redrevjoseRussia will use nuclear weapons in response to attacks deep into the country — deputy Kolesnik
Personally? I’m against the use of nuclear weapons in this way.
me? im against crime. and I’m not afraid to admit it
I dunno I think some crimes are pretty, pretty coooool 😎
bobby newports… never had a real job… in his life…
life life life
Bobby newpoooort
And I’m willing to anonymously post it on the internet!
erase all pictures of ron!!!
Boof it?
geneva_convenienceNukes are supposed to be a deterrent. So as long as they’re bluffing…
redlemaceSounds like they are having a hard time maintaining the illusions and panik starts to strike
Just fucking do it already. Everybody is tired of your threats and the current state the world is in. Let’s have this extinction experience and restart if anybody survives.
Yep, as fucked as it is, every new day of this madness just has me begging for the band-aid to be ripped off.
Incapable of imagining the end of capitalism, liberals become a death cult that increasingly fantasizes about nuclear armageddon
“I’m either the good guy or I rather see everyone dead.”
sometimes i really do hope I’m reading a bot
“I’m either the good guy or I rather see everyone dead.”
sometimes i really do hope I’m reading a bot
teagrrlNo thanks, I really don’t want to die.
I have got bad news for you.
Sorry, thought it was pretty obvious that I really don’t want to die in a nuclear holocaust. I am aware I will die one day, hopefully from natural causes in my sleep.
Yeah, let’s pray. I just saw the opportunity to make a joke. But in reality, I understood what you meant and feel the same.
Being at ground zero wouldn’t be a bad way to go. A bright light, then just gone.
Water is wet in other news.
Go.fuck.yourself.russia
yeyeye orrrrr the US empire could end it’s proxy war and NATO colonialism!
Russia is literally a colonial power. NATO is a defensive alliance of countries that don’t want to be gobbled up by the Russian empire.
AntiOutsideAktionName a Russian colony
BizzleChechnya… Georgia… Azerbaijan…
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆You manged to name a Turkish colony there, have a gold star for trying.
Cowbee [he/they]Russia has no colonies. As the USSR, it was an anti-imperialist and anti-colonial force. After its dissolution, the economy imploded and is still recovering. It has had no opportunity to gain colonies like it had under the Tsar, even if they wanted to.
NATO started as an anti-communist alliance, with terrorist operations like Operation Gladio. Now, it maintains its status as the strongest alliance of imperialist countries on the planet. It’s as “defensive” as the Israeli “Defense” Force is.
AnUnusualRelicRussia has no colonies. As the USSR, it was an anti-imperialist and anti-colonial force.
Entire eastern Europe: *cough* *cough*
The SSRs were not colonies, they were a part of the broad USSR as a socialist economy.
Of course they were.
Yes, they were not colonies and were indeed parts of the broad socialist economy.
How much they paying you over there bro?
I’m a communist for free, I don’t get paid to be a Marxist-Leninist. In fact, I pay dues.
So you are even crazier than I thought! Cool 👌
Nice bit of ableism, combined with anti-communism.
Yes, I’m
Anti-communist. Most sane people are 🤯
Relying on ableism to make a point is bigoted, for starters, and secondly, with capitalism on the decline everywhere and socialism on the rise, why would it make sense to bat for the dying system and not the one that has served the people the best and presents an alternative to imperialism and genocide?
What do you disagree with? Specifically.
I don’t argue with crazy people that are government shills.
Nice bit of ableism and conspiracy theorism there, a classic duo!
Eat shit.
Anyone can accuse a country of imperialism. Ultimately, people argue over the definitions of imperialism, and those hostile to a country will cling to the accusations, regardless of merit. Russia does not meet the Marxist intetpretation of imperialism or neocolonialism, but that doesn’t stop the west from trying to pin that on them.
If you’re changing the goalposts here from imperialism to the ‘marxist interpretation of imperialism’ would you disagree that a key characteristics of marxist imperialism is monopolistic capitalism, or that imperialism arises from the concentration of economic power in the hands of powerful monopolies and cartels within capitalist nation, which Russia’s oligarchs is a prime example of?
I’m not changing the goalposts, the Marxist conception of imperialism originates mostly with Lenin’s advancements on Hobson. Those who wish to minimize and generalize imperialism erase its ties to monopoly capitalism, and make it about any kind of millitant action, which is a step backwards from even Hobson.
Either way, Russia does not have monopolies on a global scale. They are nationalist and deeply capitalist, but have an inwardly driven economy, not an outwardly driven one. If Russia had the ability to truly become a world monopolistic power, then it would be imperialist, but it lacks the financial capital to do so as well as the open countries to imperialize that aren’t already under the thumb of the west.
The US Empire, on the other hand, is a prime example of having monopolies on a global scale, and using its millitary to keep this going.
The Marxist interpretation of imperialism says imperialism arises from the concentration of economic power in the hands of powerful monopolies and cartels within the capitalist nation which is pretty clear that it isn’t talking about monopolies on a global scale.
Being nationalist and deeply capitalist in an inwardly driven economy seems to fall squarely into the definition making Russia an imperialist state by the marxist definition.
No, the monopoly stage of capitalism is a prerequisite for imperialism, not imperialism itself. Imperialism is economically compelled by reaching the monopoly stage, it arises from the conditions you set out but is not itself those conditions. A country cannot imperialize itself. I recommend reading at least the Prolewiki article on imperialism, but reading Lenin’s Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism is well worth it.
Even if Russia barely fails to meet your strict standards of marxist imperialism calling Russia an imperialist state isn’t incorrect though because the common definition of imperialism is a policy of extending a country’s power and influence through diplomacy or military force which can hardly be argued that Russia isn’t actively doing both of those things.
Russia doesn’t “barely” fail, it fails outright. It fails for similar reasons nationalist countries like Iran fail, or countries like Columbia. The definition you’re using is useless, as it applies to literally every country. It doesn’t examine why or how it arises, or how to stop it.
The definition I’m using is the commonly accepted one and language matters because how else are you supposed to communicate concepts?
The definition you used is applicable to literally every country on the planet. It isn’t useful, every country uses diplomacy, every country uses their millitary. It doesn’t matter how common it is, among those who seriously attempt to ubderstand imperialism, such a definition is far too oversimplified to be useful. You even tried to say a country could imperialize itself.
When did I say that?
I know you accused me of it but after reviewing our conversation I can confidently say I didn’t say that.
The Marxist interpretation of imperialism says imperialism arises from the concentration of economic power in the hands of powerful monopolies and cartels within the capitalist nation which is pretty clear that it isn’t talking about monopolies on a global scale.
Being nationalist and deeply capitalist in an inwardly driven economy seems to fall squarely into the definition making Russia an imperialist state by the marxist definition.
Russia is inwardly driven, it is blocked from becoming an empire by NATO and the west. By being inwardly driven and “imperialist,” by your claims, it would be imperializing itself.
Those weren’t my claims they were claims of yours I repeated because it proved my point that those claims proved it was an imperialistic state based on marxism’s definition of such.
I can see how that would get confusing though.
No, my claim is that even though the preconditions for imperialism are almost met for Russia, they don’t actually have the means or space to run an externally driven, imperialist economy.
Oh so the US and NATO started attacking Russia right?
queermunist she/herNATO destroyed Libya.
So what does that have to do with Russia?
Did Nato threaten to use nukes? No Nato also doesnt attack, its a defense pact, so stop spreading russian propaganda.