The situation in Crimea and "national liberation"

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Something I've been thinking of - doesn't the situation in Crimea show how "national liberation" as a strategy and principled goal lead to a dead end? Ukrainians are essentially caught between Russian and EU domination, so the Ukrainians sought some kind of national liberation from Russia. This leads to Ukraine's new government abolishing Russian as a language equal to Ukrainian, and fears from Russians in Crimea that their rights will be extinguished by the new government. Yet if their demands were met, it would not serve the interests of national liberation among the Tatars in Crimea, who understandably fear Russian domination after experiencing Stalin's ethnic cleansing effort in the 40s.

I don't think this is exactly an old story - Indian national liberation did not liberate many of the tribal groups, and certainly Kashmiri Muslims felt left behind. Mugabe fought for the national liberation of blacks against whites, but one of his first acts was to oppress the Ndebele nation. Burma sought national liberation from Britain, but have enforced it by repressing minority nations like the Shan.

This, of course, is aside from the problem that each of these "nationalities" have their own bourgeoisie which is exploiting the working class regardless of nationality.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Not at all really because consistent proponents of national liberation don't equate it with the support of nationalism. We aren't really concerned with re-drawing the borders insomuch as the fact that we are consistent opponents of the global imperialist system. Because imperialism has prevented the basic democratic aspects of the bourgeois project from being fulfilled on an international level and has formed a unique and complimentary oppression which operates parallel to capitalism it becomes necessary to support certain peoples oppressed by imperialism as a part of a global strategy of defeating the beast.

So to answer your question, I don't really see how this has anything to do with national liberation unless you think that national liberation occurs when Scotland succeeds from the UK or when some other line on a map is redrawn. Because imperialism oppresses nations on a national level it becomes important to engage these conflicts as a part of anti-imperialist praxis. It is true that the Ukrainian people have historically been oppressed by foreign domination and that their country hosts a privileged strata of creole settlers, the Russian and Russian speaking Ukrainian population which has benefited from the subigation of the broader Ukrainian population. If a genuine anti-imperialist movement emerged something similar to Hugo Chaves and his ilk then I would have supported it and I have to say that it's unfortunate the turn Ukrainian politics has made due to the fact that it is ripe for an anti-imperialist pole to emerge. The recent protests had this possibility but the fact there existed no progressive elements to take this cause forward led to the natural result of comprador nationalists supporting the EU facing off with a Russian puppet government.

[Alexios]

"Consistent supporters of national liberation don't support nationalism, except for when they do."

[Tim Cornelis]

If a genuine anti-imperialist movement emerged something similar to Hugo Chaves and his ilk then I would have supported it

How is the bourgeois head of a capitalist nation-state that sought to become the geopolitical leader of a continent and was involved at least one territorial dispute is "genuine[ly] anti-imperialist". Chavez was anti-imperialist insofar he challenged Washington, and no more anti-imperialist than Putin.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Yeah pretty nothing nothing in Ukraine has anything to do with National Liberation. Anyone speaking of nationalism is speaking of right-nationalism. Not even Left-bourgeois nationalism.

Check back in in 1938 and see if you are going to equate anything like this with National Liberation.

[ckaihatsu]

Yeah pretty nothing nothing in Ukraine has anything to do with National Liberation. Anyone speaking of nationalism is speaking of right-nationalism. Not even Left-bourgeois nationalism.

Check back in in 1938 and see if you are going to equate anything like this with National Liberation.


I'm going to try a nuanced argument here and say that I have to admit I'm kind of impressed with what the protestors / rioters did with Yanukovich's estate, though -- turned all that shit into state / public property since the work to generate all of that wealth came from the people anyway. It's like a nationalization of feudal-like spoils, if not the country's productive machinery itself.

No argument over the *general* politics of the situation and where it's going.

[PhoenixAsh]

I am going to say that the outrage over Yanukovich estate is pretty hypocritical and not rooted into any sense of class struggle but is a personification. The same situation applied to countless of politicians before him and these politicians are now hailed as heroes and even prospective new presidents....and...when they get elected or pushed forward...will probably do the exact same as Yanukovich.

So no...not very impressed. If it would have been a sincere indignation about presidents and possession...then maybe.

[ckaihatsu]

I am going to say that the outrage over Yanukovich estate is pretty hypocritical and not rooted into any sense of class struggle but is a personification. The same situation applied to countless of politicians before him and these politicians are now hailed as heroes and even prospective new presidents....and...when they get elected or pushed forward...will probably do the exact same as Yanukovich.

So no...not very impressed. If it would have been a sincere indignation about presidents and possession...then maybe.


Hmmmmm, okay -- noted.

[red flag over teeside]

National Liberation struggles do not negate class struggle rather it's only through independent working class struggles that nationalism can be negated. Show me one successfull national liberation struggle that has not lead to the continued exploitation of the working class. The Ukraine will end up the same way as will the Crimea with a capitalist class in charge.

[Devrim]

Yeah pretty nothing nothing in Ukraine has anything to do with National Liberation.

Why?

Devrim

[Die Neue Zeit]

Chavez was anti-imperialist insofar he challenged Washington, and no more anti-imperialist than Putin.

Putin has a sphere of influence. Chavez didn't, so how was he no more anti-imperialist?

[Rusty Shackleford]

Why?

Devrim

The Ukrainian nationalists are not trying to split the west from the east, rhetorically at least. The Russians are manufacturing some issues in Crimea where the aim of more autonomy is led by people that have lived there for only a few generations, and the Tatar people are ignored, uninvolved for the most part, and a severe minority in 'their' land.

[Tim Cornelis]

Putin has a sphere of influence. Chavez didn't, so how was he no more anti-imperialist?

That just means Russia is higher on the scale of 'imperialism'. Chavez certainly aspired to create a sphere of influence, in Latin America especially. That he lacked such a sphere of influence merely means he was not (yet) successful.

Unless we consider ALBA his sphere of influence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALBA

[GerrardWinstanley]

I think Russia's reasons for intervening in the Crimea are far more prosaic than national liberation for Ukraine's ethnic Russians. The threats to Russia's national security posed by a US-backed Neo-Nazi regime (installed by an illegal act of war, however covert) on its doorstep are manifest. In addition, Ukraine's legitimate leaders requested Russia's help. The national socialist regime has no right to cry 'sovereignty' when they illegally seized power with CIA and US state department funds and weapons.

I share your position on the question of dividing Ukraine, which is why Russia should act sooner rather than later. Nazi Ukraine has already threatened to have nuclear weapons up and running within six months. Taking the Crimea will bring Russia closer to neutralising them.

[GerrardWinstanley]

That just means Russia is higher on the scale of 'imperialism'. Chavez certainly aspired to create a sphere of influence, in Latin America especially. That he lacked such a sphere of influence merely means he was not (yet) successful.

Unless we consider ALBA his sphere of influence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALBAWhy are you using the phrase 'sphere of influence' interchangeably with 'imperialism'? States entering into agreements voluntarily (even where one state is setting the agenda for others or doing so out of naked self-interest) is soft power at the very most. Does Venezuela demand exclusive access to the resources of ALBA's member states, dictate political ideology [under the threat of bombing them] and economic policy. Is there a strong case to say the relationship is exploitative (surely anything amounting to 'imperialism' would have to satisfy that condition?)?

[Tim Cornelis]

Why are you using the phrase 'sphere of influence' interchangeably with 'imperialism'?

Because:


Putin has a sphere of influence. Chavez didn't, so how was he no more anti-imperialist?

Why does Yet another boring "Marxist" not answer my question?

[Sasha]

I share your position on the question of dividing Ukraine, which is why Russia should act sooner rather than later. Nazi Ukraine has already threatened to have nuclear weapons up and running within six months. Taking the Crimea will bring Russia closer to neutralising them.

where the fuck are you getting all this utter nonsense, ukraine doesnt have any nuclear weapons anymore, they dont have the technology either, they gave it all away in 1996 (note, all 1.000 of their nukes!) to fucking russia under the promise that Russia would respect its territorial integrity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukraine
so while maybe some ultra-nationalist idiot said something along the lines of "if russia doesn't keep their end of the deal we want our nukes back" that doesn't mean its an feasible possibility, which maybe means you shouldn't spread it, it makes you seem like a deranged tool (even more than normally)

[Tim Cornelis]

I think Russia's reasons for intervening in the Crimea are far more prosaic than national liberation for Ukraine's ethnic Russians. The threats to Russia's national security posed by a US-backed Neo-Nazi regime (installed by an illegal act of war, however covert) on its doorstep are manifest. In addition, Ukraine's legitimate leaders requested Russia's help. The national socialist regime has no right to cry 'sovereignty' when they illegally seized power with CIA and US state department funds and weapons.

I share your position on the question of dividing Ukraine, which is why Russia should act sooner rather than later. Nazi Ukraine has already threatened to have nuclear weapons up and running within six months. Taking the Crimea will bring Russia closer to neutralising them.

>Nazi Ukraine

Holy shit. I fucking hate pars pro toto, cognitive rigidity.

>legitimate leaders

Does this mean you think they are legitimate?

>Russia should act

Does this mean you support Russia's imperialist aggression. I fucking hate it when "imperialism is only when the US does it." Iraq invaded because of alleged WMDs? "OMG! Imperialist US scum!!!!". Ukraine invaded, supposedly threatened with apparently non-existent WMDs? "Russia has a legitimate ground for an intervention to safeguard its ... blah blah blah".

[aristos]

>Nazi Ukraine
Holy shit. I fucking hate pars pro toto, cognitive rigidity.


Oh really?
Is the Ukrainian army now becoming officially subordinate to the Right Sector a "pars pro toto"?
Or that their thugs now constitute the bulk of the new police, going around and extorting, robbing, arresting, kidnapping, torturing and killing people (based on lack of loyalty and ethnicity no less)?
Or that all the moderators and celebrities and politicians on Ukrainian television are falling all over themselves coming up with xenophobic and genocidal remarks à la "Crimea will be either Ukrainian or empty", "it's good to learn Russian only if to interrogate prisoners", "Suitcase - Train Station - Moscow" and such?

Or the fact that
- 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?

Same old, same old. Not all anti-Bashar fighters are Salafists, right?




Does this mean you support Russia's imperialist aggression.


Who exactly is it they are aggressing? The inhabitants of Crimea who overwhelmingly pleaded for Russian troops to come in and protect them?
Or do you want to first see horrible ethnic cleansing and rivers of blood before your highness deems they can act (maybe not even then)?
Oh I know, how come I didn't see it before, they have surely committed an act of aggression against the US Navy that is surrounding the area as we speak. Those pesky Russkies, being so mean to the democratic military-industrial complex of the West!

[Per Levy]

Who exactly is it they are aggressing?

well against the ukraine of course, you know ignoring the national independence that so many leftists are obsessed about but only seem to care when the west threatens national independence of whatever nation.


The inhabitants of Crimea who overwhelmingly pleaded for Russian troops to come in and protect them?
Or do you want to first see horrible ethnic cleansing and rivers of blood before your highness deems they can act (maybe not even then)?
Oh I know, how come I didn't see it before, they have surely committed an act of aggression against the US Navy that is surrounding the area as we speak.

oh i didnt know how humanitarian and selfless russia is in this conflict, they totally dont have economic or hegemonial interests in that region at all.


Those pesky Russkies, being so mean to the democratic military-industrial complex of the West!

those "pesky Russkies" also have no military-industrial complex or what? or is the russian military-industrial complex/capitalism/imperialism so much "nicer" since you are in full support of it?

anyway, can we restrict supporters of russian imperialism? as we do with supporters of western imperialism?

[Tim Cornelis]

Oh really?
Is the Ukrainian army now becoming officially subordinate to the Right Sector a "pars pro toto"?
Or that their thugs now constitute the bulk of the new police, going around and extorting, robbing, arresting, kidnapping, torturing and killing people (based on lack of loyalty and ethnicity no less)?
Or that all the moderators and celebrities and politicians on Ukrainian television are falling all over themselves coming up with xenophobic and genocidal remarks à la "Crimea will be either Ukrainian or empty", "it's good to learn Russian only if to interrogate prisoners", "Suitcase - Train Station - Moscow" and such?

Or the fact that
- 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?

Yes, that is pars pro toto. I think you start to get it now.


Same old, same old. Not all anti-Bashar fighters are Salafists, right?

Exactly.


Who exactly is it they are aggressing? The inhabitants of Crimea who overwhelmingly pleaded for Russian troops to come in and protect them?
Or do you want to first see horrible ethnic cleansing and rivers of blood before your highness deems they can act (maybe not even then)?
Oh I know, how come I didn't see it before, they have surely committed an act of aggression against the US Navy that is surrounding the area as we speak. Those pesky Russkies, being so mean to the democratic military-industrial complex of the West!

You're 100% right. This is why I supported the US invasion of Libya and Iraq and Afghanistan. Who exactly is it they are aggressing? The inhabitants of these countries who overwhelmingly wanted for US troops to come in and liberate them?

You're an idiot.

[aristos]

well against the ukraine of course, you know ignoring the national independence that so many leftists are obsessed about but only seem to care when the west threatens national independence of whatever nation.

Seeing how I haven't "obsessed" about national independence anywhere on this forum, I'm not sure why this is addressed to me?
Oh and what exactly did this supposed Russian aggression against Ukraine entail?
Could you provide details in this regard, I'm waiting with baited breath.

Anyway, if anyone needs to be restricted it's the apologists of Ukrainian fascism, who are consistently trying to downplay its central role in Ukrainian politics even when the obviousness of the fact is inescapable.

[Tim Cornelis]

Seeing how I haven't "obsessed" about national independence anywhere on this forum, I'm not sure why this is addressed to me?
Oh and what exactly did this supposed Russian aggression against Ukraine entail?
Could you provide details in this regard, I'm waiting with baited breath.

smh, another one of those idiots. Aggression in that it invaded another country.

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.

It objectively is aggression on Russia's part.


Anyway, if anyone needs to be restricted it's the apologists of Ukrainian fascism, who are consistently trying to downplay its central role in Ukrainian politics even when the obviousness of the fact is inescapable.

They don't exist, whereas supporters of Russian imperialism are very real.

[aristos]

smh, another one of those idiots. Aggression in that it invaded another country.

Russia invaded Ukraine? When? How? This is news to me, please explain. In detail, if you can.

However it seems to me that it is you who is "obsessing over national liberation" , since for you the territorial integrity of the bourgeois state known as Ukraine seems to be something unassailable, something to be preserved.
What was that about workers not having any country...

[aristos]

Originally Posted by aristos
Oh really?
Is the Ukrainian army now becoming officially subordinate to the Right Sector a "pars pro toto"?
Or that their thugs now constitute the bulk of the new police, going around and extorting, robbing, arresting, kidnapping, torturing and killing people (based on lack of loyalty and ethnicity no less)?
Or that all the moderators and celebrities and politicians on Ukrainian television are falling all over themselves coming up with xenophobic and genocidal remarks à la "Crimea will be either Ukrainian or empty", "it's good to learn Russian only if to interrogate prisoners", "Suitcase - Train Station - Moscow" and such?

Or the fact that
- 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?

Yes, that is pars pro toto. I think you start to get it now.

Originally Posted by aristos
Same old, same old. Not all anti-Bashar fighters are Salafists, right?

Exactly.


I really wanted to answer with something insulting to your pathological denial, but I think the juxtaposition of my factual information to your hand-waving speaks for itself.

I'm interested though, what would signify for you that the state apparatus and the everyday life of the citizens in Ukraine is actually being controlled by fascists?
Would a personal letter from the Junta there acknowledging this fact satisfy your sky-high standards of skepticism? Would anything?

[ckaihatsu]

http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/news/crimea-referendum-the-hidden.html