kano OP wrote

I'm still on the Mohawk Warrior Society, reading Louis Halls essays, the first essay is called the Ganienkeh manifesto, written during and for an reoccupation of Mohawk land in so called upstate New York Now I'm on the warriors handbook which is pretty good. I have the feeling that Louis Hall somehow knows every idea a conservative might have and rips them all apart. Also appreciate his use of relatively simple language.

Also technical specifications for work super boring.


kano moderator wrote (edited )

I'm very tempted to delete this, as to me it reads like any other russian state propaganda. Might respond to some of the points in there later.

The myth of NATO expansion in Eastern Europe and its role triggering the Ukraine war is one of the favourite arguments of the Western left. It is also flimsy.

The relationship between NATO and Russia is complicated. All leaders of Russia have, at some point, expressed concerns about eastward expansion of the powerful Western military alliance as a security threat. However, Russia’s attitude toward such expansion varied, depending on the country’s strategic goals at any given time. Even Vladimir Putin himself, during a 2000 visit to London, when asked about the possibility of Russia joining NATO said: “Why not? (…) Russia is a part of European culture, and I do not consider my own country in isolation from Europe. (…) Therefore, it is with difficulty that I imagine NATO as an enemy.”

Yet the Western left insists that Russia was promised no expansion eastwards following the fall of the Iron Curtain. The problem is there was never such a promise, and both former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and Russian president Boris Yeltsin have admitted this. It’s easily google-able: just type in “unification of Germany” or “Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation 1997.” And for the adventurous who wish to educate themselves on what Russia (and the US) did promise to Ukraine (and Belarus, and Kazakhstan) in exchange for the post-Soviet nukes present on its territory: try “the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances 1994.”

From the left’s perspective, the biggest problem with this claim, however, isn’t that it is factually incorrect. It is the apparent image of Eastern Europe in the eyes of the Western left as naturally subordinate to Russia, incapable of independence. Instead the two great colonial powers, the West and Russia, should settle this dispute, because who would bother asking nearly 45 million Ukrainians what they think, or let them sit at the same table as equals. This kind of attitude is, pretty obviously, left over from the West’s own colonial past and post-colonial present, and the requirement for its left to self-improve around this issue isn’t unreasonable – it is anti-colonial.




Check out the pinned post in this forum innit.


kano moderator wrote

Reply to by cyb3rd4ndy

General questions around our access to information and entertainment.

Above is a quote from the sidebar

How is this relevant to this forum?