Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
Any brainworms in his speech that I should know about before I start reading?
He mentions Europe "plunged into chaos by migration" and may have a few other chuddy asides, but everything he actually focuses on is good and important.
Our legitimate questions were answered with excuses, claiming that no one was planning to attack Russia and that NATO expansion was not directed against Russia. Promises made to the Soviet Union and then to Russia in the late '80s and early '90s about not including new members into the bloc were conveniently forgotten. If remembered at all, it was mockingly said that these assurances were verbal and thus non-binding.
We have consistently, in the 90s and later, pointed out the errors of the course chosen by Western elites, not just criticized and warned but proposed alternatives, constructive solutions, emphasized the importance of developing a mechanism for European and global security that would satisfy everyone – I want to emphasize, everyone.
. . .
Sometimes it seems that ruling European politicians and eurobureaucrats are more afraid of falling out of favor with Washington than losing the trust of their own people, their own citizens. Recent elections to the European Parliament also show this. European politicians swallow humiliation, rudeness, and scandals involving surveillance of European leaders, while the US simply uses them for its own interests . . .
I'm only halfway through but at one point he calls the western elites "liberal-globalist" which was a little strange to me
As for the United States itself, the ongoing attempts by the liberal-globalist elites ruling there today to spread their ideology worldwide by any means, to maintain their imperial status, their dominance, only further exhaust the country, lead it to degradation, and directly contradict the true interests of the American people.
Liberal-Globalist is interchangeable with International Capital or the International Bourgeoisie
I feel like we'll have a field day of possible struggle sessions with the terms over here (to me, it feels dirty; a bit of page torn from "the Protocols of Zion")
I'd prefer to say "Western Capital and its compradors"
There is nothing wrong with calling them liberal globalist
The word "globalist" is pretty much exclusively used by Nazis as a dogwhistle.
Putin is not a nazi nor is it anything weird about calling them Globalist.
The last 2 years has shown us that the pro globalist sides are defending actual Nazis
There's definitely something weird about a guy whose base is very nationalistic (and not in the national liberation sense) positioning himself in opposition to "liberal globalism" when you and I know perfectly well that 'liberal' in that phrase can perfectly mean the f slur, and 'globalism' means NATO just as much as it means immigrants. Putin has sold this war domestically as a fight against western decadence, as though they're fighting a morally indecent society.
I'm not saying Putin is wrong to defend against NATO expansionism though, just to be clear, but you don't have to hand it to him.
This whole anti nato/globalist right wing red brown thing doesnt exist its just projection from neoliberals
Why whould you assume that it has anything to do with f slur or immigrants, do you think pro Nato people are pro immigrants or progressive or something?
Why do you (plural) assoicated anti nato with reactionary
Dont get me wrong Putin has reactionary views himself i just dont think we should be pearl clutching about the word globalist.
Z
It's not a red/brown alliance if the reds are all dead, genius. Putin is not your savior, he's just in a position where he's doing anti-imperialism as a result of his country being ostracized and excluded from participating in imperialism. I can't exactly call him an opportunist because he's not even genuinely trying to sell his government as progressive anyway. He's calling queer people in Russia extremists, and yeah obviously NATO demons have an even worse track record, but don't act like there's no reason for me to be skeptical of his angle when he calls his war a crusade against the globalists.
Just to make my point clear: NATO is even worse than Russia at all the things Russia is accusing them of being good at. NATO is more racist, more queerphobic, more reactionary than Russia. But Putin has to bat for a base of nationalistic chuds in his own country, which is why he attacks the West for accepting immigrants, pinkwashing, and not respecting tradition or whatever. He's weirdly doing the right things while saying all the wrong things.
It obviously isn’t, seen by the widespread usage of the term across the political spectrum
The attempted rebranding of globalist into jew is a very recent fringe phenomena. Globalism has been the explicitly stated ideology of Liberals for decades, they self-proclaim as such
I repeat, show me anti-globalist leftist lit pre-2016, I've never heard the term used leftistly. It was alex jones fodder for decades, not sure why we should use it instead of imperialism/liberalism.
But I'd rather be specific and not simply of talk of mere 'liberal-globalists' ; I do not wanna look like a larouchite or settler-socialist (A la Patsoc Infrared)...
Dont let those patsoc losers steal our terms
How is liberal globalist or elites specific? Anyone can use it for their goal
But railing against Industrial, Landlording, and Finance Capitalists, along with compradors, settler-capitalists, semi-feudal lords, and the like... that's something they can't steal, -----!
They can steal anti-western... but they can never steal those terms specifically...
is moon of alabama the human trafficker guy or is that someone else
You mean this BeauoftheFifthColumn. MoA is just boomer conservative.
absolutely bonkers that that guy has a fan base after these details got publicized.
that's Beau of the Fifth Column