troops being inserted into the Crimea violates the sovereignty of Ukraine as they did not invite them, and therefore constitutes "aggression." It was an invasion and it was aggression.

Russia no more invaded Crimea than the UN invaded the Golan Heights.

I'm not sufficiently familiar with that example.

Accusations of idiocy from a man/clown of your caliber I consider compliments instead. So, thank you, sir.

Well here's another compliment: you are daft twat.

If the US stationed their troops in Crimea to prevent the Maidanists from bringing violence to the peninsula and to help Crimeans exercise their nature-given right of self-determination, I would congratulate Obama for doing at least this one right thing in his entire career. I am not a fan of unnecessary violence and bloodshed, preventing such things I consider progressive and worthwhile.

I don't even think you believe that yourself.

cyu

9th March 2014, 15:29

If you (general you - not directed at anybody in particular) were in Ukraine right now, and you had a weapon (sniper rifle, handgun, baseball bat, pitchfork, etc), what would you do in the following situations?

1. You hear that nationalist / fascist gangs are attacking people downtown. Would you go there to help either side? If so, which side? If not, would you make verbal or internet statements supporting either side? If so, which side?

2. You hear that pro-Russian forces are attacking people downtown. Would you go there to help either side? If so, which side? If not, would you make verbal or internet statements supporting either side? If so, which side?

3. You hear that nationalist / fascist gangs and pro-Russian forces are attacking people in different parts of town. Would you go there to defend people on any side? If so, where would you go first and who would you defend? If not, would you make verbal or internet statements supporting any side? If so, which side?

Tim Cornelis

9th March 2014, 17:17

aristos

9th March 2014, 17:31

Because the situation did not appear over night - foreseeing in what catastrophic direction things are going, I would attempt to create an armed insurrectionist group beforehand.
This group would then try to recruit more and more members by:
- explaining the situation (capitalist exploitation reaching almost insufferable proportions) to the people in detail
- appealing to anti-corruption and national-liberation sentiment, if those to be recruited are pro-maidan,
- appealing to anti-corruption and anti-xenophobia sentiment if those to be recruited are anti-maidan.

If luck is on our side and we make all the right moves, this could grow into a movement that (at least in the power it can project if not the amount of people) would eclipse both the Nazis/Ukrainian Nationalists as well as Russian Nationalists/Party of Regions supporters.

By playing both against each other as well as possibly presenting ourselves to US and Russia (separately) as a viable ascending force and a reliable partner (thus securing funds and arms from them) we might just be able to take power in the country.

Afterwards, playing both Russia and US against each other by making them court our favour, while executing radical socialist or masked socialist reforms and reviving industry to its past splendour and beyond, we would cement our position with the Ukrainian populace as well as start organizing revolutionary activity in neighbouring countries - Russia (would be a tough one though, because of how consolidated the state power is there), Moldova, Rumania, Belarus, Hungary, Slovakia, Georgia, if possible Serbia/Bosnia/Albania/Macedonia, as well as Latvia/Lithuania, supporting prospective anti-capitalist groups in Greece and if such exist in Turkey.

But if no such organization could be constructed and it would be just me with a rifle:

1) Would go to help the anti-fascist side but try to organize the anti-fascist resistance at least into a coherent battle formation. Would also conduct ambushes and raids on small groups of fascists (here any, even the most bloody, means go), try to take out the leaders.

2) Would try to find out who is it those forces are attacking and who the pro-Russian side actually are. If the pro-Russian gangs are Vlasovtsy or something similar see above.
If we are talking about the Eastern and Southern Regions, then if the pro-Russian faction are simply afraid of ethnic cleansing I would join their organization (would not fire any shots though), and then once inside their organization would try to calm them down and help organize a normal self-defence force, that would neither provoke nor try to put down those who are pro-maidan but would instead take all the key strategic objects in the region, create checkpoints and take any and all action to repel provable fascists. The pro-maidanists (as well as anti-maidanists), as long as they are not Nazis/Fascists, can participate in any rallies they want, we wouldn't touch them.

3) Situation is really bad! Would try to get out the place if it is viable. If not try to rally my friends and neighbours, occupy a building that could be well defended, procure as many weapons as possible, and barricade ourselves inside until the situation calms down.
If Nazis win and establish their official power and there is no hope for any meaningful resistance it's time for naked survival. So I would try to save my skin by joining them and collaborating/rising in rank until such point when I can safely flee the country/area.
If any other faction wins - the same, minus the fleeing part, unless the regime they establish is similarly repressive and dangerous like the Nazi one or I am confident that I will find better life abroad.

aristos

9th March 2014, 18:17

This is ridiculous. I'm not making an ought-statement, I'm making an is-statement. I don't care about national sovereignty or self-determination, but these categories are relevant in defining invasion.

So in other words you are operating with the framework of bourgeois international law.

I suppose then it makes sense to back the Russian ruling class and its imperialist agenda which have brought Ukraine and Russia to the brink of war.

NATO is just as if not more responsible for the situation. Before the protests started, where NATO right from the start rushed to the Nazi side (and even nurtured that faction long before the protests), Ukraine was just another impoverished corrupt East European country, just like many around it. The only "provocation" that came from the Russian side is they dared pressure Yanukovich to enter into a mutual trade agreement (they didn't even dropped insisting on Yanukovich not making similar agreements with EU when they understood he couldn't be pressured into it). US/EU answered with open hostilities and got that ball rolling.

How is it a Junta? I suspect you obfuscating the nature of the present regime in Kiev, and rebranding it a Junta as the Minister of Defence is a member of Svobodo and therefore the circle of calling Ukraine "Nazi Ukraine" or "Fasist Ukraine" fits. How is it a Junta?

If we are going to operate within the framework of international law and national law then it is a Junta by definition, because a group of non-elected people took power through the sheer use of force and violence. Call it a Putsch instead of a Junta - I don't care.

Also, since you want to insist on the Nazis playing a marginal role I will post this list again:

- the Prosecutor-General
- Secretary of the Security and National Defense Committee (so the entire military apparatus)
- Deputy Prime Minister for economic affairs
- Minister of Education (instilling Nazi worldview form the youngest age)
- Minister of Youth and Sports (organising terror training camps and recruiting youth into Right Sector gangs [Ukrainian version of the SA]
- Minister of Agriculture
- Minister of Ecology
- Chair of the Anti-Corruption Comittee (austerity measures and confiscations)

are all members of either Svoboda or the even more nefarious UNA-UNSO.

Moreover, Political Commissars from the Right Sector are now de jure and de facto in charge of the armed forces of Ukraine. (the only hope is that the individual commanders become insubordinate, but that is a slim prospect I fear)
Right Sector thugs have taken over policing duties in Kiev completely and are recognized as an official policing body by many (if not most) cops outside of Kiev.
The latest news is that they are now also in charge of the ballot printing part of the Central Electoral Commission in Kiev and are now occupying an entire floor of the CEC building - so expect them to be in charge of conducting and counting elections come May.
You can get beaten up if you don't join in the Nazi code-chant "Glory to Ukraine, Glory to the Heroes!"
The very first law that was enacted under the new administration was the repealing of the status of minority languages.
Ukraine's representative at the UN demanded that Bandera (http://warfiles.ru/show-44831-ne-dlya-slabonervnyh-zverstva-oun-upa-foto-fakty.html) and his genocidal regime be internationally rehabilitated.
It seems the administration is also giving up some military bases and armouries directly to Right Sector fighters.
All over the Ukrainian TV xenophobic remarks rule the day

I don't believe any of that. There's very little class consciousness in Russia and Ukraine and loads of chauvinism, authoritarian sentiment (e.g. preferring a strong leader over certain civil liberties).

So what do you propose be done not in in the abstract, but in this specific situation to raise class-consciousness?

I don't find it implausible that the US has invaded some tiny Caribbean island without bloodshed, but may I infer from this that you'll stop supporting the Russian troops as soon as fire is exchanged?

Yes, as soon as I see that the Russian troops and their involvement is doing more harm than good I will naturally not be supporting them.

That doesn't even make sense. I hate misantrophists. Maybe I have a wrong definition of it, but I think it means contempt for humanity, which has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

I mean it in the sense that you would rather "fiddle while Rome burns".

Thirsty Crow

9th March 2014, 18:32

I honestly wonder whether people in this thread actually believe that Russian intervention represents something positive and worthy of support by communists...maybe the most important question here is, positive for whom, more good than harm to whom actually?

Tim Cornelis

9th March 2014, 19:08

So in other words you are operating with the framework of bourgeois international law.

In other words you missed the point. Another ridiculous assertion. So if I were to say, for instance, war generally is generally understood to be between two sovereign countries, I'm "operating with the framework of bourgeois international law" for using appropriate, everyday definitions. :rolleyes: It has nothing to do with law, international or otherwise.

NATO is just as if not more responsible for the situation. Before the protests started, where NATO right from the start rushed to the Nazi side (and even nurtured that faction long before the protests), Ukraine was just another impoverished corrupt East European country, just like many around it.

Given your dubious track record of reiterating Russian propaganda you've established, I'm very skeptical of this being true.

The only "provocation" that came from the Russian side is they dared pressure Yanukovich to enter into a mutual trade agreement (they didn't even dropped insisting on Yanukovich not making similar agreements with EU when they understood he couldn't be pressured into it). US/EU answered with open hostilities and got that ball rolling.

Which hostilities would that be?

If we are going to operate within the framework of international law and national law then it is a Junta by definition, because a group of non-elected people took power through the sheer use of force and violence.

That's not a junta. I doubt international law has a definition for junta even.

Call it a Putsch instead of a Junta - I don't care.

Might as well call it an absolute monarchy if you're going to disregard the meaning of words.

Also, since you want to insist on the Nazis playing a marginal role

You just pulled that our of your arse.

So what do you propose be done not in in the abstract, but in this specific situation to raise class-consciousness?

I don't necessarily think this is a period in which class consciousness and socialist politics can gain momentum. Emphasising through all available instruments that this is a war between ruling classes for which the working class will bleed is the only means (http://libcom.org/news/internationalists-issue-declaration-against-war-ukraine-02032014) but usually nationalism fervor sweeps nations in times of war.

Yes, as soon as I see that the Russian troops and their involvement is doing more harm than good I will naturally not be supporting them.

Then the whole premise for why you support them being there is flawed in the very first place! You say you support Russian troops because they protect against the fascists, but then if it comes to clashes between them, you withdraw support! How does occupying the Crimea defend Jews in Kiev?

I mean it in the sense that you would rather "fiddle while Rome burns".

Would you say the same about those whom objected to World War 1?

aristos

9th March 2014, 19:29

Those hostilities would be escalating the protests. It is well known that the whole operation was funded by the US and EU. The Nazis existed there independently of the US of course, but were pretty marginal. They grew thanks to targeted funding.
As I said, Yanukovich was not opposed to trade with the EU, nor was the Russian government for that matter, but for the EU it had to be all or nothing - an exclusive deal. Yanukovich counted his pennies and it became clear to him that the conditions that the EU were offering were extortionate and insupportable. Not because he is such a caring person, but because Ukraine would have plunged into an economic death-spiral with or without him if accepting those conditions. He didn't want to go, so took what he considered a better deal (which it purely economically was). EU wouldn't accept such a choice and the riots started.

In WW1 I would have tried to organize a proletarian insurrection. What the Bolsheviks actually did. But I wouldn't preach peace and love, that's for sure.

Tim Cornelis

9th March 2014, 22:22

Those hostilities would be escalating the protests.

And how did they do that? Exporting agent provocateurs?

It is well known that the whole operation was funded by the US and EU.

Perhaps in Russian speaking media, I've never read a single letter about it.

The Nazis existed there independently of the US of course, but were pretty marginal. They grew thanks to targeted funding.

That'd be really stupid, what use would neo-Nazis have to the USA? The main opposition were neoliberal moderates with pro-EU sentiment, all the EU-USA could ask for -- the ideal partner. I don't see what strategic value funding neo-Nazis would have to them.

The reason they grew in influence is because they were well-organised and prepared and managed to mobilise their members and sympathisers in great numbers (due to their committed beliefs), this allowed them to become the vanguard of the movement.

As I said, Yanukovich was not opposed to trade with the EU, nor was the Russian government for that matter, but for the EU it had to be all or nothing - an exclusive deal.

Which presupposes that the EU instigated these protests, do you have a source for that?

Yanukovich counted his pennies and it became clear to him that the conditions that the EU were offering were extortionate and insupportable. Not because he is such a caring person, but because Ukraine would have plunged into an economic death-spiral with or without him if accepting those conditions. He didn't want to go, so took what he considered a better deal (which it purely economically was). EU wouldn't accept such a choice and the riots started.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

In WW1 I would have tried to organize a proletarian insurrection. What the Bolsheviks actually did. But I wouldn't preach peace and love, that's for sure.

Sure.

PhoenixAsh

9th March 2014, 22:50

Lets be extremely clear on some issues.

The Kiev government maybe of debatable legitimacy (if this is at all relevant) but it is NOT a military led government and therefore NOT a Junta.

The Kiev government is also NOT a fascist government...it does however have fascists partaking in that government and they hold to greater or lesser extend influence over decision making. This does not mean we shouldn't worry but it also does not mean we should overstate the real issue in lieu of a proper analysis.

The Russians are NOT there out of the kindness of their hearts. Nor are they there to fight fascism. ANY claim that Putin is there on some anti-fascist mission is completely ludicrous and delusional.

This is pretty much a clash between bourgeoisie factions whose loyalty and class interests collide based on where their profit margins and powerbase comes from (EU/US vs Russia) fueled by imperialist interests and backed by foreign money and aid...on BOTH sides.

There is NO objective reason the Crimean population cannot enact the same kind of situation the Miadan protesters created and declare independence...or wrestle control from an unwanted government.

Tim Cornelis

9th March 2014, 23:50

So much for it being a "peacekeeping operation":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFlLN9E2kcY&feature=youtu.be&t=8m23s

What the Ukrainian officers say seems plausible, the Russian troops evidently momentarily assumed control over this base and then leave (as seen in the video). If there's indeed a pattern and they do so continually there seems to be no other reason than trying to provoke the Ukrainian troops.

ckaihatsu

10th March 2014, 23:53

U.S. and EU face opposition in Ukraine

By David Hungerford

The crisis in Ukraine is driven by outside forces, the U.S. and the European Union. Their aim is to gain control of the country and plunder it of everything they can get their hands on.

Ukraine has been atrociously run for a long time. It has almost $140 billion in foreign debt. There is little prospect of it being able to repay without help or devaluation. The U.S. and the EU have played on this economic weakness and other internal divisions to overthrow the government of President Victor Yanukovich, which, however imperfect, was democratically elected. In February, a junta with no constitutional legitimacy was imposed by violence. It was quickly designated as the ‘government’ by the U.S. and the EU.

Ukraine lies to the southeast of Poland. It is almost as big as Texas. The population is 45 million. The Russian language and identity as a people originated in Ukraine. It is closely bound to Russia. Historically, that separation was a prime goal of the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union in World War II. People have not forgotten. There is massive and intense rejection in both countries of the aims of the U.S. and the EU. The people’s opposition to the U.S. and the EU is an important political factor in the crisis.

Protests began last year in the Euromaidan square of the capital city, Kiev. Many people were there because they were sick of seeing one gang of thieves in power follow another in power to line their pockets, while the overall economic conditions got worse and worse.

The protests were polluted by other influences. Since the Orange Revolution of 2004, the U.S. has poured $5 billion into Ukraine in order to buy friends, set up NGOs and find political allies. Beneficiaries include the CIA-linked National Endowment for Democracy. Another is the Nazi-connected Svoboda Party. It traces directly back to the Organization of Ukrainian Unity (OUN) that, during WW II, set up a partisan army that fought against the Soviet Union alongside the Nazi invaders [see note 1]. The Nazi connection is so flagrant that there have been some misgivings about Svoboda even in the thoroughly tamed U.S. media.

At first there was little violence in the protests. The security forces generally had control of the streets. The situation turned bloody on Feb. 20 as dozens of people were killed by sniper fire. The western media were quick to blame the government of President Victor Yanukovich, despite the fact that 13 policemen were among the dead. It has since been revealed that the snipers were put there by some force outside the Yanukovich government [see note 2].

The tide turned against the security forces as Svoboda and a neo-Nazi faction called the Right Sector resorted to Molotov cocktails, bricks and baseball bats to overwhelm police forces that still were forbidden the use of deadly force. On Feb. 21 the police forces were withdrawn to the police stations and Yanukovich abdicated.

The circumstances were spelled out in a March 4 press conference by Russian President Vladimir Putin. He confirmed something that had been rumored already.

Putin said: “President Yanukovych, through the mediation of the Foreign Ministers of three European countries – Poland, Germany and France – and in the presence of my representative (this was the Russian Human Rights Commissioner Vladimir Lukin) signed an agreement with the opposition on February 21. I would like to stress that under that agreement (I am not saying this was good or bad, just stating the fact) Mr Yanukovych actually handed over power. He agreed to all the opposition’s demands: he agreed to early parliamentary elections, to early presidential elections, and to return to the 2004 Constitution, as demanded by the opposition.” [see note 3].

On the basis of its imposition by the foreign ministers of Germany, France and Poland, the Feb. 21 coup d’etat has been called Munich II. The reference is to the infamous Munich Conference of September, 1938 in which Britain, with the cooperation of France and Italy, connived to hand the Sudetenland area of Czechoslovakia over to Adolf Hitler. The joint aim was to provide Hitler with a corridor to the east by which he could infiltrate, subvert and break up Ukraine prior to a full invasion of the Soviet Union.

Munich ended what little hope there was to avoid World War II.

At about the same time as the March 4 press conference, Russia moved 6000 troops into the Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula that is the southernmost region of Ukraine. U.S. President Barack Obama reacted by saying, “Since the Russian intervention, we’ve been mobilizing the international community to condemn this violation of international law and to support the people and government of Ukraine.” He also threatened sanctions.

Obama’s statement was a strange thing coming from the government with the worst record in the world for violations of other countries’ sovereignty. Russia has large military bases in Ukraine and by treaty has rights to station up to 25,000 servicepersons there. The troop movement was within the treaty limits, therefore lawful.

The Russian reaction to the U.S. threats was fury, in the government and among the people [see note 4]. The parliament passed a measure allowing Mr. Putin full authority to take whatever military action he felt necessary. A plebiscite for independence from Ukraine is scheduled for Crimea on March 16. Crimean secession would unsettle the grip of the junta. The war of words is heating up but there is little the U.S. can do.

The U.S. has landed itself in another quagmire. It has seized control of a heavily indebted country it cannot bail out except through draconian measures that would further rouse the people. It has gained power through the neo-Nazi Svoboda and Right Sector, and this will place it conflict with the broad masses of people.

The Nazis have toppled statues of Lenin and defaced monuments to the heroes of WW II. The people’s fury has been expressed already in huge rallies against the junta and the Nazi brown shirts in Donetsk and Dniepropetrovsk.

The EU is lukewarm about economic sanctions, which would especially cost Britain and Germany a lot of business. They have little reason to pass up profits so the U.S. could heap the plunder on Washington D.C.’s plate. A lot of daylight has opened up between Europe and the U.S. Coming out of Munich I, Britain thought it had a deal with Germany to fight the Soviet Union. It did not turn out that way.

The situation is very dangerous. The track record of U.S. imperialism is that it is great at going into other countries and getting into trouble, but terrible at getting itself out. It is losing in its effort of more than two years to destabilize and subvert Syria, and doing badly at the same game in Venezuela. Hawks like John McCain and Lindsey Graham make political hay by tough talk about things that would only bring disaster. The people of the world must take a strong stand against these aggressions and help defeat them. That is the only way to safeguard world peace.

Notes:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/protests-in-ukraine-supported-by-us-and-eu-both-covert-and-overt/5371869?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=protests-in-ukraine-supported-by-us-and-eu-both-covert-and-overt
http://rt.com/news/ashton-maidan-snipers-estonia-946/
http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/6763
http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2014/03/obama-just-made-things-much-much-worse.html

Read more News and Views from the Peoples Struggle at http://www.fightbacknews.org. You can write to us at [email protected]

This email was sent to [email protected]
why did I get this? unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences
Fight Back! News · P.O. Box 582564 · Minneapolis, MN 55440 · USA