"Ukraine is a war between two predators, there are no lesser evils"

[Sasha]

Ukraine is a war between two predators, there are no lesser evils


Posted by Sietededos on Mar - 27 - 2014

ALBERTO BUITRE / OFICIO ROJO – Oleg Yasinsky is a Ukrainian journalist, living in Chile. His perspective of the Ukrainian conflict is unique from a natural point of view. He’s from Ukraine and like a few he knows in Spanish what is going on there, from an historic perspective.
I’ve chat with him about it and his analysis is really interesting.
Even though many sectors of the global left defend the steps taken by Vladimir Putin against the fascism in Kiev and the US/EU intervention, the reality show us that Russia is just another imperialism which aims to sack the Ukrainian labor class to favor the Russian capital.
To put it into words: “Let’s take a good look and we will see in his fangs and claws the same human blood. Is a war between predators and none of them is innocent neither less evil.”
Next is the interview, that some may not like, but without doubt offers a forgotten perspective, here what matters is the people and the Ukrainian labor class, Without imperialism, neither American nor Russian.



OFICIO ROJO: We know the crysis in Ukraine started due to the conflict between the ones who favors the EU or Russia, please give us an historical context for what’s actually happening in the country.
OLEG YASINSKY: The actual show of Ukraine started with the historical fraud known as Perestrioka. The power in the new independent republics was taken by criminal groups, the privatization of the Soviet heritage and the looting of the natural resources was managed by the ex-first secretaries of the communist party that in a matter of days turned to anti-communist and Pinochet admirers.
Later the new oligarch groups and a new politic class were formed to defend their interests, the most corrupt government in the short history of the Ukrainian republic was by far the one of the recently defeated Victor Yanukovich, who was the closest ally to Putin’s government, defending the interests of the Russian capital.
A popular rebellion ended his government, but it didn’t managed to become a revolution, because from the start was controlled by far right groups.
Behind these groups and the new government in Kiev lies the Interests of the European and American capital, the IMF and NATO, with this change they try to extend themselves to the western border of Russia.
Inside this all this the Ukrainian lest is nowhere to be seen, because the traditional Communist and Socialist parties have from the beginning been with Oligarch groups and have done a huge damage to the socialist ideas in the country, that today are being seen as Stalinism or with other opportunistic parties.
Something similar happens with the Russian Communist Party, which is one of the most conservatives and right-wing parties and loyal ally of Putin, since there’s no alternatives in the left, the post-Soviet right and far right keep growing.

OR: Is in Ukraine possible to say that the first fascist coup in modern European history have taken place?
OY: This term have been used by Putin’s propaganda to justify the pressure and possibly a military invasion to another sovereign country, well supposedly sovereign.
I can be wrong but instead of a Fascist coup, i would rather talk about a civil rebellion that put in power the most right-wing government in Europe, this government lacks institutional legitimacy, is Neoliberal with an 8% of Nazi movements and organizations representatives, some will say that in Kiev a fascist coup took place, I live in Chile and for me a fascist coup is another thing.
Victor Yanukovich’s government apart from being absolutely corrupt reached to control every power of the state and he despised any democratic procedure, there didn’t exist legal mechanism in the country or conditions to change that power.
Following the questions logic we could also call coup the Nicaraguan Revolution that ended the tyranny of Somoza’s clan. The problem of Ukraine resides that instead of the Sandinistas there were the far right nationalists that pushed the weak and unpopular government of Yanukovich to its fall, that way the rebellion of the Ukrainians against the corruption and mafia in power created another power, even more dangerous to the people than the former.
But talking about a “Fascist Government” or a “Fascist coup” in Ukraine sound more like propaganda than reality to me.



OR: What is the origin of the fascist groups that assaulted Kiev in the so called Euromaidan?
OY: I think it has to do with the huge void generated by the absence of the left. Why? An important part of the Ukrainian left was annihilated during Stalin’s era. Later after WW2 the Soviet model of socialism, dogmatic and bureaucratic turned into a double standards school where the new generations of professional opportunists was formed, they were an important part of the Soviet republic’s socialist parties, and when the “real socialism” fell, they were the first to change the jacket and support the neoliberal reforms.
The actual Communist parties of the ex-USSR are just living fossils and allies of the capitalist governments. Let’s add to this sad reality a huge anti-communist campaign in the main Ukrainian and Russian media that after 25 years have not stopped… Result: the left pretty much doesn’t exists.
The strong social problems created by the restoration of a savage capitalism in the ex-USSR, the conscious destruction of the historic memory of its peoples and the massive propaganda of the capitalist antivalues in the media, lead the desperate people to find for irrational answers to their real and urgent problems. And fascism appears like one of the first offers, like always disguised as patriotic nationalism and other covers that sell.
In a time when the traditional parties are being rejected by the people, the fascism appears as a Young, creative, energetic, force, able to offer the people simple and concrete solutions.
After the “orange revolution” of 2004, the pro-western government of Victor Yuschenko officially recognized the Ukrainian anti-communist guerrilla UNA UNOS and even honored them, from the beginning his politic rival the pro-Russian president Victor Yanukovich gave green light to the neo-Nazi movement Svoboda, thinking in his reelection for the second term and wishing to confront a fascist rival, which should have ensured him success.
The president was wrong. Svoboda and his Nazis allies were active and creative, they grew without competition and during the last few months they surpassed the support of Yanukovich’s corrupt government.

OR: Do the people who took power in Kiev have any real future?
OY: If we are talking of Svoboda and his allies, that are more visible in the media, but they aren’t the only ones that took power in Kiev, an Russian invasion would be a great gift for them because then they would have a real cause to fight for, everything that has to do with war, national pride, patriotic marches and other idiocies is their terrain. It’s what they dream about. And the Russian government is about to deliver all of that to them.
Also, an eventual war would justify the cuts in social expenses, a bigger dependency on their western allies and banks allies, suspension of personal freedoms and rights to dissent and the persecution of political opponents… But that’s already another issue…

OR: The propaganda talks a lot of “Russia yes” and “Russia no” for Ukraine as a country, but what does the Ukrainian labor class wants?
OY: You would have to ask them. I guess they don’t want to serve the interests of their masters who are just about to start a war. I don’t think there exists a big importance between the nationalities of the oligarchs, because their money has no country. The future deaths neither.
I also guess that big countries can’t invade others because they just don’t like their governments or to defend their “vital interests”. You can invade if there’s a genocide and there’s no other way to stop it. For example in 1978 when Vietnam invaded Cambodia to liberate it from the horrors of Pol Pot, but that’s not the case in Ukraine.
I think it’s sad that many leftist media lose all capacity to critic and they turn to Putin’s government, I think many still confuse the Soviet Union with Russia, a country with the most savage of capitalisms, anti-communist in essence, very corrupted and under the control of oligarch groups, I think we must not fall under the blackmail of “lesser evil”.
Being Ukrainian my first language is Russian and i identify myself a lot more with the Russian culture than with the Ukrainian, I think with my words I’m not attacking Russia nor wrongly defending Ukraine.
In this historical moment Russia has way more resources to offer “more convenient” income to its population. Despite tremendous social injustice, Russia now is way better economically than a decade ago, Seeing it that way many will say that being part of Russia is more convenient than being part of Ukraine, But we also know that not everything is measured by money and opportunities and I know that many Ukrainian workers will choose to stay with this real Ukraine of today and fight for it, so one day this country can be theirs. Speaking about Ukrainians I mean all the people of all the Ukrainian born ethnicities.



OR: Will Ukraine be the jewel in dispute between two imperialisms, Russian-BRICS and the Euro-American?
OY: We don’t know, in the long run what will matter is the maturity of the Ukrainian people and also the international solidarity.
That’s why I think is very important not to fall in this logic of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”, and if we consider ourselves against imperialism and left-wing, to not defend the ethically no indefensible.
We need a NO to this war, the one that neoliberalism is about to unleash on humanity. In this days I remember the Che and his idea of the movement of unaligned countries… We ne a left unaligned with any power.
This war “against the Nazis” in Kiev makes me remember the war “against terrorism” of Bush and promises to have similar effects, And with that of “defending the Russian population” i remember in 1980 when the United States invaded the Little island of Grenada under that pretext, any difference?
It’s not about the anti-fascist convictions of Putin. His most evident reasons are: the defense of the capital of Russian economic groups; looking for more popularity through chauvinism that always generate wars (in the last ten days his popularity grew by almost 10%), the need to intimidate the Russian opposition groups and the desire to show that Russia is a superpower just like the US that can act to protect its interests.
Also a considerable part of the Russian people still thinks that Ukraine doesn’t exists, because we Ukrainians are some kind of Russian and we speak a funny dialect of Russian. The per-capita amount of neo-nazis may be bigger in Russia than in Ukraine… Why don’t they care of their own fascist first?



OR: What is your opinion about the Russian annexation of Crimea?
OY: First a bit of context.
Crimea was a gift to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic by the Soviet Union in 1954. In those times it didn’t matter much, because the differences between the republics of the USSR were symbolic and it was a single country.
In the 60 years of being part of Ukraine, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea was a peaceful place, famous for its spas and the Mediterranean climate, where dozens of peoples co-existed: Russians, Ukrainians, Tartars, Koreans and others. They all always spoke Russian.
More than 200.000 Crimean Tartars were expelled from Crimea in 1944, by Stalin’s orders, they were sent to Central Asia and Siberia, this was the punishment for “collaborating with the Nazis” during the German occupation of Crimea. The tartars were able to go back to Crimea only since 1998. This provoked some tension because their lands already had new owners, Russians mostly, that’s why Tartars are against the “devolution” of Crimea to Russia. The others are divided and since all speak Russian, there are almost no difference between the Russian and the Ukrainian population in the peninsula.
Kiev’s new government under the influence of ultranationalists hurried to approve an absurd “language” law requiring all the people to speak the language of the State which is Ukrainian at work. This generated some concern among the Russian speaking South-East of the country.
The rest of the work was done by the media.
The actual leaders of the Pro-Russian movement of Crimea are a copy of the Ukrainian “independentists” of a quarter of a century ago: declaring their disobedience to the center (this time in Kiev), protect and ensure their power and their privileges in the territory they supposedly represent. Since most of the capital invested in Crimea is Russian, a Russian or Pro-Russian administration is their only guarantee. No more than that.
As Putin assure us that in Crimea “there are Russian troops”, the peninsula got filled with thousands of armed men, well equipped and with green unidentified uniforms, they speak with a Russian accent, and they move in Russian military transports. They call themselves “self-defense forces” of Crimea. The people calls them “Little Green men”.
Now after a more than suspicious referendum, Russia recognizes the Independence of Crimea and the “government” of the peninsula (just as legitimate as the one in Kiev) will ask for Russian aid and military help, while the Duma prepares the annexation.
I think all peoples including the Crimeans, have the right for free determination, but in these circumstances of the permanent military and unilateral pressure and a very aggressive campaign by the Pro-Russian media (because the Ukrainian media was cut from the peninsula by the Crimean authorities) and even (and is very probable) if most Crimeans want their republic to be part of Russia again, a 97% of votes of an 80% of the people who voted doesn’t seem to me suspicious but incredible, To many lies.

OR: It seems like a sector of Crimeans as well as Ukrainians are reclaiming the Soviet history of Ukraine and we have seen them raising the Soviet flag, is this real or is it just propaganda?
OY: I think it is a mix between the nostalgia and the naive belief that Putin’s Russia will “fight against Ukrainian fascism”. Lots of us confuse our fantasies with what’s really going on.

OR: Do you think that Ukraine is a modern anti-communist laboratory, the Ukrainian Communist Party was outlawed for example.
OY: I knew several anti-communist laboratories. In Latin America Colombia and Paraguay are the main ones, In Europe are the ex-USSR. Not only Ukraine. The current government did not invented anything new and just repeats the same anti-communist speech of the previous ones, who were allied with the US and Russia.
The outlawing of the Ukrainian Communist Party apart from being a necessary number of the anti-communist show, doesn’t seem serious to me, because that party of communist only the name had. I know many on the left felt relief when this party abandoned the political scene. But thinking in a democratic, way they also have the right to exist.

OR: Do you think a world scale war could break from this crysis?
OY: The neoliberalism’s war against humanity broke out alredy some decades ago. The battle for what was called Ukraine is just a part of that war. To what level can the war go up from the Ukraine crysis will depend of how mad politicians are and the people’s sanity. I have my hopes, but I’m not sure of anything.

OR: What is your forecast for what could happen in your country?
OY: Thinking in immediate terms, i think that whatever the outcome may be, the Ukrainian people will lose.
If Putin wins and i mention Putin because i know he doesn’t represent all of Russia, the Ukrainian far right will end stronger and the space for democracy that left in Ukraine will be restricted to the minimum possible.
If the government in Kiev wins and the western stock behind it, what’s left of the country will be de-industrialized and sacked following the instructions of the IMF… a nightmare will come that will end the European dream of the Ukrainians. Is what I see in short to medium term. After it a leftist revolution will come of course… This last sentence is to get from you grin kid of smile.



OR: What’s your opinion about the place the media is having in this conflict?
OY: The big western media that turned the Ukrainian in their subsidiary and the official Russian media lies as always, obeying their masters. For the best journalists, if lucky, are unemployed, if not we don’t know where they are. The big media creates their own parallel reality, they drug the people and break down consciences. This is their job al around the world and Ukraine is just one more case.
I’m more concerned about the smaller media, the alternative, the leftists.
I understand our dream of a multipolar world where the bloody beasts of the US and NATO are stopped, who lately felt as the only gendarmes of the planet, but make no mistakes and believe that of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. He’s just as gendarme as the other, but with less experience, with a moderate appetite and another speech. Let’s take a good look and we will see in his fangs and claws the same human blood. Is a war between predators and none of them is innocent neither less evil.
I don’t like when the leftist media lose the historic perspective and the capacity to criticize when they speak of the role of Putin’s government in this conflict. I would like to see them more respectful to the facts, more consistent. In other words, more sensitive. Remembering the Che again “Always capable of feeling in the deepest, any injustice done against anyone, in any part of the world”. Is what I miss lately.
Translated by @IlCharlie1
Author: Oleg Yasinsky @OlegYasinsky
Original Source: Ucrania es la guerra entre depredadores; ninguno es menos malo

source:http://int.acampadadebarcelona.org/2...-lesser-evils/

[tallguy]

The tug of war between Russia and the USA-led Western interests over Crimea may indeed be a war between two predators. However, whatever your or my view on the matter, it is reasonably clear which of these are considered the lesser of two evils by the majority of the Crimeans themselves.

[Sasha]

The Crimean maybe, i think in all reality the Crimean is russian now again, but the rest of Ukraine is a whole different story.

[PhoenixAsh]

Is this a lesser of two evils for the Crimeans in the same sense that the Dutch were marginally more friendly to the natives of the colonies than the Spanish? Or...to invoke Godwin...the Germans liked the NSDAP more than the KPD?

[Rurkel]

I don't really think so, there is, evidently, quite a lot of genuine enthusiasm in Crimea. Of course, all kinds of undesirable things, historically, prompted genuine mass enthusiasm.

[PhoenixAsh]

Yes this is specifically what I meant. In almost every colony we took from the Spanish the locals were happy we liberated them. The Germans certainly were in majority very enthusiastic about the NSDAP

[Geiseric]

Yes this is specifically what I meant. In almost every colony we took from the Spanish the locals were happy we liberated them. The Germans certainly were in majority very enthusiastic about the NSDAP

Lol what? The Nazis never got a majority vote so I don't know what you're talking about, how did this have anything to do with Ukraine?

[PhoenixAsh]

Lol what? The Nazis never got a majority vote so I don't know what you're talking about, how did this have anything to do with Ukraine?

That you do not know what I am talking about isn't my concern nor any real measurement of the truth of what I am saying. So do read the threads and try to keep up.

The best election results the NSDAP got was a 43.9% in the 33 elections (as opposed to the KPD which got 12.32%). But a majority vote is not what I meant.

The NSDAP was pretty damned popular among the Germans even among those who didn't vote for the NSDAP....which was represented in the august referendum of 34 legitimizing Hitler and the NSDAP take over in which only 16% voted against....and of course I am referring to the immense popularity Hitler and the NSDAP had in 1938 which most sources seem to agree to be the height of Hitler's popularity. Most therefore cheered for him and his leadership.

And as such I poised this against this:

it is reasonably clear which of these are considered the lesser of two evils by the majority of the Crimeans themselves.

What a majority of a population thinks and prefers is not a sign of lesser of two evils....or in fact a wise choice for that population.

[tallguy]

What a majority of a population thinks and prefers is not a sign of lesser of two evils....or in fact a wise choice for that population.

So, from this, should I take it you consider the democratic process worthless unless the majority view accords with your own? I'm not suggesting you should base your view on what the majority thinks, but rather that you seem to be suggesting the majority view should base itself on what you think or else you consider it worthless.

Have I understood you correctly?

[NoXiOuScRaSh]

What a majority of a population thinks and prefers is not a sign of lesser of two evils....or in fact a wise choice for that population.

I could be wrong but I think what Phoenix is getting at is that sometimes people make uneducated political decisions which is correct, I do not however presume to know about the personal motivations for such a statement.

[PhoenixAsh]

So, from this, should I take it you consider the democratic process worthless unless the majority view accords with your own? I'm not suggesting you should base your view on what the majority thinks, but rather that you seem to be suggesting the majority view should base itself on what you think or else you consider it worthless.

Have I understood you correctly?

I think the "democratic" process isn't democratic at all when it is conducted within a bourgeois capitalist political environment and the options and outcome serves the bourgeois regardless. Especially when these processes are designed to serve an imperialist cause either way within a context of nationalist propaganda and fear mongering. I think in that sense popular opinion is useless and simply serves to support one bourgeois faction over another devoid of class consciousness. And as such I reject popular opinions which are diametrically opposed to the class interests of the working class and indeed think of them as worthless from a revolutionary left wing perspective.

But as NoXiOuScRaSh correctly stated: this time I merely meant it as yet another example of uneducated decisions with huge consequences. Or: the grass always seems greener on the other side of the fence.

[tallguy]

I think the "democratic" process isn't democratic at all when it is conducted within a bourgeois capitalist political environment and the options and outcome serves the bourgeois regardless. Especially when these processes are designed to serve an imperialist cause either way within a context of nationalist propaganda and fear mongering. I think in that sense popular opinion is useless and simply serves to support one bourgeois faction over another devoid of class consciousness. And as such I reject popular opinions which are diametrically opposed to the class interests of the working class and indeed think of them as worthless from a revolutionary left wing perspective.

But as NoXiOuScRaSh correctly stated: this time I merely meant it as yet another example of uneducated decisions with huge consequences. Or: the grass always seems greener on the other side of the fence.

Okay, so if we were to conduct a little thought experiment and were to afford you the absolute power to impose any kind of outcome you personally desired on the situation in Crimea irrespective of the majority wishes of the Crimean population (which, in your opinion, are ill-informed and so should be disregarded) what would be your desired outcome? Bear in mind, however, that your omnipotence only extends so far as Crimea and so your choices are constrained (in much the same way as those of the Crimeans themselves, as it happens) by a wider geopolitical reality. In other words, what would be your alternative, non-democratic, well-informed outcome?

[PhoenixAsh]

Okay, so if we were to conduct a little thought experiment and were to afford you the absolute power to impose any kind of outcome you personally desired on the situation in Crimea irrespective of the majority wishes of the Crimean population (which, in your opinion, are ill-informed and so should be disregarded) what would be your desired outcome? Bear in mind, however, that your omnipotence only extends so far as Crimea and so your choices are constrained (in much the same way as those of the Crimeans themselves, as it happens) by a wider geopolitical reality. In other words, what would be your alternative well-informed least of all evils?

This falls entirely outside the scope of the thread and the way in which I used the reference as an example that popularity vote isn´t always wise. But I will play for now.

Although I am struggling to understand you fascination with attributing this rejection of what is happening to me personally and do not see this as an inherent aspect of the fact that the revolutionary left always should reject any course of action or opinion which falls under the category `false class consciousness`.

But first I will explain to you how I see the context of fascism and ultra/nationalism in the Ukrainian conflict.

As Sasha previously, and correctly, argued in the last months the coup in the Ukraine is not a fascist coup and, even though, fascist factions play a major role in the maidan protests escalation they are in fact politically marginalized regardless of political posts they may currently have been bestowed.

The reason for this, and I am not sure if Sasha agrees with this, is that fascism and ultra-nationalism has traditionally been a multi-faceted, albeit dangerous and unpredictable, tool of the bourgeois in stabilizing their own positions and power play when faced with popular uprisings. When properly controlled fascism can, and is used to, advance the interests of bourgeois factions over the interests of competing factions and over that of the working class. When no longer needed feigned anti-fascism even strengthens victorious bourgeois factions as legitimate and democratic. Of course this tool is dangerous because of the unpredictable nature of these groups and the inherent danger they pose to the bourgeois.

We have seen similar situations in the former USSR. The Slavic Union was a government funded and assisted group. Which served the purpose of destabilizing opposition to the government and which served to break the backbone of the Russian left. When the Slavic Union became a direct threat to the interests of the Russian government they were immediately declared illegal and repressed.

As such the fascist factions in the maidan protests were needed to enact the coup, they needed to be placated in the immediate aftermath, and now, after serving their purpose, they will be expelled by the new government. We are already seeing this in increased police and political actions against these fascist elements and we are also seeing it in the increasing EU pressure to rid the new Ukraine government of fascist elements after months of ignoring the issue. We will see increased pressure on the Ukraine government and from the Ukraine government into reducing the factual political influence and power of fascist and ultra-nationalist parties in an attempt to reestablish the status quo.

Do note that saying that fascism and ultra-nationalism in this situation is politically marginalized only refers to their position of power and does not mean they are not dangerous and should be dealt with. In fact understanding this is vitally important because it is integral in my argument.

The Russian bourgeois has an immediate strategic and economic interest in the Ukraine. I think this is established fact and doesn't need to be clarified. And what is also certain is that the maidan protests gained so much popular support as a reaction to Russian imperialism and meddling in the Ukraine.

As an immediate result of the outcome of the maidan protests and coup these interests were threatened and the Russian press which dominates the Eastern and Southern Ukraine immediately began to type cast the coup as being fascist and anti-Russian in nature. Creating an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty. Fascist initiatives, which were ultimately and also immediately unsuccessful and shot down, were given propaganda priority further fueling Russian ethnic nationalist sentiments. All this was done, not out of come anti-fascist sentiment but out of protection of Russian imperialist interests.

Center stage was the funding of Russian nationalist groups and bolstering these with both finances and direct personal support by flying in Russian nationalists and crypto-fascists factions of their very own such as split offs from the slavic union and former members of the slavic union. Something which is increasingly more visible in the upsurge of anti-semitism in eastern en southern Ukraine. Plus we are seeing identical repression of dissenting opinions we see in other parts of the Ukraine.

In this climate the referendum was argued would protect the eastern and southern Urkaine against ultra nationalism of western Ukraine and was set up in response to fears for safety of ethnic Russians positions which were mainly fueled by the Russian dominated press.

To be clear. The Ukrainian far right will be suppressed in the following months by the new government and by actions taken by the EU. They are no longer needed or essential. Depending on the popular success the far right will have in the coming months this repression will probably turn violent.

Their only option for survival will depend on international cooperation. Their best chance is to seek alignment with Russian ultra-nationalists. Sergey Razumovsky springs to mind and there seem to be indications of connections between his Ukrainian volunteers to Syria and Right Sector. We will see.

Given this context.

To answer your questions. I do not think there is a right course of action outside the confines of anti-fascist and anti-capitalist/imperialist association of the working class. And anything that does not conform to this is simply playing into the hands of the bourgeois imperialists on either side.

Leaving the Ukraine rather than organizing to oppose the ultra-nationalists and instead joining other ultra-nationalists is imo rejectionable and simply to be taken "as is". Much like the popular support of the NSDAP in pre-war Germany I think this entire referendum is a hasty farce fueled by nationalist imperialist sentiments and propaganda to the detriment of the working class which has been thoroughly misled and misguided.

I also reject the line of reasoning of "lesser evils" in this conflict. As neither side is any less detrimental, inclined to use fascism and ultra-nationalism or fueling imperialist ambitions and agenda's as the other....both equally serve capital.

As such the ONLY desirable outcome I can think of in this context is the formation of workers associations opposing imperialism of both the EU and RF and actively fighting the fascist and ultra-nationalist factions in the Ukraine.

[The Idler]

Socialists should not support the lesser of two evils anyway.

[tallguy]

Socialists should not support the lesser of two evils anyway.

Who on here has said they should?

[tallguy]

...As neither side is any less detrimental, inclined to use fascism and ultra-nationalism or fueling imperialist ambitions and agenda's as the other....both equally serve capital.

As such the ONLY desirable outcome I can think of in this context is the formation of workers associations opposing imperialism of both the EU and RF and actively fighting the fascist and ultra-nationalist factions in the Ukraine.

Since you appear to view both imperialist powers as being precisely equally heinous, PhoenixAsh, I'm struggling to understand why you seem so perturbed that the Crimeans have majority chosen to throw their lot in with one imperialist power as opposed to the other. I mean, what's the difference, right?

In terms of your desired outcome of a political awakening of the Crimeans leading to their choosing to resist both imperialist powers, how would you propose this political awakening might be achieved?

[PhoenixAsh]

Since you view both imperialist powers as being precisely equally heinous, I'm struggling to understand why you seem so perturbed that the Crimeans have majority chosen to throw their lot in with one imperialist power as opposed to the other?

I am not. Or at least not any more worried one way or the other:

simply to be taken "as is".

I am however saying that the majority opinion of what is the lesser of two evils is not in fact a truism but could very well be misguided foolishness of the majority.

In terms of your desired outcome of a political awakening of the Crimeans leading to their choosing to resist both imperialist powers, how would you propose this might be achieved?

This can't be easily achieved anymore since the Crimea is already part of Russia. So any answer would be mood an we just have to wait and see how the situation develops and base our reaction to these new developments.

However...it could have been prevented by not overreacting to the developing situation in the Ukraine and rushing to push through a referendum in a situation of complete propaganda. The call for a referendum, interestingly enough, was supported by bourgeois factions whose main economic interest and basis for power are with the Russia bourgeois.

[tallguy]

I am not. Or at least not any more worried one way or the other:



I am however saying that the majority opinion of what is the lesser of two evils is not in fact a truism but could very well be misguided foolishness of the majority.




This can't be easily achieved anymore since the Crimea is already part of Russia. So any answer would be mood an we just have to wait and see how the situation develops and base our reaction to these new developments.

However...it could have been prevented by not overreacting to the developing situation in the Ukraine and rushing to push through a referendum in a situation of complete propaganda. The call for a referendum, interestingly enough, was supported by bourgeois factions whose main economic interest and basis for power are with the Russia bourgeois.

I happen to agree with most of the above PheonixAsh. The fact on the ground, nevertheless, is that the Crimeans have clearly shown their own preference and it matters little if this preference is based on a desire for a lesser of two evils or a more pro-active desire to rejoin Russia. The fact remains, that is what the Crimeans have majority decided.

[PhoenixAsh]

I happen to agree with most of the above PheonixAsh. The fact on the ground, nevertheless, is that the Crimeans have clearly shown their own preference and it matters little if this preference is based on a desire for a lesser of two evils or a more pro-active desire to rejoin Russia. The fact remains, that is what the Crimeans have majority decided.

Yes it is and this was never in dispute. It is simply a factual reality...one of many in the current developing situation in the Ukraine.

Although I do have doubts to the honesty of the numbers involved given my experiences in the region...I have no doubt the majority voted to join Russia.

[DaringMehring]

If the USA would have held an "election" to certify the invasion after the troops had gone in , it wouldn't have mattered. Imperialist troops go in, what follows is theater and after the fact rationalization.

USA put on a big made-up show of Saddam's statue being toppled, Nazis made newsreels of Soviet citizens greeting them with overflowing love, etc.