"I live here now"
-
Ok so I actually have a degree in Poli Sci and another degree in Econ, I have read quite a lot of theory, often got into arguments with my NeoLiberal professors over things like the IMF, WorldBank, how to evaluate systemic risk in financial markets, the idea of bailing out Wall Street during the GFC instead of jailing them all as corrupt, as Iceland did, once got a bad mark on a paper about conflict goods because my PoliSci prof simply refused to acknowledge that US Army troops were guarding opium farms in Afghanistan, independently sought out and studied modern Marxist econonmists outside of the scope of course work, etc etc.
I want you to explain, in a couple sentences, or paragraphs if you need to... how the situation I described above either is not settler colonialism, or is a wildly innacurate mischaracterization of the situation, or some mix of both.
Not just yell 'read theory!' at me and give me an author name.
I do not need the entire concept of settler colonialism explained to me. I am familiar with it.
If you've read and understood Fanon, you should be able to... you know, make that argument.
Succinctly.
In your own words.
Otherwise you're just a pretentious hipster, arrogantly name dropping authors and scoffing.
In simple words, in colonialism a country invades another country in the aim of taking its resources or exploiting and descriminating against its population or in the case of settler colonialism wiping them out and replacing them, what Russia has done is use military power to invade an area not controlled by it to change their ruling class, they want to make the population have a Russian citizenship and for the land to be under the map of Russia.
A citizen of an eastern Oblast of Ukraine after Russia takes over will still be the same as he was earlier, just now with a Russian citizenship. Just like how people in Crimea were Ukrainian citizens before 2014, but after they became Russian citizens, and Crimea is treated as a part of Russia (although not recognized by a lot of countries).
A Palestinian citizen after the colonialism of Palestine now lives either abroad or in a concentration camp or is dead.
Completely different situations
-
itโs about settler colonialism, something Russia doesnโt do
Okay, tap the breaks dude.
I'll spot you that Ukraine/Russia is the latest in a long line of proxy wars between Eastern and Western oligarchs. And I'll happily concede that Ukrainians are being swindled by their NATO "allies" while they're forced to play punching bag in order to exhaust its historical enemy. I'll even through in a "Maidan was a color revolution and liberal Ukrainians got royally played".
But the idea that Russians aren't above a little expansionism and exploitation is just... my god, man. Literally centuries of history to the contrary.
But the idea that Russians arenโt above a little expansionism and exploitation is justโฆ my god, man. Literally centuries of history to the contrary.
- That is not what I said
- Why should I give a shit about you agreeing with me?
-
In the Donbas? Half of them speak Russian natively, you dunce. About another fifth are natively bilingual.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Since you started it: are you blind?
There are no Ukrainians in Ukraine
"There are Ukrainians in Ukraine"
I wasn't talking about the Donbas specifically, they were talking about the entire Ukraine.
-
Don't you mean zionist
Nazionist Ashkenazi jews
-
Kinda like the Jewish invaders in middle east
Jew bad?
-
@dessalines And yet they still fight Putin. Go figure.
wrote last edited by [email protected]No they don't lmao. You're literally crying about Russia supporting Donbas secession.
They're the ones resisting Ukraine, they've been doing it since 2014.
-
You're making the claims, you get the source. It's really not that hard.
You don't have a source? It's ok. Don't make claims, only repeat things you checked the source for.
No investigation, no right to speak.
I've already provided a source.
-
Not two comments ago you were saying the soviets accelerated the Tsarist policies of forced russification. Either you know fuck all about Tsarist Russia and it's pogroms (and thus you're doing genocide apologia) or you don't know shit about the Soviet Union. Either way you should stop commenting on it and replying like you're aware of everything and that's just the thing you meant.
Unless, of course, disinfo is the point.
Tsarist Russia started with the russification process. The Soviets initially under Lenin reversed course, but this later changed under Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev. They accelerated the process. None of this is contradictory to what I've said.
The pogroms in tsarist Russia are horrible acts of genocide, but they were fairly simply anti-Jewish in nature. They were not a part of the russification process and should be considered separate. Hence when I compare the russification between tsarist Russia and the Soviet Union, I'm obviously not taking any pogroms into consideration. It's horrible, but unrelated to the subject at hand.
-
Ok so I actually have a degree in Poli Sci and another degree in Econ, I have read quite a lot of theory, often got into arguments with my NeoLiberal professors over things like the IMF, WorldBank, how to evaluate systemic risk in financial markets, the idea of bailing out Wall Street during the GFC instead of jailing them all as corrupt, as Iceland did, once got a bad mark on a paper about conflict goods because my PoliSci prof simply refused to acknowledge that US Army troops were guarding opium farms in Afghanistan, independently sought out and studied modern Marxist econonmists outside of the scope of course work, etc etc.
I want you to explain, in a couple sentences, or paragraphs if you need to... how the situation I described above either is not settler colonialism, or is a wildly innacurate mischaracterization of the situation, or some mix of both.
Not just yell 'read theory!' at me and give me an author name.
I do not need the entire concept of settler colonialism explained to me. I am familiar with it.
If you've read and understood Fanon, you should be able to... you know, make that argument.
Succinctly.
In your own words.
Otherwise you're just a pretentious hipster, arrogantly name dropping authors and scoffing.
-
Ok so I actually have a degree in Poli Sci and another degree in Econ, I have read quite a lot of theory, often got into arguments with my NeoLiberal professors over things like the IMF, WorldBank, how to evaluate systemic risk in financial markets, the idea of bailing out Wall Street during the GFC instead of jailing them all as corrupt, as Iceland did, once got a bad mark on a paper about conflict goods because my PoliSci prof simply refused to acknowledge that US Army troops were guarding opium farms in Afghanistan, independently sought out and studied modern Marxist econonmists outside of the scope of course work, etc etc.
I want you to explain, in a couple sentences, or paragraphs if you need to... how the situation I described above either is not settler colonialism, or is a wildly innacurate mischaracterization of the situation, or some mix of both.
Not just yell 'read theory!' at me and give me an author name.
I do not need the entire concept of settler colonialism explained to me. I am familiar with it.
If you've read and understood Fanon, you should be able to... you know, make that argument.
Succinctly.
In your own words.
Otherwise you're just a pretentious hipster, arrogantly name dropping authors and scoffing.
Settler colonialism a form of imperialism (theft of land, labor and natural resources of a weaker country by a stronger one), where the stronger country sets up a military garrison, and evicts or enslaves the local population. This is border conflict to halt the ever-eastward march of NATO.
The accusations of "russifying the ukrainian language" is pure projection; its the banderites who (with NATO help, Obama bragged about this one) couped Ukraine in 2014 (and who were killing thousands of civilians in the donbass) that have been attempting to make spoken russian illegal in the country. They've also been reviving nazi collaborators and building monuments to them as fast as they can.
It was the Bolsheviks (Stalin especially) who strongly supported the creation of a Ukrainian state, as it had a distinct national, lingual, and cultural character, while the western nations were opposed to Ukrainian sovereignty (The fascist dictatorhips of the 30s were essentially at war with all slavic peoples). Modern Russia wants to preserve Ukraine as a buffer state (as it was before 2014). There are many ppl more knowledgeable on lemmygrad and hexbear, that could give you a long background on this conflict.
Modern imperialism (usually) takes a different form from classical colonialism, but even with that definition, Russia can't be called imperialist as it fits none of the traits.
-
I've already provided a source.
You provided a second claim from somebody else. That's not a source. Sources include verifiable facts.
-
What should happen to the Israelis if palistine takes their land back?
The finders keepers rule of colonizers. We stole it, but you wanting it returned is stealing it too! /s
It's not up to you or me, or the israeli colonizers as to what happens to Palestine. That should be decided by the palestinian people themselves.
-
the Russian stateโs approach has basically been in every single way wrong.
This is the nut of it and the thing a lot of folks seem to struggle with. The NATO fuckery in Ukraine notwithstanding, Putin thought he could raise the stakes in Ukraine through a full scale invasion. He was absolutely wrong to do so. He fucked things harder than a thousand pogroms in the Donbas could have done.
The Russian ethnic minority and itโs treatment is a domestic issue.
Okay, no. That's not how internationalism works. You don't look across the border at an atrocity, shrug, and say "Not my problem."
The Russian response could have been to open their own borders, build up relief on their end, and give Donbas residents a safe place to run and hide. But "sorry fuckers, should have been a Russian born in Russia" is as meat-headed as the folks who wanted to charge into Ukraine guns blazing.
wrote last edited by [email protected]He fucked things harder
Last when i checked Russia is winning the war, its economy is rising, its economical bloc is gaining traction while the US hegemony crumbles and US vassals are in complete shambles (a lot of which like the liberation of Sahel is directly possible only because NATO is currently being uncovered as paper tiger).
I would say it's very distant from "fucking up".
than a thousand pogroms in the Donbas could have done.
What a nice thing to say, pogrom enjoyer. Donbass is one of the genocides we will never know how bad they would get because they were stopped in time. And if it wasn't, you probably wouldn't even cry the crocodile tears, beacuse what's a pogrom or hundred, right?
-
Ok so I actually have a degree in Poli Sci and another degree in Econ, I have read quite a lot of theory, often got into arguments with my NeoLiberal professors over things like the IMF, WorldBank, how to evaluate systemic risk in financial markets, the idea of bailing out Wall Street during the GFC instead of jailing them all as corrupt, as Iceland did, once got a bad mark on a paper about conflict goods because my PoliSci prof simply refused to acknowledge that US Army troops were guarding opium farms in Afghanistan, independently sought out and studied modern Marxist econonmists outside of the scope of course work, etc etc.
I want you to explain, in a couple sentences, or paragraphs if you need to... how the situation I described above either is not settler colonialism, or is a wildly innacurate mischaracterization of the situation, or some mix of both.
Not just yell 'read theory!' at me and give me an author name.
I do not need the entire concept of settler colonialism explained to me. I am familiar with it.
If you've read and understood Fanon, you should be able to... you know, make that argument.
Succinctly.
In your own words.
Otherwise you're just a pretentious hipster, arrogantly name dropping authors and scoffing.
wrote last edited by [email protected]You're trying to start an appeal to authority here while clearly being full of shit
it's giving me third party embarrassment. -
All that says, is that you are this close to admitting that Ukraine has been an occupied territory for centuries. Except you are using that fact as a justification for continued occupation, and not a reason for Russia to stop their colonial objectives.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I didn't say any of that shit.
What I did was state a couple objective historical facts and then ask a question, one that none of the downvoters and none of the people who have replied to me (including you) have anything resembling an answer to.
All y'all do when you get confronted by something you can't answer is downvote, fall back on lazy talking points, block, and ignore it. This makes your criticism very hard to take seriously, you just parrot the news, with no investigation or critical thought.
Not all of modern Ukraine was part of Russia before the USSR, btw. When I said "it" I was referring specifically to the Donbass. Donbass was given to Ukraine, perhaps in the hope that the Russian population would influence the politics of the Ukrainian SSR in a way that was more cooperative with the rest of the Union. This is simply a fact, and astute readers will note that it's mostly tangential to my actual question, except in that establishes that many Russians have lived there historically.
-
You digress
Edit: youre like 5 sentences away from admitting harm reduction is the only way to sort these problems and im here for it.
Absolutely, and the destruction of the apartheid state is the best way to reduce harm.
-
Absolutely, and the destruction of the apartheid state is the best way to reduce harm.
What does "destruction of apartheid state" look like?
-
I forgot about tinysnek. Is there a way to see his comics outside of Instagram/Twitter?
-
What does "destruction of apartheid state" look like?
Look at South Africa, for an example.
-
Look at South Africa, for an example.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I wont pretend to know much about South Africa or Palestine/Israel but my understanding is Palistine/Isreal are separate entities so if you were going to use civil disobedience to overcome the conflict you would have to convince the people of isreal.
Which, sounds fine.
