tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post631742347820574803..comments2024-01-19T04:00:42.885-05:00Comments on Permanent Revolution: Revisiting the events of Jan 6Alex Steinerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09128453587484101609noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-11706003022987683162022-11-26T08:46:17.036-05:002022-11-26T08:46:17.036-05:00Mark,
You have nothing to say that responds to m...Mark, <br /><br />You have nothing to say that responds to my note from Nov. 9.You provided a false account of our position on the Ukraine-Russian war. Your attempt to justify yourself by citing some writings of Lenin and other Marxists (without I might add actually providing any references) does not absolve you of your dishonest behavior. It is clear that it is a waste of time having any further debates with you. You are welcome to embrace the Grey Zone and Tucker Carlson and join the reactionary anti-vaxxers but you will not find a forum for that point of view here. Alex Steinerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09128453587484101609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-39084905366235935372022-11-18T21:52:34.993-05:002022-11-18T21:52:34.993-05:00Is an additional comment warranted? It's not q...Is an additional comment warranted? It's not quite clear, it's interesting that you accused me of not taking dialectics seriously, but who else is giving you a critique here which is one of the most basic forms of dialectics? Of course Hegel and Marx gave dialectics an ontological meaning, dialectics applied not merely to arguments but to concepts and societal institutions. If I did not take dialectics seriously, I probably would not have learned that.<br /><br />You assert that I've "travelled [far] away from Marxism and socialism". I don't think I have to remind you of the debates within the Second International. I've had to reread these debates on the subjects of 'self-determination' in formulating my response. I tend to side with Lenin and that means the right of oppressed peoples to secede and that this was important for Marxism. In your reference to 'self-determination' there doesn't appear to be any reference to the seminal Marxist definition of the concept.<br /><br />Of all the Marxists post Marx, I think Lenin was the most unimpeachable, does that mean he was perfect? Absolutely not, but if Lenin was right in some of these instances it also means Trotsky and Luxembourg who took opposing positions were wrong, that's why these debates are important even if we share a common goal or a common ideology. The state of Marxism is in poor shape today, because we forgot about the common goal, we want to "socially distance" ourselves, to borrow a term from Fauci, from those we deem different from ourselves as unworthy of pursuing the cause of socialism, and end up with tiny sects of those that don't deserve to be mentioned.<br /><br />I still think the Jan 6th critique would be interesting, but I'm not sure it's worth the investment given your lax attitude towards debate. Posting here it's unclear whether or not something will be published no matter how substantive the comment is.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04624839910570059635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-65081364886780948592022-11-12T15:50:07.974-05:002022-11-12T15:50:07.974-05:00Just to follow up on the COVID discussion, I did r...Just to follow up on the COVID discussion, I did review the article that you praised. Unfortunately, that is more of an endorsement of Big Pharma than it is a critique. This article was written in December 2020, before the mass COVID vaccine rollout. Most of the article is devoted to "vaccine hesitancy", among socialists apparently! Of the few scientific claims made in the article is the one that "70 percent immunity [is] necessary to end the pandemic", and it is implied that this can be achieved through mass COVID vaccination. In practice we know that didn't work. As RFK Jr. points out in his book that several countries experienced an increase in COVID infections even in some cases with vaccination rates well above the magic 70 percent threshold. Specifically he mentions Gibraltar, Malta, Iceland, Belgium, Singapore, Britain, and Israel, all countries that had a rapid roll out of the COVID vaccines.<br /><br />One potential explanation here is that the COVID vaccines did not provide the robust immunity that they were thought to have prior to the mass rollout. Now we know that in the testing of the vaccines, in the trials overseen by both governments and Big Pharma never tested for the efficacy in terms of contraction and non-transmission of the virus. In other words the 'vaccines' were never tested as such as an actual innoculation against this particular disease. We also know from several studies that infection from SARS-Cov-2 provides a more robust immunity than that of mRNA vaccination which causes to the body to produce only a fragment of the virus, the so-called "spike protein", which also happens to be the most dangerous part causing blood clots among other issues.<br /><br />Moreover, this singular focus on "vaccination" promoted by Big Pharma, Bill Gates and the WHO, and governments around the world came at the expense at other approaches such as the "focused protection" advocated by the Great Barrington Declaration, and early treatment which could have been effective tools in reducing the spread of the virus. Instead of treating COVID, in wealthy countries we implemented draconian lockdowns that kept healthy people at home, implemented infective mask mandates, we sent sick people to work because they were considered "essential workers'', and did nothing to address the crisis in the health care system. Anyone not convinced that these policies have been a disaster should read RFK Jr.'s book.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04624839910570059635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-40526748310165498312022-11-10T04:39:47.292-05:002022-11-10T04:39:47.292-05:00Response to Alex (Part 2):
The issue is why do yo...<br />Response to Alex (Part 2):<br /><br />The issue is why do you support COVID vaccine mandates when there is no scientific support for their efficacy in terms of the non-transmission of the virus. As for the claim that "MRNA vaccines are killing more people than Covid", I don't know, but that is a completely separate issue from whether COVID vaccines should be mandated or not, which is what the anti-mandate movement is all about.<br /><br />As for Alex Jones and Tucker Carlson, I don't know their positions on COVID vaccine mandates and I suspect you don't either.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04624839910570059635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-65209947341463779992022-11-10T04:36:29.288-05:002022-11-10T04:36:29.288-05:00Response to Alex (Part 1):
Part of the problem is...Response to Alex (Part 1):<br /><br />Part of the problem is that you don't have a worked out or consistent position on Ukraine, you want to have it both ways. You want to cheerlead the so called Ukrainian "resistance" to Putin just like liberals at same time you want maintain some kind of commitment to Marxism and 'national self-determination'. That's where things get muddy. The Marxist concept of national self-determination, at least as I understand it, was developed from the perspective of oppresed minorities within a nation-state, exactly what we are seeing within the Donbas since the Maidan coup in 2014. The liberal from of 'self-determination' as it applies to Ukraine seems to give the right of a nation to trample on oppresed minorities, to form military and economic aliances with imperialists without any consequences.<br /><br />Is Russia imperlialist, yes, I don't think anyone needs necessarily an in depth exploration of the subject to know that. China is also imperialist, but seems to exercise a soft form of imperialism with its "belt and road initiative". At the same time, I don't think the aim of Russia was to conquer Ukraine, it seems that they were working toward a peace with Ukraine just prior to the invasion before the US and the UK sabotaged talks, then the shelling increased in the Donbas, clearly the US and NATO were provoking Russia via Ukraine. I don't know all the calculations that went into the Russian response, but it seems like the US had at least predicted such a response, which is why I would say this is as much Biden's war as it is Putin's war. From that point on, the US has been supplying arms, equipment, intelligence to the Ukrainian forces. Any Marxist claiming to support the "resistance" to Putin clearly doesn't understand what is happening on the ground.<br /><br />Is there a Marxist alternative? Didn't Lenin once advocate a policy of revolutionary defeativism? Shouldn't this apply to Ukraine, why should anyone defend a totalitarian government dominated by neo-Nazis?<br /><br />As for the reference to Tucker Calson that seems like a red herring. I haven't noticed any alliance between Tucker Carlson and the Grayzone. Even so, not sure the neo-fascist descriptor is accurate in reference to Tucker, maybe you would care to explain that. To Tucker's credit he provides a platform for some left wing commentators (like the Max Blumenthal, Jimmy Dore), he has opposed the Ukraine proxy war, exposed details of the Nord-stream sabotage. He is objectively to the left of any cable news commentator at least from my limited knowledge of this space.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04624839910570059635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-11552656662988251092022-11-09T20:14:19.284-05:002022-11-09T20:14:19.284-05:00I will not waste time debating with people who bel...I will not waste time debating with people who believe that MRNA vaccines are killing more people than Covid. Just as I will not engage in "debates" with Creationists and flat-earthers. I learned long ago, when the 9/11 "Truthers" first came on the scene, that you cannot have a meaningful exchange with people who live in a self-contained bubble that is impervious to logic or the rules of evidence. The fact that a significant section of conspiracy theorists, including those in the anti-vaxx movement, have made common cause with right wing neo-fascists like Alex Jones and Tucker Carlson, says a great deal about the political implications of a turn from a distrust of authority into a rebellion against science and rational thought. A certain amount of scepticism about authority can be a healthy impulse but when this distrust of authority becomes an Absolute it throws out the baby with the bathwater. <br /><br />But I will answer one question you asked - can I cite any literature from a Marxist perspective that provides a critique of Big Pharma. As a matter of fact there have been tons of literature on Big Pharma from a Marxist perspective. I will just cite one of the better one that I found online,<br /><br /><a href="https://www.marxist.com/covid-19-vaccine-big-pharma.htm" rel="nofollow">COVID-19 vaccines: Big Pharma profits trump human lives</a>Alex Steinerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09128453587484101609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-88713542358341684552022-11-09T19:29:19.909-05:002022-11-09T19:29:19.909-05:00Reply to Mark Part I
Nice that you fail to quote ...Reply to Mark Part I<br /><br />Nice that you fail to quote the remainder of that paragraph after the part about defending Ukraine's right to self-determination,<br /><br />"..This is crucial in the battle to win the hearts and minds of the Ukrainian masses who are currently largely under the sway of right wing and fascist forces. At the same time the revolutionary left must warn the Ukrainian masses about the alternative trap of aligning themselves with U.S. imperialism and NATO. The slogan of the day must be ‘neither Moscow nor Washington but an independent socialist Ukraine as a step toward the United Socialist States of Europe.’ That Is the only way to concretize the struggle for internationalism and overcome the destructive force of nationalism."<br /><br />We have made it clear from the beginning that the right of Ukraine to self-determination is subordinate to the larger inter-imperialist conflict between the US/NATO and Russia. <br /><br />We wrote in Part II of our analysis of the Ukraikne-Russian War,<br /><b> "The larger context in addressing the national question – an inter-imperialist conflict </b><br />Finally what we consider the legitimacy of Ukraine’s right to self-determination must not be taken in isolation from the larger context of the inter-imperialist conflict between Russian and NATO/U.S. We cannot lose sight of the basic truth that Ukraine’s right to self-determination is intertwined with NATO’s hostile actions against Russia. We do not take either side in this conflict and stress that those who live in countries allied with NATO have a particular responsibility to oppose NATO and specifically to oppose NATO’s intervention in the war.<br /><b> Opposition to sanctions and the anti-Russian witch-hunt </b><br />Finally we must oppose all sanctions against Russia and the anti-Russian witch hunt currently being pushed by the EU and the Biden Administration. Sanctions are a form of economic warfare and therefore just another means of carrying on and extending the war. Support for sanctions by NATO countries is in fact support for the war drive by NATO. While we understand why many of those who wish to show their solidarity with the Ukrainian resistance support sanctions, it is the duty of international socialists to oppose them."<br /><br />Aside from your dishonest selective quotations aimed at distorting our position you have exactly zero, nothing, to say about the theoretical basis for our position - our analysis of the nature of the conflict as an inter-imperialist conflict based on our analysi of the nature and therefore the trajectory of Russia as well as NATO and US imperialism. This was the method empplyed by Lenin and Trotsky when they had to develop a policy around war. It's certainly possible we are mistaken somewhere in our analysis, but you counter not with an alternative analysis but with stupid innuendoes and name calling.<br /><br />As for the Grey Zone, I used to appreciate some of their journalism but they were never anything more than inverted liberals and now we see where inverted liberalism takes you - into a "united front" with neo-fascists like Tucker Carlson.Alex Steinerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09128453587484101609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-90450649111585548642022-10-24T15:17:14.150-04:002022-10-24T15:17:14.150-04:00Response to Alex (Part 2):
I'd be happy to ta...Response to Alex (Part 2):<br /><br />I'd be happy to talk COVID and why you're wrong about vaccine mandates, because it shows yet again your concession to liberalism. What you're calling an "anti-vaxx movement" is a workers movement, workers don't want to be the guinea pigs for an experimental unproven vaccine in order to keep their jobs. Richard Wolff is an exception to the rule in taking the side of workers among so-called "Marxists", but even in this case I sense he is careful in his language in order not to upset his liberal supporters and followers.<br /><br />It was known since the creation of the COVID vaccines that they don't prevent transmission of the virus. COVID vaccination, if it does have any benefit, and this entirely questionable at this point, is only done for an individuals benefit, in other words COVID vaccination should be a voluntary choice.<br /><br />At least from what I've observed the last few years, the liberals are among the most ignorant in regards to the science of COVID, they can't be educated on the matter and won't bother to educate themselves. As far as this "legitimate Marxist critique of the pharmaceutical industry", where is it? It's coming up on three since the first COVID outbreaks and you or your associate have made no public statements on COVID or "Big Pharma". The only comprehensive study on COVID and the corruption of the governments and "Big Pharma" was done by Robert F Kenedy in "The Real Anthony Fauci", not a Marxist from my understanding, but a skilled researcher and competent lawyer.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04624839910570059635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-54521207007900102632022-10-24T15:16:35.740-04:002022-10-24T15:16:35.740-04:00Response to Alex (Part 1):
On the topic Ukraine&#...Response to Alex (Part 1):<br /><br />On the topic Ukraine's national self determination, this what you wrote a few months back just as a reminder:<br /><br />"In the context of today's invasion of the Ukraine by an imperialist Russia, it is incumbent on the revolutionary left to be the most consistent supporters of Ukraine's right to self-determination and resist Putin's invasion."<br /><br />In fact liberal war hawks like AOC are using the exact same language to support Ukraine's "right to self-determination" as they funnel billions of dollars in weapons and aid to one of the most corrupt nations in Europe.<br /><br />You talk about Ukrainian self-determination as if it were something you could decide for Ukraine and as if the only possible path for Ukraine is to "resist Putin's invasion." What about Ukrainians that want peace? Don't they get to have a say here? Also how do Ukrainians determine their own fate when the Ukrainian government has banned all opposition parties and consolidated all media so that only state propaganda is allowed on the Ukrainian air waves?<br /><br />Let's be reminded that all Putin was asking for was respect for the Minsk agreements. Some moronic liberal commentators have tried to equate Putin's invasion with the Iraq War, a bloody imperialist adventure waged halfway across the world hatched in the minds of neocon think tanks. While I didn't support Putin's invasion, I think there is some essential context that is missing from your piece. Credit to Frank, at least he includes some context about the Minsk agreements and security concerns of Russia.<br /><br />In regard to possible Russian war crimes you say the reports are "credible and have been verified by other sources", just because you say so? Do you realize that most accounts of Russian war crimes come directly from the Ukrainian government? There is little if any independent verification and virtually no independent media operating in Ukraine. Still there have been disputes about so-called Russian war crimes, if you had taken time to investigate you might have come across articles from the Grayzone ([1], [2]) that contradict Western reports.<br /><br />War in any case is barbaric, it wouldn't surprise me to the least if atrocities had been committed on both sides, but as Marxists we should be the least bit aware of how such reports function within Western media. The obvious point apparently has to be made, the purpose of these reports is to portray Russia as a barbaric nation and Putin as a madman, it is also to generate sympathy for Ukraine as we dole out billions in arms and aid for another "forever war." In your article you barely acknowledge such a function, such reports merely serve as ammunition in your conflict with what you call "Putin apologists."<br /><br />[1] https://thegrayzone.com/2022/04/03/testimony-mariupol-hospital-ukrainian-deceptions-media-malpractice/<br />[2] https://thegrayzone.com/2022/03/18/bombing-mariupol-theater-ukrainian-azov-nato-intervention/Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04624839910570059635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-489376810108040362022-10-23T19:59:52.600-04:002022-10-23T19:59:52.600-04:00Reply to Mark Part III:
Finally I want to comment...Reply to Mark Part III:<br /><br />Finally I want to comment on a series of misrepresentations of our positions and outright slanders against us. <br /><br />You accuse us of "adopting the positions of liberalism" and that we are just "repeating Western propaganda." Our position on liberalism has been articuated very clearly many times and we have repeatedly castigated those on the left who capitulated to "lesser evil" politics. For instance in this article, <br /><br /><a href="http://forum.permanent-revolution.org/2020/10/behind-politics-of-lesser-evilism.html" rel="nofollow"> Behind the politics of lesser-evilism"</a><br /><br />You don't cite anything to justify your claim that we are supporters of liberalism other than your horror at our ackowleding that Ukraine has a right to self-determination. I have already dealt with that topic. <br /><br />As for your claim that we are just "repeating Western propaganda" the only piece of evidence you cite for that as far as I can tell is the fact that we cited some articles in the New York Times, Amnesty International and other sources to make the case that Russia has been guilty of committing war crimes in the Ukraine. Of course we are well-aware that the New York Times is one of the leading forums for propagating the foreign policy of the Biden Administration and NATO. Their bias is very clear when they fail to ever mention the connection between the Azov battalion in the Ukraine and their neo-Nazi politics. And their unmitigated propaganda and demonization of Russia and the Russian people is despicable. But it does not follow that therefore everthing written in the New York Times is automatically false and a tool of Western propaganda. Again, I think it is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time. The world is not as simple as you seem to think. Nor is the western press.<br /><br />The accounts of Russian war crimes in the Times is credible and have been verified by other sources. I think in fact it is somewhat bizzare to deny that Russia has committed war crimes in the Ukraine. It was an indication to me of the lengths to which some left groups that have given support to the Russian invasion of the Ukraine would go to literally deny reality. That does not mean that Ukraine has not committed its own share of war crimes. But to most objective observers it is obvious that war crimes have been committed by Russia. And why should that I be surprising? This is the same country that savagely repressed the Chechens in the Second Chechnya War presided over by Putin. Does acknowledging Russian war crimes mean that we support NATO in any way?<br /><br />Your simplistic take on the Western press is symptomatic of a kind of radicalism that is fundamentally alien to Marxism. It is based on automatically opposing whatever you think smacks of the liberalism in which you were inculcated in your formative years. Let's call it an inverted form of liberalism. It does not actually overcome liberalism, but merely puts a minus sign where you once had a plus sign. It's a philosophy of someone who feels betrayed by liberalism but has not understood that this "betrayal" is nothing more than the working out of its own internal contradictions.<br /><br />It is of a piece with the anti-vaxx movement that you have embraced in which "Big Pharma" is seen as all powerful and pure evil. <br /><br />There is a legitimate Marxist critique of the pharmaceutical industry and their penchant for putting profits above human lives, but it does not follow that every product produced by "Big Pharma" is dangerous and part of a plot to control the world. Clearly conspiracy theories lurk in the background in your thinking as you have on more than one occasion expressed your sympathy for the 9/11 "Truthers". You have also embraced the libertarian rubbish that rejects public health measures like wearing masks because it is an infringement on your "freedom". <br /><br />I don't think it is necessary to comment further about how far you have travelled away from Marxism and socialism.Alex Steinerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09128453587484101609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-84086450499081214902022-10-23T18:54:50.739-04:002022-10-23T18:54:50.739-04:00Reply to Mark Part II
It is also true that the U....Reply to Mark Part II<br /><br />It is also true that the U.S. and NATO have been using the Ukraine as a proxy in a campaign to expand NATO and encircle Russia. Does that mean that Ukraine loses all agency? The fact that the Ukrainian government has come into conflict with NATO on several occasions, demanding more arms and even a nuclear capacity, seems to disprove the contention that Ukraine is nothing but a vassal state of NATO. While there is truth in the statement that the Ukraine is being used as a proxy by NATO to weaken Russia, that statement is a partial truth and does not by any means exhaust the nature of the Ukraine. It denies the contradictory nature of the relationship between the Ukraine and NATO. Also saying that Ukraine is "nothing but a proxy of NATO" is a way to completley ignore the fate of the Ukrainian working class. As internationalists we fight for the unity of the Ukrainian and Russian working class against their own capitalist masters. How is that possible if you are basically telling the Ukrainian working class that you are all fascists and go f*** yourself? Would you say that to the Italian working class who are now saddled with a neo-fascist government? Remember that even in the darkest days of Nazism Trotsky always insisted that internationalists must try to reach out to the German working class. Indeed the Fourth International had a number of martyrs who circulated revolutionary propaganda among the German military and civilians and gave their life for this cause. None of this means that we look the other way at the oversized influence of fascists and out and out Nazis in the Ukrainian government and military. <br /><br />You say that discussing the Ukraine war should have been an opportunity to discuss the right of nations to self-determination. I guess you missed the fact that we long ago published Trotsky's essay on this topic from 1939 in which he called for the right of Ukraine to secede from the Soviet Union.<br /><br />We commented at the time when we published this piece in 2014<br /><br />"it is not possible to oppose the right wing regime in Kiev and their fascist allies by conceding the Ukrainian national question to the right, unless that is, one is convinced that the consciousness of the Ukrainian masses does not matter and that the only thing that can be done is to support Putin's Russia as if it were a bulwark against Western imperialism and fascism. But it is this very position, which recapitulates the Stalinist policy of a "Popular Front" against fascism, that is precisely the position that many of our modern day sectarian muddleheads have stumbled upon, by giving short shrift to the national question, as they follow in the footsteps of the sectarians Trotsky was writing against in the 1930's."<br /><br /><a href="http://forum.permanent-revolution.org/2014/06/independence-of-ukraine-and-sectarian_3730.html" rel="nofollow">Independence of the Ukraine and Sectarian Muddleheads</a> <br /><br />Although many things have changed of course since 1939 the right of Ukraine to self-determination remains a principle internationalists should support. But the issue of self-determination for the Ukraine is embedded within the broader context of the inter-imperialist war in which we must call for an end to NATO's support of the war. <br /><br />As for the issue of self-determination for the people of Donbas and Luhansk, that is another question that needs to be addressed but it does not make the question of the Ukraine's right to self-determination go away. These are complex issues and cannot be resolved on the basis of your simplistic either-or logic. It really is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time.Alex Steinerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09128453587484101609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-17798732284026089082022-10-23T18:08:39.374-04:002022-10-23T18:08:39.374-04:00Reply to Mark, Part I:
Mark, your problem is that...Reply to Mark, Part I:<br /><br />Mark, your problem is that you never took seriously dialectics and are therefore caught flat-footed in trying to understand a complex and contradictory phenomenon - namely the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine. As Trotsky expressed so clearly in his essay, <a href="https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1939/12/abc.htm" rel="nofollow">The ABC of Materialist Dialectics</a> that in trying to understand and develop a policy in relation to war it is first necessary to clarify the nature of the belligerent powers involved. He wrote,<br /><br />"The fundamental flaw of vulgar thought lies in the fact that it wishes to content itself with motionless imprints of a reality which consists of eternal motion. Dialectical thinking gives to concepts, by means of closer approximations, corrections, concretisation, a richness of content and flexibility; I would even say “a succulence” which to a certain extent brings them closer to living phenomena. Not capitalism in general, but a given capitalism at a given stage of development. Not a workers’ state in general, but a given workers’ state in a backward country in an imperialist encirclement, etc."<br /><br />We have developed an understanding of the nature of Russia as an imperialist power, though one much weaker than the United States. We wrote back in 2015,<br /><br />"There is little doubt that Russia today plays a role similar to the Russia of the Czarist Empire as a regional power that dominates its neighbors. In addition few would argue that it maintains a full- fledged colonial occupation in Chechnya. It is also true that Russia is playing a largely defensive role vis a vis the aggressive moves of U.S. and European imperialism in the Ukraine, the Baltics and its Western borders in general. But that fact does not make Russia a “semi-colonial” country as some have claimed."<br /><br /><a href="http://forum.permanent-revolution.org/2015/11/russian-as-imperialist-power.html" rel="nofollow">Russia as an imperialist power</a><br /><br />You do not challenge any of this analysis, in fact you completely ignore it. Compared to Russia the Ukraine can be considered a semi-colonial country dominated by the U.S. and the European powers that are part of NATO. The conflict over Ukraine must therefore be seen first of all as an inter-imperialist conflict. As Marxist internationalists we do not take sides in an inter-imperialist conflict. We are or should be the anti-war party. Given the increasingly belligerent tone of both The US/NATO and Russia and the threats to use nuclear weapons, it becomes urgent for those of us in the NATO-aligned countries to call for an end to the U.S. and NATO's fnancing and escalation of the war in the Ukraine, indeed we should demand the dissolution of NATO.<br /><br />At the same time internationalists in Russia have a responsibility to call for the withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine and a negotiated end to the war.<br /><br />We do not take the position that one imperialist power is better than another. Those kind of considerations are the hallmark of the bourgeois pseudo-science of global strategy and have nothing to do with Marxism. They are also very common among strands of the radical left who see Russian imperialism as more "progressive" than U.S. imperialism, indeed a bulwark against U.S. hegemony.Alex Steinerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09128453587484101609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-64560652074196074242022-10-21T07:11:45.582-04:002022-10-21T07:11:45.582-04:00While the WSWS apparently misfired in its Putin in...While the WSWS apparently misfired in its Putin invasion prediction, everything it published on the topic of the Trump coup turned out to be correct. They even warned the working class in advance about what was going to happen on election night and what would follow, almost all of which would be confirmed by events. Their integrity on this issues is unimpeachable. <br /><br />Regards, <br /><br />Adam CortrightAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09243726181901547455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-44473387269354839972022-10-17T02:02:51.595-04:002022-10-17T02:02:51.595-04:00Would you actually like a critique of this article...Would you actually like a critique of this article? Maybe I can do that. Would you publish it is another question.<br /><br />I think I made the point convincingly in regard to your Ukraine coverage that you were just repeating Western propaganda. Bizarrely you were making a call to arms for the Ukraine resistance. I think it is clear to everyone on the left at this point that the Ukrainian people are just being used as cannon fodder for a US-NATO proxy war against Russia and that Russia had some legitimate security concerns that might have justified the invasion. The key point however was that this was not clear to you or cothinker Frank months ago.<br /><br />Unfortunately many of these issues are a kind of bellwether of where you stand politically. The Ukraine war, Jan 6th, COVID. While I'm not angry with you, I am disappointed that you are adopting the positions of liberalism. Could age be a factor? Should Marxists retire at some point? In the past I don't think this was an issue since people that have more relevance take the place of those with diminishing relevance. Then you have people like the WSWS who are just a cancer on any kind of leftwing movement and should definitely get out of the way at this point.<br /><br />The Ukraine subject would have been an excellent opportunity to talk about the right of national self determination. And this of course would apply to the people of the Donbas, who were banned from speaking their language and were being shelled by their own government. Instead you used it to argue for a Ukrainian resistance against Putin, can we imagine Lenin making the same argument? Either you don't understand the Marxist concept of national self-determination or you have forgotten it.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04624839910570059635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-689554891485113512022-10-16T03:56:01.576-04:002022-10-16T03:56:01.576-04:00This comment by Mark, a former supporter of this w...This comment by Mark, a former supporter of this website, is essentially an unhinged series of personal insults and ageist remarks without any content. Basically Mark is saying that he is angry with me for articularing certain positions or not commenting on certain events, and implicitly claims to find some kinship between me and those I have criticized in the past. While I would not ordinarily publish such personal invectives I think there may be an educable moment here about the evolution of a certain layer of radicals who have become disoriented by the cataclysmic events of the 21st century. But to treat that topic seriously will require more than a comment so I will reserve my remarks for an upcoming essay. Alex Steinerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09128453587484101609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062509833711600070.post-8765851156114164002022-10-10T10:42:01.987-04:002022-10-10T10:42:01.987-04:00I'm so glad you're giving Jan 6th its prop...I'm so glad you're giving Jan 6th its proper due, maybe next you can match the WSWS in its COVID hysteria. We have "fascism" in the US and Italy, but barely a word about actual Nazis in Ukraine and their hold on the goverment there.<br /><br />It may seem insulting to suggest retirement for a Marxist, but it seems like someone should intervene. We are not at our fullest capabilities for our entire lives. Plekanov was a brilliant Marxist, but failed to appreciate the changing situation in Russia.<br /><br />I'll still appreciate the insights offered by your critique of the WSWS. Unfortunately the latest installments of this website are only diminishing the peaks of your intellectual achievement. I would suggest a different path, unless you want to change the name of this site from "Permanent Revolution" to "Liberal Democracy."Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04624839910570059635noreply@blogger.com