Comments
ziq wrote (edited )
i didn't read it but i've read stuff they've posted in the past and it was always designed to victim blame Ukrainians for not surrendering to russia and letting putin colonize them
but anyway they were banned for their continued misogyny and no action was taken against this post
Gardon00765 wrote
Are you sure? Maybe some people don't support Ukraine state because they force citizens to remain and die and consript. Maybe they also don't like always be called alts.
[deleted] wrote (edited )
veuzi wrote (edited )
The Ukrainian population had a choice
Yes, this is a problematic statement, because many Ukranians genuinely didn't have a choice. But that's not to say that war propaganda and nationalist rhetoric isn't a factor in how the Ukranian Army recruits those that volunteer (internationals especially) rather than those who got conscripted, and that is something that is rather inherent to any war.
So we are against the state but happy with what -- EU sanctions?
Not really seeing that in the quoted bit. Could you elaborate?
Notice how conveniently vague this article is every time it proposes alternatives.
Yeah, that I can see. I think it is more focused on critique than laying out alternatives. That's not necessarily a bad thing to me, that is the MO for a lot of post-left writing as well.
For the other bits that you quoted, I think that liberal democracy being better for anarchists than fascism isn't entirely speculative, but it is a common justification for well, not criticizing liberalism when fascism is the "bigger threat". We can see that same logic in, for example, American liberals trying to convince leftists and anarchists to vote for them.
Pointing out that the West has a vested economic interest in Ukranian resources and cheap labor isn't also wrong, even if Russia is the obvious military aggressor in the conflict. Defense industries in the West are also still making bank from this war as with any war the West have been involved in for the past 40 or so years.
[deleted] wrote
veuzi wrote
Tankies will of course use the talking points that are convenient to their narrative, and discard them when it is no longer convenient. No surprise there.
Gardon00765 wrote
they both had. Consription always bad. Putin and zelensky are both evil sending kids to die and should swallow a bullet.
[deleted] wrote
veuzi wrote (edited )
So how we are supposed to sabotage the Russian invasion from not-that-distant Dresden? By not heating up our houses with Russian gas?
To my knowledge, some German anarchists have conducted direct action style sabotage such as arson against vehicles owned by certain Russian companies, and have also be known to do the same towards companies involved with the Turkish defense industry in solidarity with the Kurds, so they could be referring to something like that. Not that it is very effective as sabotage, but it is a thing that anarchists have been known to do that isn't just a boycott.
In the stated context of anarchists donating money for equipment, they could also be suggesting that giving it to BOAK for example, or other clandestine partisan movements in Russia would be a better option for striking blows against the Russian war effort, than just giving it to the Ukranian military which is at this point well equipped.
Yes of course. But when you entirely leave out Russia's vested economic interests (coincidentally, Donbass, which Russia recently declared as hers, is the richest Ukrainian region), as well as the entire history of Ukraine as basically Russia's colony and Russia's continuing interventions in Ukraine's politics ever since the fall of the USSR, while also forgetting to mention that we saw, not that long ago, how Georgia and Chechnya's attempts at autonomy went, then it maybe might not be entirely out of line to propose that this is all rather quite distasteful tankie propaganda.
It would be better to elaborate on this part, yes, and it is somewhat telling that it doesn't. It is tonedeaf to rely on the "no war but class war" slogan in this context. It's bad but I still wouldn't say it's tankie level bad.
They are not talking about fascism but dictatorship. And coming from 'anarchists' whose entire programme is to advance towards the 'dictatorship of the proletariat', it is not difficult to see that this has very little to do with the criticism of liberalism. After all, they bring up how Czechia's 'democracy' hasn't helped the proletariat that much. But say nothing about how the workers are doing in, well, significantly less democratic Russia.
No love for the dogmatic politics of Marxist class distinctions, and I don't really know anything about these specific Czech anarchists. But from what little I know of post-Czechoslovakia political history, yeah I wouldn't be very enthusiastic for Czech democracy if I was from there either. There is value in calling out the "lesser evil" logic as well as the Marxist dogma.
But there is not that much disagreement otherwise, and I think I am at my limit of how much I'm willing to be the devils advocate for an ancom tract, so I'm fine with leaving it at that.
ziq wrote
change your username tank
AnarchoDoom OP wrote (edited )
lol
Somehow I knew you'd shit your pants over this post, and text (which you didn't even read, but ANYWAYS).
ziq wrote
it's not exactly rocket science predicting i'd be against your imperialist bullshit
rot wrote
too bad it comes from a pro russia site that blames the ukrainian people because on some points id agree.
veuzi wrote (edited )
Honestly this article isn't horribly bad. It is very rooted in class-struggle politics which is obviously cringe, but I'm not seeing any takes that would inherently provide cover for Russian imperialism in there. I guess the issue is with which particular user that decided to post this and why.