this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2024
152 points (99.4% liked)

news

23555 readers
788 users here now

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-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--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. --

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rod_Blagojevic@hexbear.net 42 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

You know what's gonna improve Russia, China, Syria, Venezuela, Iran, Cuba, Palestine, North Korea, and all the other places liberals hate? Being pillaged by American and western European capitalists (in the case of Russia, being pillaged again). That definitely won't create the type of crisis that's perfect for promoting fascism.

You're right, if you're worried about fascism you should definitely oppose an alliance between Russia and Cuba.

Less sarcastically, I don't know how old you are, but I'm old enough to remember seeing what the west did to the people of the Soviet Union. I know what they're up to and the people of Russia, regardless of they're government, do not deserve to go through that again. This is a world the US made, not Russia. If you don't like capitalist restoration Russia you seriously need to ask if anything else is realistically possible in a world where they have to coexist with the US.

[–] CamillePagliacci@hexbear.net 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

I'm learning that this place will excuse anything, including the violent suppression of communist by fascist movements and the US state department, as long as they can own the libs on the internet.

The Russian state did not have to turn out this way. This was not an inevitability. It took work and years and years of effort by the shittiest human being imaginable to make it the way it is now. It is not excusable to spend 30 years suppressing workers and building yourself into exactly what the US wants you to be because the US has a lot of power to make communism difficult. If the Cubans right now gave up on the workers movement and embraced anti communism, neoliberal capitalism and reintroduced limits on minority rights, that would be a tremendous loss, not some kind of inevitable thing we should just shrug off because "well it's easier to do that and you don't want them to face what they did when the US was more actively suppressing them do you".

[–] coolusername@lemmy.ml 39 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Is this a gpt post where the bot is prompted to be an ultra but always reach the conclusion the CIA wants

[–] CamillePagliacci@hexbear.net 2 points 5 months ago

No I'm just right and that makes you mad

[–] YuccaMan@hexbear.net 37 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If you aren't going to engage with what we're saying regarding the necessity of what the Cuban government is doing, or even reckon with the historical realities of why Russia is the way it is, perhaps you would at least like to tell us what alternatives you see. Recall again this is all in the context of a world domimated by a hegemonic hyper-militarized state with nearly-unmitigated strike capacity that has proven itself eminently hostile to both governments.

[–] CamillePagliacci@hexbear.net 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I think there's a side in this discussion not reckoning with the historical reality of what Russia is, and it isn't me. It really, really, really isn't me.

If you think the presence of Russia in a place will stop the US from interfering and trying to overthrow or remove that regime, you have not been following along. A Russian ship isn't going to stop the US from embargoing them, it's not going to stop them from trying to overthrow the country if they want to. Russian troops or deals with Russia haven't stopped the US from doing so with any other latin american countries in the last decade.

I don't presume to know or be able to accurately strategize for the perfect thing to do. I don't even necessarily oppose whatever Cuba is doing, since I don't know what Cuba is planning against. I just know that relying on Russia has proven to not work, and I don't like their government. If the Cubans find this to be the best option that's obviously their choice, but I still won't critically support comrade hitler.

[–] YuccaMan@hexbear.net 38 points 5 months ago

and I don't like their government

See, this is what it really comes down to, every time. You by your own admission have no idea where else Cuba might procure the things it needs to survive, but partnering with the Russians is verboten because you personally find it distasteful, regardless of the fact that no other willing assistance is forthcoming.

[–] Tunnelvision@hexbear.net 29 points 5 months ago (1 children)

So you don’t like this move purely because of Russia? I agree that Russia is not the nation we would want it to be right now, but it’s hard to argue they are 100% bad when they’ve been fighting nato the last two years. Not to mention objectively speaking Putin has been dealing with the Russian oligarchs his entire career that were created by the west. It’s only since the war in Ukraine that Russia has had any real hold of their economy since 1991. I think you need some historical perspective on this because you sound exactly the same as any western liberal.

[–] CamillePagliacci@hexbear.net 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

So you don’t like this move purely because of Russia?

I don't know whether to support the move, I don't like the optics of speaking of your warm relations with a fascist regime, and I think it is generally a mistake to trust a fascist regime with your security.

I think you need some historical perspective on this because you sound exactly the same as any western liberal.

Hey you know who said pretty much the same about Putin dealing with the oligarchs and not being so bad and actually their government is good and cool now? The obama state department before the Syrian civil war. I think the ones lacking historical perpective isn't me., I think it's you guys. And given the immutable fact that I am right (always) and that I'm not the one in agreement with the US state department back when it wanted to have good Russian relations, I'm pretty confident in saying so.

[–] YuccaMan@hexbear.net 32 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Nobody's telling you not to argue for your point of view here, but this "I'm always right" bit doesn't make you sound confident, it makes you sound like a smug prick

[–] CamillePagliacci@hexbear.net 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Given that I am in the company of a bunch of smug pricks, it would seem only natural to act this way.

[–] YuccaMan@hexbear.net 27 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Explains why you're the only one acting this way

[–] CamillePagliacci@hexbear.net 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm not though. You just disagree with me so others being smug pricks reads as just normal behavior to you.

[–] YuccaMan@hexbear.net 28 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I wasn't aware that people having clearly stated reasons and citations for the things they believe constituted smugness now

[–] CamillePagliacci@hexbear.net 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] Egon@hexbear.net 18 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] CamillePagliacci@hexbear.net 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] Egon@hexbear.net 17 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Hi Correct I'm "There's Several People In This Thread Have Taken The Time To Argue Their Viewpoint Clearly And Also Gone Thru Your Arguments Were You Lie About The Sources You Vaguely Refer To Yet You Somehow Think It's Weird That You're Getting Met With Derision Despite This Shitty Behaviour Of Yours", nice to meet you.

[–] CamillePagliacci@hexbear.net 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

There's Several People In This Thread Have Taken The Time To Argue Their Viewpoint Clearly And Also Gone Thru Your Arguments

No. There are two people who have done anything approaching that. One I'm having a quite civil discussion about the definition of fascism with, and one is frothing about Robert Paxton.

I should also say that I did not lie about robert paxton, as proven by accurately describing things robert paxton said, while the other guy was just flat out wrong. Although at least while being wrong he managed to cite an article (Although he seems to think it cleared the movement around Trump, which it clearly doesn't). It seems, to me (And I am correct), that you have decided that I am wrong prima facie and therefore even just posting a jackoff emote counts as a good argument, while me going through how a thing fits within a definition that I describe doesn't.

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 17 points 5 months ago (1 children)

See this is were I refer you to my previous comment: You're delusional

[–] CamillePagliacci@hexbear.net 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Again, no, I'm just correct and you're mad about that.

[–] Gay_Tomato@hexbear.net 18 points 5 months ago

Again, no, I'm just correct and you're mad about that.

lenin-sure lenin-dont-laugh

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No you're actually wrong and mad about that

[–] HelltakerHomosexual@hexbear.net 16 points 5 months ago

No. There are two people who have done anything approaching that. One I'm having a quite civil discussion about the definition of fascism with, and one is frothing about Robert Paxton.

you mean the conversation where you were wrong about robert paxton

[–] HelltakerHomosexual@hexbear.net 19 points 5 months ago

yes we're smug asf because you're not giving yourself any credibility to challenge that

[–] Tunnelvision@hexbear.net 12 points 5 months ago

Hey you know who said pretty much the same about Putin dealing with the oligarchs and not being so bad and actually their government is good and cool now?

I’m gonna need some proof on this because I’ve never seen or heard such a thing. Not to mention Putin was not able to fully deal with the Russian oligarchs (WHO HAD CONNECTIONS TO WESTERN POWERS) until the US sanctioned them.

And given the immutable fact that I am right (always)

Very cute.

[–] davel@hexbear.net 31 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm learning that this place will excuse anything

Okay, I’ll copypasta myself again:

Honest question from a non-communist, based on your reply here. Does one need to support Putin to be a Marxist?

In a word, no. In a few more words, support for Russia (not Putin, as historical materialists don’t subscribe to great man theory) is only a partial, temporary, tactical one, in the context of imperialist liberation. Russia is still a capitalist state, though, so it’s a two stage strategy: first liberate colonized bourgeois states from colonizer states, and second revolution within those liberated bourgeois states.

Russia is an interesting case: it has already liberated itself from the post-Soviet “shock therapy” neocolonizers. This occurred during Putin’s administration, which is why he is especially hated by the US. So now the support for Russia is in the context of keeping the colonizers from recolonizing it, and supporting Russia to the extent that it helps other states liberate themselves. But Russia isn’t trying to “liberate” Ukraine, at least not all of Ukraine. It’s trying to resolve the genocidal attacks on the people of the Donbas, and it’s trying to resolve the imperialist military expansion at its border.

[–] Tunnelvision@hexbear.net 22 points 5 months ago (1 children)

AMAZING THAT HOURS LATER THIS IS THE ONE COMMENT NOT REPLIED TO.

[–] davel@hexbear.net 19 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] Tunnelvision@hexbear.net 19 points 5 months ago

At least they admitted to never having read Paxton lmfao

[–] frauddogg@lemmygrad.ml 17 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I’m learning that this place will excuse anything, including the violent suppression of communist by fascist movements and the US state department, as long as they can own the libs on the internet.

Ask me how I know you're going to make a post that sums up to this in like two thousand words, with shittily-cited quotations and at least one outright plagiarization, to either lemm.ee, sh.itjust.works, or lemmy.world the minute you eventually catch your ban from this fed.

[–] davel@hexbear.net 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

They really did go from five month squeaky-clean modlog to permaban in one thread. huh What a speedrun that was.

[–] frauddogg@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I'd like to hope it's just like. Some unmedicated ish, and that they'll come back copacetic on a new account, 'cause I was here to see it and don't really get how that's possible, like-- liberals aren't typically that patient about dropping a mask; and that whole bullshit could've been avoided if they'd just shut the fuck up, accepted the critique for bearing western water, and actually stopped to think about the asinine fuckshit they were saying.