This is helpful, but what’s ultimately necessary is organization and revolution. Undermining the system isn’t the same as replacing it.

Join an organization like the Party for Socialism and Liberation! Capitalism could never be repaired, and depending on a capitalist state to fix the problems created by capitalism is a losing endeavor. Reading theory is also good, I recommend my introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list.

A lot of the Nazis are staying closer to Kiev, leaving conscripts to die on the frontlines. That’s why hundreds of thousands of conscripts have deserted or fled to Belarus.

Excellent question! In order to do the subject any justice, we need to explore fascism, Russia, and Ukraine, then circle back.

1. Fascism

In general, what is fascism, and what causes it? Fascism is, essentially, violent reaction to assert and maintain bourgeois hegemony. It rises in reaction to socialism, and to capitalist decay, coming from small business owners and sole proprietors above all else (who are pushed downward closer to the proletariat, their class position is precarious). Anti-communism is core to fascism, and usually nationalism is also core, which leads to attacking “out-groups.”

Capitalist decay breeds reaction. It’s also helpful to understand that as imperialism decays, austerity is forced inwards to cover costs. As profits from plunder go down, safety nets are trimmed so that the working classes absorb the brunt of the impact while the imperialist bourgeoisie stay on top, relatively unscathed.

2. Russia

The modern Russian Federation is a dictatorship of capital, sort of like a social democracy. Large state owned enterprises are leftovers from their soviet heritage, but the economy is thoroughly controlled by the nationalist bourgeoisie, the “oligarchs.” Capitalism was devastating for Russia, so the second largest faction behind the nationalists are the communists, in the CPRF (not the pro-west liberals).

This causes the nationalists to try to appease the communists seeking a return to socialism by trying to claim soviet heritage as Russian heritage, not socialist heritage. It’s a balancing act, where communists are gaining in power and the nationalists are losing power to them, but they are still far apart in terms of total power.

The nationalists gained power by kicking out western imperialists that looted the country in the 90s, but now they are losing their firm support amongs the public gradually to the communists.

3. Ukraine

Stepan Bandera was a Ukrainian nationalist and Nazi collaborator. With the dissolution of the soviet union, these nationalist groups began to solidify, such as Azov. Capitalism brought rampant destruction and decay, and bred reaction.

Ukraine is one of the poorest countries in Europe, and one of the most devastated by the dissolution of socialism. This became a ripe breeding ground for fascism. This is why they are tearing down soviet monuments, and upholding Stepan Bandera.

4. Circling Together

The far-right in Ukraine oppose Russia, yes. They do so as part of their anti-communist stances, opposing their own soviet heritage and despising Russia for refusing to do so. They also have connections to the western imperialist bourgeoisie, who have been supporting them for the same reasons they support Israel, as attack dogs. Within Ukraine, the Donbass region was historically Russian, and as such is also targeted by the Banderites in Kiev.

The 2014 Euromaidan coup allowed the Banderites to take power, oppressing Russians in eastern Ukraine, and allowing the west to imperialize and plunder Ukraine in exchange for personal wealth. Essentially, corrupt compradors were installed, modern Ukraine is a gangster state more than anything.

Leftover unresolved contradictions from the disollution of the USSR were leveraged by the west to spark the conflict and attempt to force Russia into opening their capital markets for foreign plunder as they already succeeded in doing in Ukraine.

and that a people with its own culture and language have the rights to have nation.

This is why Donetsk and Luhansk seceded from Kiev, though, as they are primarily culturally Russian, and Kiev, post-Euromaidan, began suppressing the Russian language. If you genuinely hold the values you do, then you should support the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics against Kiev.

The annexation of Crimea happened after Euromaidan. Yanukovych, the democratically elected president, was faced with a loan from the IMF and a loan from Russia. The IMF loan required austerity, privatizing social services, etc, while the Russian loan did not. Yanukovych went with the Russian loan, which sparked anti-government demonstrations due to the far-right not wanting to be closer to Russia.

The west backed the Banderites, who committed the Maidan Massacre, coup’d Yanukovych, and this sparked Donetsk and Luhansk to secede (as they were regions that majority supported Yanukovych). Fast forward to 2022, and a decade of civil war later, Donetsk and Luhansk asked Russia for support, to which they agreed. This sparked the modern phase of the war.

In all cases, the origins were in a decision made by a democratically elected president to reject western forced austerity, which enabled the rise of the Banderites to state power.

The key distinction with Ukraine is that the Banderites actually are in control of the state, and the various neo-Nazi groups are empowered by said state. Every state has Nazi groups, but Ukraine stands out in that said Nazi groups took power in a coup in 2014.

The EU is also fascist, as imperialism is declining they are surging to the right to force austerity at home. Same with the US Empire. The west is overwhelmingly fascist.

Can you elaborate on how Marxist-Leninists “use Marx’s name while rejecting his philosophy?” Lenin’s major advances on Marxism include analyzing imperialism as a higher stage of capitalism, something Marx lived to see only the very beginnings of, as well as organizational theory. Lenin represented a return to Marx, considering the Second International had at that point vulgarized Marx into a reformist. What part of Marxism does Marxism-Leninism reject? You specifically mention philosophy, but Marxism-Leninism affirms dialectical materialism, so I assume you mean something else.

Further, Marxism-Leninism is largely an ideology practiced in the global south, not so much the global north. Perhaps I’m misreading you, but you make it seem as though it’s largely western, and that this is why it “rejects” Marx. More common in the west are Trotskyists, who still uphold Lenin, or Eurocomms, who also uphold Lenin. The number of Marxists that reject Lenin, even if they disagree with AES countries, is extremely small, period, global north or south.

You compared me to someone refusing to apologize for a joke about SA, which I said I never made anything close to that. I didn’t say you said I made one. I really don’t think I should listen to what you have to say if you don’t actually care to read and understand what I say.

I never made anything close to a joke about SA or any racist statements, though, and you sound like someone trying to discredit a point by wielding this accusation like a club just because I don’t agree with you.

Gotcha, makes sense. It’s only in limited, personal cases that it works, within the same instance.

Interesting, makes sense. Blocking alone may be correct in that if everyone had the same block protocol, ie Lemmy or PieFed, then consistency wouldn’t be an issue, but federation and defederation still remains open.

Ah, gotcha! Thanks for elaborating!

I listened, I just don’t agree.

China is a socialist market economy, not capitalist. It’s also run by the working classes in democratic fashion. The large firms and key industries in China are overwhelmingly publicly owned and planned, and as the small and medium firms grow they are folded more into the public sphere of influence. The basis of communism is in large scale industry, not in small manufacturing, so it doesn’t necessarily make the most sense to socialize small firms.

As time continues and the productive forces develop, these become economically compelled towards socialization, which is expedited by having a socialist economy where public ownership is principle. These are all basic Marxist observations about production and distribution.

China is still making rapid progress and hasn’t slowed down in that respect, though. It isn’t that they are following a temporary solution, it’s that they are developing towards that better world, and building that better world takes time and effort. There’s no such thing as a static system.

Well I’m imagining a classless, borderless society where everyone’s needs are met and it is fantastic.

China has not reached communism, which itself must be global. It’s currently in the developing stages of socialism, which is the necesdary prerequisite to the society you’re describing.

You gave me nothing to work with, though. What does it mean to be a “strongman,” and how does that apply to Xi? How is it that my “thing” is “following the party line?” I do have opinions pretty typical to communists, and I support existing socialism, but I’m not a member of the CPC nor am I paid by them, and I do critique them. Just because I do not agree with all critique of the CPC does not mean I don’t agree with any.

🫠

No problem!