Well, everyone is entitled to a fair trial. They are not guilty or eligible for capital punishment until that’s completed and found guilty by a jury of their peers. Try again, extremist.

No, it’s just violence. There is no immediate threat on your life right now and this is premeditated.

There Lemmy goes inciting violence again. Why is it considered okay if it is the right kind of subversion? 99.9% of people are rational but that leaves millions that take this as a calling.

Oppressive was the word you were looking for.

700 Russian casualties yesterday and the kids in the Black Sea naval war says this situation is still significantly dynamic. Failure to advance does not mean Ukraine has lost the way anymore than it means Russia has lost the war in their failure to take Avdivka. People matter. Attrition matters.

War is politics by other means. Germany lost WWI due to a political failure, not anything on the frontlines. French Soldiers were mutinying up to the day of the armistice. There is a lot of political will in Ukraine and Russia didn’t seem to get the memo that this has turned into an attritional fight. You interpret that as stalemate. They have interpreted it as needing to kill as many Russians as possible. With an average of 800 Russian casualties a day for the last two months, I’d say they are absolutely not losing this war but showing they can consistently be trusted to take the actions that are most sounds towards winning the war.

Don’t think I don’t understand propaganda and that both sides do it. You do match the Russian narratives perfectly though. Suspiciously so, actually.

Trick question. Ukraine has already lost the second Russia invaded. They’ve lost an entire generation. They could still lose territory but I don’t see them ever compromising at this point and Russia would have generations of insurgencies to deal with. Ukraine will eventually gain back their territory, if not within the current conflict.

That’s not why the West is supporting them though. They are supporting them because Russia is fighting an aggressive land grab not seen since WWII (or arguably Kuwait but not by a nuclear power) and using the exact same tactics. Every major world institution set up since WWII was to prevent exactly this type of aggression.

So, to answer your leading question, yes Ukraine could still lose the current conflict. They already have and that’s why they need the aid so that Russia can be as punished as possible to maintain the current deterrence for any other states that would seek to do the same thing.

I personally think calling them a colony is incorrect. They are an island where UK citizens live and have lived since the beginning of human habitation. They get to vote. They have the same culture and want to stay in the UK. The only thing that matches the colonial definition is that they are far away which is a relative term.

That is a result of the perception that those groups work against the state, not a requirement for fascism. Communist systems have just as bad if not worse a track record in regards to minority oppression as fascist ones.

If there is functionally no difference between the systems, it it’s fascism. Call a duck a duck. Oppressed people don’t care that the flag is red.

I understand the definition of fascism. You are missing the portion by which corporations are not allowed to exist if they do not further the efforts of the state. Basically exactly the same as Marx advised towards the end of his writings. Nothing is allowed to exist in a socialist system if it is perceived to work against the needs of the people (state)

There is functionally no difference between corporations that do not control the means of production even if they are charged with running it and a state fully owning the means. It’s just middle management.

The true marxist based left is not woke. It never was. There’s a reason that the western left turned liberal in the 50s and 60s and focused on reform. The CCP killed any thought that decentralized communes could be self-sufficient and centralization killed any concept of liberalism and a responsive command economy. If the majority can vote their way into resources, minorities suffer. With no opposition checking the ruling party, corruption sets in.

If you are referring to the American Democratic party, they are liberal and not left.

I am sure that will protect minorities! That’s definitely never resulted in genocide. It’ll be fine this time around.

Giving full economic power to the state does not make you less fascist. It actually makes it much worse.

Just a reminder to the true leftists who think they can force through their better society by giving society more power over the individual without changing the culture in the first place.

I thought my significant other was one of these to a certain extent. It does weird things to me as a DJ. Turns out that she just likes the limited music that she likes and cannot stand most everything else.

Cool, what is your preferred replacement and does everyone in this thread agree? You have managed to continue criticism but not offer a replacement yet again.

The engagement is fleeting but the spoiling of the narrative is forever.

I provided four reasons why this was relevant and you jumped from communism to whataboutism? Talk about being intellectually lazy (Or a state-sponsored account)

There is a decent argument historically that communism and other left movements are extremist, racist, and anti-lgbtq. When you start banning concepts, you open your communities up to several things.

1. Group think
2. Banning of other radical ideologies that you may agree with
3. You alienate those people from exposure to better concepts
4. You jump start compaction cycles for large scale propaganda organizations that could lead to actual violence