Zompist Bboard Again

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sun Mar 20, 2022 12:37 am What a load of pro-Putin apologetics, while claiming not to apologize for him. Blaming NATO for Putin's war, or even implying some sort of shared responsibility, is apology for Putin.

Bear in mind that Stop The War is basically a front (one of many) for the Socialist Workers Party, who are reflexively opposed to anything which can be interpreted, however loosely, as "Western Capitalist Imperialism".

alice wrote: ↑Sun Mar 20, 2022 5:04 am

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sun Mar 20, 2022 12:37 am What a load of pro-Putin apologetics, while claiming not to apologize for him. Blaming NATO for Putin's war, or even implying some sort of shared responsibility, is apology for Putin.

Bear in mind that Stop The War is basically a front (one of many) for the Socialist Workers Party, who are reflexively opposed to anything which can be interpreted, however loosely, as "Western Capitalist Imperialism".

How am I not surprised. That said, I have a harder time understanding left-wing Putin-apology than right-wing Putin-apology. For the right, Putin is living their authoritarian wet dreams, so it is not surprising that they would support him. But for the left, they ought to see Putin's regime as constituting a latter-day fascism, to which whatever objections they have to Ukraine's gov't, NATO, or like being inconsequential in comparison. So to posit an equivalence between the two implies a greatly distorted way of seeing things.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sun Mar 20, 2022 10:17 amBut for the left, they ought to see Putin's regime as constituting a latter-day fascism, to which whatever objections they have to Ukraine's gov't, NATO, or like being inconsequential in comparison. So to posit an equivalence between the two implies a greatly distorted way of seeing things.

I agree, but there seems to be this bizarre thing going around these days that if thing A is bad and thing B is bad, the badness of both things is EXACTLY EQUAL. So if thing A has been a little bit bad for a long time and thing B has been very, very bad for a short time, obviously thing A is worse because the badness is reduced to the same level and the time span or who was first to be bad is seen as more important.

This Jeremy Corbyn piece in Jacobin tries to approach the matter from a generically "anti-war" perspective while completely missing the reality that the Russians are not going to pull out of Ukraine just because one has asked Putin sufficiently nice enough - that the war is going to end either due to being too long and costly for Putin's taste or with the Russian conquest of Ukraine (either reducing it to a puppet state or annexing it outright). There will be no "peaceful" solution. So opposing material support to Ukraine is necessarily giving support to Russia.

More leftists trying to in effect blame the West and NATO for the war in Ukraine by saying "yes Putin is bad... but this is still at least in part NATO's fault", as if Putin would not have invaded Ukraine (along with Russia's other wars in places such as Georgia) were it not for the existence of NATO...

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sun Mar 20, 2022 10:17 amThat said, I have a harder time understanding left-wing Putin-apology than right-wing Putin-apology. For the right, Putin is living their authoritarian wet dreams, so it is not surprising that they would support him. But for the left, they ought to see Putin's regime as constituting a latter-day fascism, to which whatever objections they have to Ukraine's gov't, NATO, or like being inconsequential in comparison. So to posit an equivalence between the two implies a greatly distorted way of seeing things.

Yeah, I agree. It should be pretty simple: when fascists invade another country for no reason, they are the bad guys. The Russian state is imperialist, fascist, dictatorial, kleptocratic capitalist, a favorite of the far right, and if that wasn't enough, tinged with reactionary religion. There shouldn't be anything there for leftists to support.

Unfortunately, there's a big subset of leftists who believe in a single villain-- the US government. They've spent decades demonizing the US government: it's the only agent in the world, everything it does is wrong, and no one else in the world has any moral agency-- they are only reacting to the US.
In US domestic politics, their extreme positions are mostly theoretical and can't do much harm. But when people steeped in that mindset look at non-US conflicts, they are at best foolish, and at worse collaborators with fascism.

zompist wrote: ↑Sun Mar 20, 2022 9:32 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sun Mar 20, 2022 10:17 amThat said, I have a harder time understanding left-wing Putin-apology than right-wing Putin-apology. For the right, Putin is living their authoritarian wet dreams, so it is not surprising that they would support him. But for the left, they ought to see Putin's regime as constituting a latter-day fascism, to which whatever objections they have to Ukraine's gov't, NATO, or like being inconsequential in comparison. So to posit an equivalence between the two implies a greatly distorted way of seeing things.

Yeah, I agree. It should be pretty simple: when fascists invade another country for no reason, they are the bad guys. The Russian state is imperialist, fascist, dictatorial, kleptocratic capitalist, a favorite of the far right, and if that wasn't enough, tinged with reactionary religion. There shouldn't be anything there for leftists to support.

Unfortunately, there's a big subset of leftists who believe in a single villain-- the US government. They've spent decades demonizing the US government: it's the only agent in the world, everything it does is wrong, and no one else in the world has any moral agency-- they are only reacting to the US.
In US domestic politics, their extreme positions are mostly theoretical and can't do much harm. But when people steeped in that mindset look at non-US conflicts, they are at best foolish, and at worse collaborators with fascism.

I have seen in a number of places leftists bringing up things like the Iraq War, the Kosovo War, the first Libyan Civil War, and so on, which smells to me awfully like whataboutism — as if Putin's war were somehow at least a slight bit more okay because of the West's past wars. And they ignore the fact that in the West, during these wars, one was free to openly oppose them, whereas in Russia the state has swiftly subjected the populace to crushing repression aimed at eliminating even the slightest bit of opposition to Putin's war.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sun Mar 20, 2022 12:37 am What a load of pro-Putin apologetics, while claiming not to apologize for him. Blaming NATO for Putin's war, or even implying some sort of shared responsibility, is apology for Putin.

An almost brilliant bit of sophistry. "We're not supporting Putin's horrid war, obviously. We're just holding our own government accountable. During a conversation that happens to be about Putin's war." I wonder if you could apply this logic to other situations:

"We don't support over-incarceration of African Americans! We just coincidentally showed up to this community planning meeting about incarceration to talk about our concerns vis-a-vis black crime."

"We didn't support the Unite the Right rally! We just showed up there with signs about our distaste for wealthy bankers. For all you know, we could have been counter-protestors."

"We don't support the continued manufacture of licorice! We just brought anise and fennel to the candy factory. Maybe be a little more logical and stop making unwarranted conclusions, hm?"

Personally, I;ve always disliked tankies. But they have turned me off even more lately. Their nostalgia for the USSR and its glorious resistence against the West is so powerful, that they will support a government that is at the exact opposite end of the political spectrum. Gross.

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Sun Mar 20, 2022 10:28 pm Personally, I;ve always disliked tankies. But they have turned me off even more lately. Their nostalgia for the USSR and its glorious resistence against the West is so powerful, that they will support a government that is at the exact opposite end of the political spectrum. Gross.

I used to not see much in the way of tankies and more in the way of trots, but I always disliked the former due to, well, being a bunch of unreconstructed Stalinists or Maoists (trots are a bit better, and are more annoying than anything with their newspaper-selling and front-organizing ways). But in recent times I've noticed more of them coming out of the woodwork, and they are betrayed by, as you mention, their willingness to support any gov't which will oppose the West no matter how awful that gov't is or even how diametrically opposed said gov't is to their ostensible political views. This kind of thing is why I've come to strongly dislike so-called "anti-imperialism", because said "anti-imperialists" often have the tendency to uncritically align themselves with the worst regimes and like out there, as long as they are not Western.

From the other link:

While we do not forget the responsibility the US, NATO, and its allies bear for bringing about this war, the clear aggressor in the current situation is the Russian political and economic elite. Our efforts should be to expose Russia’s inexcusable imperialist invasion of Ukraine, to which NATO’s aggressive expansion and the Ukrainian post-Maidan regime also paved the way. In the revolutionary spirit and in solidarity with the peoples of Ukraine, Russia, and the region, we say “No!” to Moscow today and “No!” to the false choice between Moscow and NATO in the future. We call for an immediate ceasefire and return to the negotiating table. The interests of global capital and its military machines are not worth one more drop of the peoples’ blood. Peace, land, and bread!

It's subtle, but there's a very important shift going on there. When we like Russia, they are the successors of Marx and Lenin. When Russia does something bad, they're just capitalists painted red.

My blood pressure will be endangered if I worry about these people too deeply... still, I want to point out that calls for cease-fires and "peace" in the middle of an invasion are not actually high-minded; they are statements of support for the invasion. When a group they actually care about is attacked, they don't call for the attackers to keep sitting there occupying territory, they call for continuing resistance. If they cared about freedom or peace they would demand that Russia withdraw. If you see a mugger holding a knife to someone's throat, asking them to negotiate with the knife still in place is not either neutrality or peace.

zompist wrote: ↑Sun Mar 20, 2022 9:32 pmUnfortunately, there's a big subset of leftists who believe in a single villain-- the US government. They've spent decades demonizing the US government: it's the only agent in the world, everything it does is wrong, and no one else in the world has any moral agency-- they are only reacting to the US.

Thus my remarks above. Over here in Britain, there's the difference that it's not just "the US government", it's anyone in any government further to the right than JEZZA!!!, which happens to be about (at a guess) 90% of all politicians.

zompist wrote: ↑Mon Mar 21, 2022 1:28 am My blood pressure will be endangered if I worry about these people too deeply... still, I want to point out that calls for cease-fires and "peace" in the middle of an invasion are not actually high-minded; they are statements of support for the invasion. When a group they actually care about is attacked, they don't call for the attackers to keep sitting there occupying territory, they call for continuing resistance. If they cared about freedom or peace they would demand that Russia withdraw. If you see a mugger holding a knife to someone's throat, asking them to negotiate with the knife still in place is not either neutrality or peace.

Exactly.

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Mon Mar 21, 2022 1:10 am From the other link:

While we do not forget the responsibility the US, NATO, and its allies bear for bringing about this war, the clear aggressor in the current situation is the Russian political and economic elite. Our efforts should be to expose Russia’s inexcusable imperialist invasion of Ukraine, to which NATO’s aggressive expansion and the Ukrainian post-Maidan regime also paved the way. In the revolutionary spirit and in solidarity with the peoples of Ukraine, Russia, and the region, we say “No!” to Moscow today and “No!” to the false choice between Moscow and NATO in the future. We call for an immediate ceasefire and return to the negotiating table. The interests of global capital and its military machines are not worth one more drop of the peoples’ blood. Peace, land, and bread!

It's subtle, but there's a very important shift going on there. When we like Russia, they are the successors of Marx and Lenin. When Russia does something bad, they're just capitalists painted red.

That little quote that you mention is also what I'd call attempting to establish an equivalence - they're saying "yes Russia is very bad... but let's not forget that Ukraine's gov't and NATO are also bad", as if one could make a reasonable comparison.

zompist wrote: ↑Mon Mar 21, 2022 1:28 am If you see a mugger holding a knife to someone's throat, asking them to negotiate with the knife still in place is not either neutrality or peace.

Some people's idea of a fair deal is when they see someone being mugged to ask the mugger to return 50$ of the 100$ he just robbed

hwhatting wrote: ↑Mon Mar 21, 2022 11:01 am

zompist wrote: ↑Mon Mar 21, 2022 1:28 am If you see a mugger holding a knife to someone's throat, asking them to negotiate with the knife still in place is not either neutrality or peace.

Some people's idea of a fair deal is when they see someone being mugged to ask the mugger to return 50$ of the 100$ he just robbed

As an American, I am generally fine with this logic (looks worryingly at Western Pacific). The problem is, if you're going to be a geopolitical cynic and accept that sometimes the biggest gorilla gets the cheese, you need to be consistent about it, and honest. If you're secretly gleeful that Russia is bloodying the nose of a pro-Western government in Kyiv, just say so. It's not like tankies have been shy up to this point.

Whenever someone abroad does anything bad, fascists the world over are like: "Do you see how X is out to get us civilized people? Y Pride!" I would support leftist platforms that reminded their readers not to fall into this trap, but directly blaming Y for something X did doesn't seem fair or constructive.

While some pro-Putin leftists are probably useful idiots, it's not inconceivable that some of them are followers of the old school "dialectical" method.

You see, Marxist revolutionaries are strategically trying to overthrow the global power structure in order to empower the working class and create communism. To do that, they can't afford to get bogged down with moral considerations like deciding which subset of capitalists are friendlier to workers.

When two groups of capitalists are fighting each other, if the stronger side wins, nothing changes in terms of their global dominance. The classic strategy is to hold your nose and support the weaker side, whoever that is. If you're lucky, a clash between powers of comparable strength could open an opportunity for you to create your new non-capitalist society.

The problem is, classic Marxism seriously overestimates the hold of common sense on the human mind, and correspondingly underestimates the staying power of fascism. Rigidly following this "dialectical" method could require you to literally support Hitler to destabilize the Soviet Union and the US. If that sounds like a bad idea in hindsight, then you might not want to support Putin either.

Honestly, the kind of language I use here might not even make sense to old fashioned Marxists. I don't know if this guy is for real, but Marxists would probably be surprised at Putin's propaganda mistakes like this: https://youtu.be/9aLjvPzQSMo Similarly, their pro-Putin support might sound like this: https://youtu.be/eudZ1FpI9Qk

One thing about the tankies and the other leftists with their new-found Carl Schmitt-esque realism is how they deny agency to the peoples of the eastern European countries which democratically decided to join NATO specifically to protect themselves from Russian imperialism (and anyone who denies that Russia is an imperialist power is either an idiot or disingenuous, and to an eastern European Russia is a greater imperialist threat than America), as if to them people are just pawns in geopolitical games with no will of their own, who are to be parceled out to one country's sphere of influence or another without taking their own interests into account. All of this smells like they went around one side of the so-called "political circle" and ended up on the other side. (Of course the "political circle" really isn't valid because anarchism belongs to the very far left yet is diametrically opposed to the very far right.)

Why do I even look at Reddit? The place is absolutely crawling with tankies who can't believe that anything can be anything other than America's fault and who have no concept of false equivalences...

On the flip side, our support for Ukraine seems to take the form of obligingly parroting Ukrainian military propaganda. I'm sick of seeing headlines like "Russian soldiers run like little girls, Ukrainian official reports" or "Ukraine chief: every Russian plane now shot down twice." Nobody's even trying to push back on the casualty figures supplied by Ukraine. Some of this stuff is pretty low-stakes, but it's probably something we'll feel very embarrassed about once the dust settles.