…which the democrats upheld during the entirety of the elections. Are the Russians behind the dems too?

Trump was democratically elected, what are your plans against that?

Honestly, why does it matter? Why not just focus on his policy and his actions? Trump is a fascist, oppressing liberties, defunding public services, and carrying out immensely harmful policy. Why the need to attribute that to a third country? Trump is only bad if he does these things because he’s a Russian asset? If he did this all because of his oligarch friends, and the desire for imperialism in the USA, and the increasingly openly right wing governments in all of the western world, it would still all be wrong.

There’s no need to summon le evil people from the east to objectively analyse the evil policy of Trump, and I don’t understand why you guys need a racist dogwhistle to do so when he is literally every single day walking alongside someone who did two fascist salutes in the inauguration.

Not talked about, but I can talk about

Freedom to speak, not to be heard. Good luck saying those things on TV and ever being invited again. Good luck talking about these issues in a book and getting it published.

That’s kinda genius, I must try next time

That’s a lot of words to say that I’m right in practice even if not in principle lmao.

I’m a commie too, BTW. You’re way too charitable to the US institutions IMO.

Not even like legit access for US companies, but like they do for oligarchs in Russia

Our legitimate mining corporations, their evil oligarchic resource exploiters

the peaceful state it was in

Was it though? Wasn’t the Ukrainian government at war with separatist militias in Eastern Ukraine prior to 2022?

That’s my point, I don’t live in a Germanic country anymore and Apfelschorle (Rhabarbershorle too) is the only thing I miss

Economic sanctions on the early RSFSR after the Bolsheviks defeated the English, French, Italian, USA coalition that invaded them in the Russian Civil War.

You wish the US to be a genocidal empire? poof nothing’s changed

The US already bombed black neighbourhoods and murdered unionists, and the police kills “nonwhite” people at astonishing rates, it’s just those things aren’t talked about in the US at all.

The answer is simpler than that: the “checks and balances” system is a facade created to prevent meaningful progressive policy from passing. There’s a reason why Trump can modify a billion laws from day 1, but poor Biden couldn’t possibly do anything to codify abortion as a right or prevent the bombing of children in Gaza.

As always: the power of the working class resides in work. Organize your workplace. It doesn’t matter whether you stop buying cola, real impact will come if your workplace stops buying the overpriced 100k€ machine imported from the US tech sector. THAT’S where you really hurt them. Consumer expenditure is a minuscule amount of relevant key US exports.

Organize your workplace, join a union and create a local branch. Join an existing revolutionary socialist party. Create mutual aid networks in your neighbourhoods.

If we start ignoring the laws, we are no better than Trump

“Fascism is when piracy”. What a take

Literally the only thing I miss about living in a Germanic country lmao

OK, please tell me how the NATO block is any better in this regard, haven’t you literally just been witness to the most open genocide in history and NOBODY in the west did anything to stop it?

because Putin wants more power

They managed to get a Russia loving president in US

Holy moly “great men historiography” and “Russia is behind everything I hate” both in one single comment, that’s quite the feat. Great job firstly ignoring the material analysis and geopolitics of the situation and trying to explain history as “big man makes decision”, and then falling for the racist trope that the USA isn’t capable of electing a fascist without external interference, as if the US wasn’t founded in the fascist principles of the Lebensraum and slavery->segregation

If Ukraine falls

Ukraine will not fall. The objective of Russia in this war isn’t pure expansionism further to the west, it’s the imposition of its political principles and strategic desires in its sphere of influence. The Russian government knows it cannot control successfully for a long period of time the now (understandably) anti-Russian radicalised sections of central and western Ukraine, what it wants are concessions in geopolitical and strategic terms. Mark my words: the war in Ukraine will stop sooner than later, and after it, only some sections in eastern Ukraine will be annexed to Russia.

Furthermore your reasoning of “if this nation falls, there’s gonna be the next”, is exactly the way Russia feels about its geopolitical allies. In 1990, there was an agreement that NATO wouldn’t push beyond Germany, and that has been violated first with Poland and then with more countries. Why push a US-backed military alliance to the borders of the US-declared main geopolitical enemy? What consequences do you expect from that? Imagine a Russian-led military coalition pushing for the annexion of Mexico.

Ukraine rejected the US offer because it didn’t offer any safety guarantees

Regardless of safety guarantees, the resources of western Ukraine will be plundered by the NATO block, whether it be EU or the USA I cannot know, but mark my words when you see the economic situation of Ukraine in 2030

This is just a reiteration of what we’ve already seen in the russian empire and in the USSR

Comparing the Russian Empire and the USSR is the most ahistorical thing you can possibly do. During the Russian Empire and for all of history before that, Ukraine was a people without a nation. Oppressed, without representation, without borders, without a right to education or even learning to read in their language.

The Bolsheviks, with their first constitution in 1917, granted the right to self-determination and secession to all peoples of the former Russian Empire, which Lenin referred to as “the prison of peoples”. Quite literally after Poland seceded in this legal fashion, the Polish government decided it wanted to return to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth borders, and proceeded to unilaterally invade Ukraine and part of modern Belarus. It was the Red Army of the Russian Socialist Federation of Soviet Republics, that fought off the Polish invasion and established a lasting Ukrainian People’s Republic for the first time in history.

This wasn’t without controversy: while Lenin argued for the right to representation and to a Ukrainian Republic within the USSR, others like Rosa Luxembourg argued for a united, more homogeneous sort of socialist soviet nationality that outgrew former nationalisms. It is partially thanks to Lenin that Ukraine ended up having its own borders, administration and representation.

I know what you’ll say: “but Holodomor! Genocide against Ukrainians!”. The famine of the USSR was a sad and unintended consequence of bad policy during the collectivisation/dekulakization process of the early 30s. Millions of people died both within Ukraine and without it, especially as well in Central Asia and southern Russia. As bad as it was, and as avoidable as one can argue it may have been, there’s simply no evidence of any intent of attack towards Ukrainian people, it’s not precedented by anything similar, and it’s not followed by anything similar in the entire history of the USSR.

In those decades and the ones to come, Ukraine would obtain and solidify its own nationality, people would for the first time obtain generalised literacy in their own language, the right to study in their language up to university level, a majority of publications (both journalistic and literary) in Ukrainian, and the very next president of the USSR Nikita Khruschchyov would be Ukrainian.

Attempting to construe a history of oppression of Ukrainians in the USSR is nothing but fictitious, anti-communist and russophobic propaganda, meant to create a divide between Ukrainians and Russians. There are clear geopolitical reasons to do so, and there are clear reasons why Ukrainians are very much afraid or simply hate Russians, because of the modern proto-fascist state that the Russian Republic has become. But creating a line between this capitalist country, the socialist USSR, and the feudalist Russian Empire, is simply an attempt to divide Eastern Europe further and to push Ukraine towards the EU and away from Russia. This point can be argued for without resorting to russophobic and anticommunist myths. We’re smarter than this.

If Russia withdrew their troops, there would be peace immediately

That’s technically true. However, Russia uses military force in its sphere of influence for a reason, not solely because Putin bad (which he is, I’m a commie and Putin is fascist-adjacent at best).

Russia, like all big capitalist countries, wants to secure a sphere of influence in which it can do easy trade, influence the politics, and generally have support from these countries. The US does this for example with western Europe through NATO, and with less diplomatic methods by supporting coups and invading other countries. China does this through economic trade and through massive investment projects. Russia is in a weak position internationally, barely recovered economically from the dismantling of the USSR, and it’s surrounded by former soviet republics very much in a similar plane (barely economically recovered from the 90s crisis as a consequence of the dismantling of the USSR).

These post-soviet republics, such as Ukraine or Georgia, adopted capitalism (as Russia did) in a very quick and disorderly fashion, and the resulting oligarchs and capitalist owners ended up fumbled in a mix of pro-russian and pro-european/US positions.

The EU and the USA both exert pressure on these countries to try and bring them to their side. Being economically and politically stronger, they can use trade, diplomacy, intelligence and economic means to alienate these countries front the Russian sphere of influence. Russia, in a more precarious and weaker economic and political position, simply doesn’t have the means to maintain the diplomatic, economic and intelligence means to maintain these countries aligned to itself.

The war in Ukraine, much as the interference in Georgian and Romanian elections by the EU, mustn’t be understood as a struggle between freedom and oppression. It’s sadly just a struggle between two capitalist empires, namely Russia and US/EU, fighting for the control of smaller countries that they want aligned to themselves.

Once Russia doesn’t have the means to economically, diplomatically and through intelligence, to influence its former sphere of influence into staying by its side, the only option left is the military route. The US and the EU know this, and they keep trying to mess with Russia’s sphere of influence for gains to their empires. The reality is that there is no good side and no bad side: it’s just struggle between opposing empires.

So yes, technically if Russia withdrew its troops, there would be peace. But this peace would mean that firstly the surrounding regions around Russia, and Russia itself, would become colonies and vassal states of the western world. It wouldn’t mean “freedom” for Ukraine, as we can see by the exploitative contract for the minerals of Ukraine that the US offers. If you think the EU will offer something substantially less exploitative towards Ukrainians, you’re wrong.

Ukraine, sad as it is, as long as it remains a state between empires, will suffer the effects of both. And only socialism in Europe and Russia can offer a meaningful response to this.