The US is the world’s Empire and does super-exploit the global south for profits, ergo we need to understand the manner with which it props up seperatist groups are to service thode ends. Russia does not have the same economic forces at play. This is before you look into the origins of these movements and their history over time.
We can’t understand any of that if we use the liberal, vibes based definition of imperialism. As far as they’re concerned you’re just doing mental gymnastics, imperialism is just when countries do empire stuff like annexations and invasions.
Yes, and I’ve tried to explain how they confuse methods common to imperialist countries with imperialism itself, even explaining how imperialism is driven by export of capital for foreign plunder. They’ve obstinately reduced imperialism simply to a preference of foreign policy, rather than an economic process.
I’ve actually heard liberals say defining imperialism as economic is specifically a Leninist definition of imperialism, just so they don’t have to engage with it. Lenin was just trying to confuse us! Everyone knows the USSR was an empire. 🤡
Yep, the reason I’m trying to engage this way is because trying to explain Lenin’s analysis just leads them to saying that changing the name of something doesn’t change its nature, which is correct, and is why I try to focus more on even using their liberal definition they are wrong.
I’ve found some success in turning the focus back on the West. The NATO bloc has put Ukraine in $100 billion in debt, has made all of its aid conditional on the exploitation of its energy and mineral and agricultural resources, and is intent on fighting to the last Ukrainian. It makes Western imperialism in Ukraine pretty obvious, even if I don’t touch on Maidan being a coup that installed a neonazi banderite regime run by Western collaborators (because they’ll dismiss that as Russian propaganda).
My angle has always been that the West never wanted Ukraine to even win, they just wanted it to be a millstone around Russia.
Defending Russia’s actions seems impossible. As we see here, to the liberal mind, whoever swings first is the bad guy. That’s it.
I can normally get people to see at least how NATO is bad, but they inevitably see it as preferable over Russia, which is a better position but not great.
The US is the world’s Empire and does super-exploit the global south for profits, ergo we need to understand the manner with which it props up seperatist groups are to service thode ends. Russia does not have the same economic forces at play. This is before you look into the origins of these movements and their history over time.
We can’t understand any of that if we use the liberal, vibes based definition of imperialism. As far as they’re concerned you’re just doing mental gymnastics, imperialism is just when countries do empire stuff like annexations and invasions.
Yes, and I’ve tried to explain how they confuse methods common to imperialist countries with imperialism itself, even explaining how imperialism is driven by export of capital for foreign plunder. They’ve obstinately reduced imperialism simply to a preference of foreign policy, rather than an economic process.
I’ve actually heard liberals say defining imperialism as economic is specifically a Leninist definition of imperialism, just so they don’t have to engage with it. Lenin was just trying to confuse us! Everyone knows the USSR was an empire. 🤡
Yep, the reason I’m trying to engage this way is because trying to explain Lenin’s analysis just leads them to saying that changing the name of something doesn’t change its nature, which is correct, and is why I try to focus more on even using their liberal definition they are wrong.
Does it work?
I’ve found some success in turning the focus back on the West. The NATO bloc has put Ukraine in $100 billion in debt, has made all of its aid conditional on the exploitation of its energy and mineral and agricultural resources, and is intent on fighting to the last Ukrainian. It makes Western imperialism in Ukraine pretty obvious, even if I don’t touch on Maidan being a coup that installed a neonazi banderite regime run by Western collaborators (because they’ll dismiss that as Russian propaganda).
My angle has always been that the West never wanted Ukraine to even win, they just wanted it to be a millstone around Russia.
Defending Russia’s actions seems impossible. As we see here, to the liberal mind, whoever swings first is the bad guy. That’s it.
I can normally get people to see at least how NATO is bad, but they inevitably see it as preferable over Russia, which is a better position but not great.