axont [any,they/them]

good post

I’ve come to realize I gotta preface a lot of what I say on other instances like this: Russia is an imperialist country and I’d laugh if Putin got forcibly removed from power. I’m a communist.

No, the EU should not exist either. No neoliberal institution should exist, including things like the IMF, World Bank, USMCA, NATO, the EU. Should all become memories. Yeah except that’s not the world we’ve got quite yet.

I can’t really talk much about what should happen. Money, bosses, landlords, and banks shouldn’t exist either, but too bad, right? And yeah we can say all day what would have happened had Ukraine become an EU member nearly a decade ago, but it didn’t happen and now we’re stuck in this situation. It’s all alternate history now. Best case scenario I see right at this moment is a ceasefire even if that means Ukraine loses territory.

Russia has no excuse and neither does NATO. The best case scenario is both countries lay down their arms and have socialists take power. Unfortunately we don’t live in that kind of situation, so the only thing I can advocate is both NATO and Russia cease fighting. Ukraine shouldn’t ally with NATO because NATO shouldn’t exist.

What negative effects would Russia be feeling? I don’t know, personally I thought Russia entering the war was a bad call and a strategic mistake. I can see the reason why it happened while still saying it’s an open act of aggression. Russia probably could have negotiated with Ukraine about Donbas/Luhansk through better oil deals or something, no idea. Possibly could have tried straight up purchasing the land that Russian separatists occupied?

But Russia probably had reason to distrust diplomacy with Ukraine ever since 2014. For context, I believe that 2014 happened specifically because Ukraine’s previous government was becoming too close to Russia and it made NATO nervous. I could easily ask, what negative effects would Ukraine be feeling if they hadn’t had a western backed coup? Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych floated membership in the Eurasian Economic Union, which set off protests that were capitalized upon by western nations. Would it had been so negative had Ukraine entered a formal economic alliance with some former Soviet states? Who knows now.

The new president, Porochenko, was much harsher on Russian separatists in the east than his predecessors, which started the Donbas war in earnest. That’s the moment above any I can point to that started all of this. Maybe if Yanumovych had remained president there could have been a more peaceful solution to Donbas. Who knows now

Yeah but this is all speculation and we live in reality. The reality is the war should cease immediately, for the benefit of people in Ukraine, Russia, and all refugees from the region. Only way I see that realistically happening is if NATO disengages and Ukraine loses territory.

Maybe once fighting finishes something new and better can get negotiated, but I’m not holding my breath that neoliberal countries like this know how to resolve long standing conflicts.

We believe the war was started by a quagmire of situations going back as far as 1991, including things like the 2014 NATO-backed coup of Ukraine and the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia. This war wasn’t some random unprovoked territory grab dictated by Putin, it’s the resolution of western interference in the region for decades. Ukraine had been shelling Donbas and Luhansk for years. NATO brought this war upon themselves, basically. Instigating and prodding at the situation for years.

Also, Russia and Ukraine, near the start of the war, floated the possibility of a ceasefire and NATO pressured them out of it. The USA saw the possibility of a proxy war and started drooling.

We don’t support Russia so much as we see them as one unfortunate reality fighting another unfortunate reality. The war’s true culprit is capitalism, and as a leftist the only conclusion you should reach is wars like this are senseless and they should immediately stop. And the only way I see this war to stop is if Ukraine immediately surrenders and loses territory, otherwise we’d just be back in 2014 all over again and the situation would repeat. I can vaguely see how that could be construed as pro-Russia, but it’s more that I believe diplomacy with Russia is strained, Russia is volatile, and nothing is gained from open warfare with them. Everyone needs to stop fighting, whatever that takes, because the only winners in wars like this are wealthy capitalists, the rest of us lose.

Hey, Star Trek is good sometimes :(

I’m still confused on what constitutes Kremlin propaganda though. The world is a multifaceted place and I personally like to think I came to my opinions through studying, learning with other people, visiting places, reading history, working for a boss, paying rent to a landlord, etc… I’m an American and I’ve never read a word of Russian, and as far as I know I haven’t engaged with Russian troll farms or whatever, and even if I have, my political opinions don’t come solely from forums or twitter.

I don’t think it’s fair to us or yourself to dismiss political opinions you find distasteful as trolling or Russian state-funded propaganda. There are a lot of people in the world, you know? There are all sorts of people like socialists in Africa who might have a very positive opinion of China and things like the Belt and Road Initiative. There are a lot of Chinese socialists who have a positive opinion of China too. There are communists all over the world who don’t necessarily share the same immediate distaste for socialist projects of the past or present. Are they all just wrong or disqualified from analysis or what? I’m saying this as a genuine question and I don’t mean to sound sarcastic, but I know tones are hard to impart over text like this.

Are they all parroting propaganda when they’re stating their point of view? That’s where I get lost. I’ve been accused a few times now from other instances of parroting Russian propaganda when I don’t think I’ve done anything of the sort. Do I have to put a disclaimer in every post I make about how modern Russia is a bourgeois nation built on oil money that I don’t admire? Because I can say that, but it’s gonna get tedious.

Also I am a non-binary queer person and I can’t really say much about the socialist countries I admire in terms of LGBTQ rights, since I’ve never lived there. But I have visited one socialist country (China) and it seemed alright, I guess. Maybe living there would be different, but I did bring up being non-binary to several people there and no one gave a shit. Also saw a bunch of gay bars in Shenzhen, like, everywhere. Anecdotal experience I know, but it is always gonna color my perception of this.

At first I thought the accusations of bigotry were because of the jokes we make about Italians or our criticisms of the state of Israel. Turns out that wasn’t it.

Currently I’m still very confused, because it seems like any positive claim about the USSR or any discussion of Russia outside of a pro-NATO lens can be considered bigotry. This is where I’m lost, because I truly don’t get it.

I’m welcome to temper how much I talk about China and Russia on other instances, because I realize they’re contentious topics and honestly I’d much rather discuss political stuff closer to me anyway. But I really don’t understand how I’m supposed to discuss things that fall outside of a typical western perception of socialist countries, or anti-imperialism, or modern Russia. Should I just avoid those topics entirely? Should I not say anything unless I’m saying the consensus western liberal opinion? Because that doesn’t feel right.

Rogan doesn’t just talk to any cranks, he gives a voice to incredibly bigoted cranks like Sam Harris, Douglas Murray, and Jordan Peterson.

These types are more than simple fringe eccentrics, they’re outright racist, transphobic lunatics who shouldn’t feel comfortable showing their faces in polite society. Nothing can be gained from talking with these people unless we’re all laughing at them or we’re learning how to identify their type of fascism.

That would be funny though, if Rogan had these folk on his show specifically to mock them and show everyone what clowns they are, like what Zizek did to Peterson. But Rogan doesn’t clown on them. He talks to them as seriously as he does anyone else, and even occasionally agrees with them, so what value does that provide? Should freedom of speech include racist screeds or calls for violence against trans people?

good thoughtful post

It was crowded on Japanese intercity commuter rail? Was this a JR Line or a city metro line? Were you on peak hours?

I’ve been on hundreds of trains in Japan and the only time I remember it being too crowded to move are the ones early in the morning and the ones at rush hour.

They also get a little crowded in inner cities on Friday and Saturday nights, but you know what? They’re great. They’re almost never late, they’re comfortable, and they get you where you’re going. Cheap too. I remember going from Narita to Shinjuku (40 something miles) for around 2700 yen (like $24).

The best trains I’ve used ever are actually in China, unless the shinkansen in Japan counts. The shinkansen is the best transportation I’ve ever experienced. Surreal levels of comfort and smoothness.

Big Andorra

Oh you reminded me I have some Coco Ichibanya curry mix in the cupboard somewhere. I know what I’m eating tonight

There’s a particular Midwestern thing of putting a working TV directly in front of the broken TV

I actually kind of embrace the players doing whatever they want, so long as it’s not some way to harass other players or the DM. If they’re doing something to deliberately ruin the game, that’s not acceptable. If they’re doing something the DM didn’t expect or account for, that’s just the game baybee. It be how it is

yeah it’s an issue with the Hexbear embed images I’ve seen in a lot of federated instances. I’m hoping one day it’s resolved.

Shinzo Abe was a clown and Japan’s abortion laws are draconian.