Russian Tensions
- This topic has 5,319 replies, 40 voices, and was last updated 11 hours, 24 minutes ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The Moscow Patriarchate since its re-invention by Stalin has always been a tool of the state. It is not in linear descent from the Russian Church prior to 1918, the last patriarch of which was Tikhon.
That Church had informed the Tsar’s rule, except during the anti-clerical reigns of powerful monarchs like Peter and Catherine.The hunt for “traitors” in Ukraine is on, including appeals to inform on neighbours for names to be passed on to the secret police:
FWIW I tried to have a dialogue with Kliman about that recent MHI editorial, nothing much came of it though. For those interested it’s in the comments under the article:
Editorial: Ukraine Fights for National Self-Determination Against Russian Imperialism
You might obtain a faster answer from Peter Hudis and Kevin Anderson than killman
You are not going to make a dent on MHI that is part of their Leninist principles in essence Dunaveyskaya never abandoned Trotskyism and Leninism
Here is 25 minutes interview with Prof. Georgi Derluguian on Russia-Ukraine war on Turkish TV, gives a southern angle missing from most commentary.
https://youtu.be/LZ6BNDgAnlA (Only the introduction is in Turkish, the rest is in English).
Killman ! That does seem a not inappropriate misspelling in the circumstances.
At least he only called you an appeaser and not a fascifist as Orwell would have. He just doesn’t get it and can’t see the difference between a state and its subjects.
The so-called “right to national self-determination” is an incoherent concept as it assumes the pre-existence of a “nation” when whether nations exist and what they might be is precisely the point at issue. In practice is the “right” of a particular grouping of capitalists to have their own state. Why should socialists support that?
Andrew Kilman like anybody else on the left will call you a nazis or a fascists or a counter revolutionary , or a Zionist
On a Chilean chat I was called a fascist because I don’t support Naomi Klein and James Petra left wing reformists point of view
For most of them imperialism is one country ( called the empire ) they have not read Rosa Luxembourg accumulation of capital which shows that all capitalists countries are potentially expansionists
Some personalities write many books but their ideas can be reduced to one single pamphlet
Lenin reduced Marxism to a theory of nationalists and they are not going to break away from Leninism if they do that their whole worldview will fall apart
It takes time to be deintoxiticated from Leninism
The MLPUSA questioned Stalin and Hoxha and the whole organization vanished immediately and they should have also questioned Lenin
James Petra on Russia.
https://www.voltairenet.org/article185870.html
https://petras.lahaine.org/about-james-petras/
He is not as popular as Noam Chomsky but he writes for the Mexican newspaper La Jornada, and RebelionDJP, Kliman’s final reposte to you
“The Ukrainian people’s understanding of their interests is the polar opposite of yours. When millions of people who are being slaughtered, terrorized, and displaced overwhelmingly oppose appeasing the perpetrator, I’m going to listen to what they say is in their interests. Also, appeasement didn’t work out so well prior to WWII, or during the last 8 years in Ukraine” is revealing, especially from someone of his academic intellectual stature.When does the attitude of the majority determine the rights or wrongs of any political position. We can safely assume that the views of many more millions of Russian citizens are also the polar opposite to your understanding. Does that invalidate what you say, also?
Bringing up the WW2 appeasement is such a shallow defence for any historical analysis of present events.
The earlier accepted wisdom was that it was Ukraine that was unwilling to seriously negotiate any home-rule proposals due to the political pressure from its right-wing nationalists.
And what appeasement does Kliman talk of? No nation apart from Russia has supported self-rule for DPR and LPR or recognised the annexation of Crimea. Very different from 1938 when an international conference conceded Sudetenland to Germany.
Economics may be Kliman’s forte but history isn’t.
As we fully expected our analysis is not a popular one by either side. We are the rare Third Campists who stand by our convictions and commitments.
If Kliman seeks to raise the past, then he should be aware with Britain actually in a war, facing a real threat of invasion and suffering daily war crimes from the Blitz bombing, we stood by our principles and did not bend because they were not in accord with the sentiments of our families, friends and neighbours. To paraphrase Churchill, we too stood alone.
I don’t know the figures but some of our own members were casualties of the war yet it did not result in the Party being moved by emotional appeals.
This is the statement of another Marxist Humanist Group,
In essence, they all have the same analysis. They all support the so-called self-determination of the nations
Stop Russia’s Imperialist War on Ukraine! Solidarity with the Ukrainian People’s Resistance!
Putin’s brutal war in Ukraine puts the future of humanity in doubt
When does the attitude of the majority determine the rights or wrongs of any political position? We can safely assume that the views of many more millions of Russian citizens are also the polar opposite to your understanding. Does that invalidate what you say, also?
Most workers support capitalism and their own ruling class, should we support capitalism too?
Their mistakes come from this source:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/mattick-paul/1958/dunayevskaya.htm
Although details are vague and not verified, Belarus railway workers appear to have taken action to thwart the Russian supply lines
As we fully expected our analysis is not a popular one by either side. We are the rare Third Campists who stand by our convictions and commitments.
——————————————
Alan, our principles and stands have never been popular. I have tried to propagate our ideas and principles thru different groups and individuals and none of them has accepted them, one leftist ( who call himself a socialist ) told me that our ideas are out of this world, and in order to obtain them we must first build a rocket. I told him that Marx’s ideas are out of this world too because all our principles are based on Marx’s analysis.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.