Russia invades Ukraine

[Raphael]

Now Dmitry Medvedev, who was officially President of Russia during the time when Putin was officially Prime Minister, has directly threatened attacks on NATO member countries. I remember when there were members of the Western establishment who seriously thought that he was more reasonable than Putin.

[chris_notts]

Now Dmitry Medvedev, who was officially President of Russia during the time when Putin was officially Prime Minister, has directly threatened attacks on NATO member countries. I remember when there were members of the Western establishment who seriously thought that he was more reasonable than Putin.

I think everything right now is broadcast at a domestic Russian audience, to try to keep them onside even as the war continues going badly for them. I find it hard to know how much is lunacy and how much is desperation.

[Moose-tache]

Today's headline: Putin's Russification Proclamation Declares All Unsurrendered Ukrainians Ethinicly Russian After Jan 1.

[Raphael]

So now the latest talking point among US right-wingers seems to be that the whole Ukraine War isn't really happening, because there's supposedly no footage of it:

https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1629520360910495750

[Man in Space]

…what? Even my dad, whose head is far down the Fox News rabbit hole, doesn’t believe this.

[Raphael]

…what? Even my dad, whose head is far down the Fox News rabbit hole, doesn’t believe this.

Not yet.

[Raphael]

Theory: this is because the fact that Ukraine still exists is so embarrassing for many US right-wingers. According to their general theory of how the world works, a country led by a swaggering, macho macho manly, loves-to-strike-a-tough-guy-pose, gets-himself-photographed-shirtless-on-horseback guy should have beaten a country led by a former professional comedian in a few days.

That didn't happen, so now the entire war can't possibly have happened.

[Man in Space]

*shudder* I do not welcome the prospect of my dad becoming that far gone.

[Raphael]

They have complete and other contempt for their fans and supporters. We already knew that, but it's nice to see it confirmed like that.

hawlhawl1.jpg (177.04 KiB) Viewed 1585 times

hawlhawl2.jpg (151.48 KiB) Viewed 1585 times

[Moose-tache]

It was only a matter of time that the war in Ukraine would become "Biden's War," with all the usual political consequences. We went through the same dance over Kosovo. Clinton's two biggest sets of detractors were, simultaneously, right wingers who just wanted to push back against a Democrat, and leftists like Chompsky who are happy to treat eastern European fascists as the successors to eastern European communism. Josh Hawley, in particular, is just playing the political game according to the rules. Does he have any interest in reducing train derailments? Don't ask stupid questions. It's just about maneuering the right way for media control and voter turnout. You can't even get mad at the man; he's just doing what works.

[Travis B.]

It was only a matter of time that the war in Ukraine would become "Biden's War," with all the usual political consequences. We went through the same dance over Kosovo. Clinton's two biggest sets of detractors were, simultaneously, right wingers who just wanted to push back against a Democrat, and leftists like Chompsky who are happy to treat eastern European fascists as the successors to eastern European communism. Josh Hawley, in particular, is just playing the political game according to the rules. Does he have any interest in reducing train derailments? Don't ask stupid questions. It's just about maneuering the right way for media control and voter turnout. You can't even get mad at the man; he's just doing what works.

I would put Chomsky et al more in the category of "the West must be bad, and thus anyone opposed to the West, or anyone the West opposes, must be good". It is less about supporting eastern European Communism - after all, Chomsky himself is an anarchist, and anarchists have long and bitter memories about not just Stalinism but the Bolsheviks in the Russian Civil War before that.

[Raphael]

It was only a matter of time that the war in Ukraine would become "Biden's War," with all the usual political consequences. We went through the same dance over Kosovo. Clinton's two biggest sets of detractors were, simultaneously, right wingers who just wanted to push back against a Democrat, and leftists like Chompsky who are happy to treat eastern European fascists as the successors to eastern European communism. Josh Hawley, in particular, is just playing the political game according to the rules. Does he have any interest in reducing train derailments? Don't ask stupid questions. It's just about maneuering the right way for media control and voter turnout. You can't even get mad at the man; he's just doing what works.

Party like it's 1999!

You are, of course, completely right. Two points, though: 1) the whole red-brown thing seems a lot more stable, solid, lasting, and far-spread now than it was back then, and 2) I find it somewhat amusing that Hawley, at least for a short time, clearly miscalculated so badly what his party's line on the whole thing would be.

[Moose-tache]

It was only a matter of time that the war in Ukraine would become "Biden's War," with all the usual political consequences. We went through the same dance over Kosovo. Clinton's two biggest sets of detractors were, simultaneously, right wingers who just wanted to push back against a Democrat, and leftists like Chompsky who are happy to treat eastern European fascists as the successors to eastern European communism. Josh Hawley, in particular, is just playing the political game according to the rules. Does he have any interest in reducing train derailments? Don't ask stupid questions. It's just about maneuering the right way for media control and voter turnout. You can't even get mad at the man; he's just doing what works.

I would put Chomsky et al more in the category of "the West must be bad, and thus anyone opposed to the West, or anyone the West opposes, must be good". It is less about supporting eastern European Communism - after all, Chomsky himself is an anarchist, and anarchists have long and bitter memories about not just Stalinism but the Bolsheviks in the Russian Civil War before that.

This does not match his behavior.

Here is a video recounting his denial of genocide in Kosovo. If he's an anarchist, it doesn't stop him from insiting that certain dictators aren't so bad as long as they identify as leftist.

For balance, here is a video rebutting the claims in the first video, but mostly accusing the first video of lazy and inaccurate conclusions, while aknowledging that the underlying problem exists.

You can say "Oh, it's just anti-Americanism, not pro-Communism," but a) this seems like a weird distinction to be invested in, and frankly who gives a shit, and b) thanks to the Cold War there is very little daylight between these two things anyway. Either way, I don't buy it. I don't see Chomsky out here praising anti-American movements like ISIS. He only seems to be comfortable supporting anti-American regimes that talk like Marxists.

[Travis B.]

This does not match his behavior.

Here is a video recounting his denial of genocide in Kosovo. If he's an anarchist, it doesn't stop him from insiting that certain dictators aren't so bad as long as they identify as leftist.

For balance, here is a video rebutting the claims in the first video, but mostly accusing the first video of lazy and inaccurate conclusions, while aknowledging that the underlying problem exists.

You can say "Oh, it's just anti-Americanism, not pro-Communism," but a) this seems like a weird distinction to be invested in, and frankly who gives a shit, and b) thanks to the Cold War there is very little daylight between these two things anyway. Either way, I don't buy it. I don't see Chomsky out here praising anti-American movements like ISIS. He only seems to be comfortable supporting anti-American regimes that talk like Marxists.

The thing is that the FR Yugoslavia under Milošević did not pretend to be Marxist but rather ethno-nationalist. It certainly rejected the ideology of the SFR Yugoslavia under Tito. And as for Chomsky's Russia apologetics, Russia today is most certainly fascist, not Marxist. Yes, Chomsky has made noise in apology for some Marxist regimes, such as that of the Khmer Rouge, but what ties these all together is their anti-Western positions, not any supposed Marxism.

[Moose-tache]

What?

Communism ended in the Yugoslav successor states when they allowed elections and the Communist Party was voted out, which happened as early as 1990 in some places. This didn’t happen in Serbia, because the previous Communist leader was Slobodan Milosevic, who stayed in power. It’s true that he scrubbed the word “Socialist” from the name of the country in ‘92, but full economic reform didn’t come until after Milosevic, who I must stress again, was the previous Communist leader of Serbia, was forced out. As for what he “pretended to be,” that certainly wasn’t a nationalist, because being a nationalist is exactly what he was pretending not to be! From a 1995 interview: “You can see that there was no nationalism in those speeches. We were explaining why we think it is good to preserve Yugoslavia for all Serbs, all Croats, all Muslims and all Slovenians as our joint country. Nothing else.” We could say he was lying about that, and we'd be right, but then we'd have to consider the possibility that the half hearted gestures toward Capitalism were also not genuine.

This is starting to feel like a “no true Scotsman” fallacy. Chomsky related to Milosevic, because he was a Communist, the sole head of government left in the Balkans from before the fall of the Iron Curtain.

As for Chomsky not supporting Marxist Russia because Russia today is the opposite of Marxist: Yes, that's the point. You know that, and I know that. That's why we like Russia a lot less these days. But Noam Chomsky doesn't know that, because he is a moron.

[Moose-tache]

Also, "He's not a Communist; he's an Anarchist" is totally the left wing version of "I'm not Republican; I'm Libertarian."

[zompist]

As for Chomsky not supporting Marxist Russia because Russia today is the opposite of Marxist: Yes, that's the point. You know that, and I know that. That's why we like Russia a lot less these days. But Noam Chomsky doesn't know that, because he is a moron.

Harsh, but I wouldn't really argue, mostly on the grounds that I don't really care about Chomsky's politics any more.

But, dude's 94. He graduated at the end of WWII, that is, when fascism was defeated and reflexive anti-Americanism only led people to embrace left-wing despots. I bet he can't figure out anything past Windows 95, either.

[Ares Land]

I never really understood why Chomsky is important -- outside of linguistics, that is.

I remember his books getting a surge in popularity during the Iraq War; his views on that war were sensible but not particularly bright -about any educated person could have come up with similar arguments

[Travis B.]

What?

Communism ended in the Yugoslav successor states when they allowed elections and the Communist Party was voted out, which happened as early as 1990 in some places. This didn’t happen in Serbia, because the previous Communist leader was Slobodan Milosevic, who stayed in power. It’s true that he scrubbed the word “Socialist” from the name of the country in ‘92, but full economic reform didn’t come until after Milosevic, who I must stress again, was the previous Communist leader of Serbia, was forced out. As for what he “pretended to be,” that certainly wasn’t a nationalist, because being a nationalist is exactly what he was pretending not to be! From a 1995 interview: “You can see that there was no nationalism in those speeches. We were explaining why we think it is good to preserve Yugoslavia for all Serbs, all Croats, all Muslims and all Slovenians as our joint country. Nothing else.” We could say he was lying about that, and we'd be right, but then we'd have to consider the possibility that the half hearted gestures toward Capitalism were also not genuine.

This is starting to feel like a “no true Scotsman” fallacy. Chomsky related to Milosevic, because he was a Communist, the sole head of government left in the Balkans from before the fall of the Iron Curtain.

As for Chomsky not supporting Marxist Russia because Russia today is the opposite of Marxist: Yes, that's the point. You know that, and I know that. That's why we like Russia a lot less these days. But Noam Chomsky doesn't know that, because he is a moron.

Umm, Milošević was the key person in bringing about the end of SFR Yugoslavia because his ethno-nationalist views led to the end of "brotherhood and unity" and the domination of Yugoslavia by Serbs, which is precisely why Yugoslavia broke apart (because the Slovenians, Croatians, and Bosniaks were not very happy with being under a state dominated by them). Yes, the Communist Party as such may have stayed in power in FR Yugoslavia for a while longer than in Slovenia or Croatia, but that does not mean that it wasn't ethno-nationalist by that point.

[Travis B.]

Also, "He's not a Communist; he's an Anarchist" is totally the left wing version of "I'm not Republican; I'm Libertarian."

Saying that is like leftists who lump everything right of democratic socialism with the right and cannot see the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, or those who lump Communism together with National Socialism (aka "Commie-Nazis").

Anyways, saying that betrays an ignorance of what Marxist-Leninists and what anarchists actually believe in. The former seek to impose the dictatorship of a vanguard party to ostensibly impose socialism through the power of the state (and claim that this will somehow lead to communism, and ignore the fact that that is just state capitalism). The latter seek to bring about, from the bottom up through the direct will of the people, a socialist society without authority structured through directly democratic organizations such as workers' councils. The gulf between the two is so large that what you say here is patently nonsensical.