Thanks comrade Obvious, we know about the Nazi battalions and the rascism of the Ukrainian state. What more's there to discuss? Well, we're scientific socialists and thus our understanding of fascism and our analysis of the state of capitalism in any one moment should be based on materialism. We can't reduce our use of the word "fascism" to that of liberals using it as a generic swear-word hauled at people they don't agree with, even reactionaries. It isn't simply "when rascism", it isn't simply "when nationalism" and it also isn't "when authoritarianism". If we decide to use this word it should be based on a clear assessment of the material conditions and whether they fit the criteria of fascism. Fascism, to keep this short, is a state of capitalism in crisis advanced by the forces of finance capital which is characterized by a total destruction of organized labour brought about by a merging of private and public property. On the ideological side it is naturally and necessarily accompanied by and gives rise to violent anti-communism, racism, sexism and ultra-nationalism. Enter Ukraine. It is ostensibly a capitalist state in deep crisis. Its pretense of seperation between private and public interest, already a sham before the war, has been destroyed in its entirety. Zelensky is a billionaire's puppet, one by the broader bourgeoisie and at this point a comprador for US finance capital. All forms of organized labour have been destroyed and outlawed. Collective bargaining is abolished. Any form of proletarian participation in its fake democracy has been ruled out. The press is gleichgeschaltet. It has opened its gates for the plunder by international finance capital, because the interest of the state and that of finance capital in Ukraine have become synonymous. Symbolically Zelensky himself opened the NY stock exchange a couple weeks ago, inviting the robber barons on wall street to "invest" in the limitless opportunities of exploitation of the wealth of his country with the guarantee of a docile and defenceless working class. [He also wrote an ad-ed in the Wall Street Journal](https://www.wsj.com/articles/invest-in-the-future-of-ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-stem-graduates-business-technology-sector-billions-partnerships-11662404585), emphasizing this invitation. That's what fascism means. Fascism isn't some metaphysical quality seperate from all this, it is per definition this state of capitalism. The ideological components should be obvious by now. Zelensky is a fascist, but more importantly Ukraine is a fascist state. Crucially this is an assessment we can now confidently make independent from Russia's narrative, however justified that may be. It is also undoubtedly a victim of US imperialism. Ukraine is also clear evidence that imperialism with its manufacturing of crisis and its exploitation of them via shock therapy measures neccessarily demands and brings about those forces and those conditions we call fascism. This is important, because it increasingly looks like the natural next target of US imperialism, the next crisis it needs to exploit is currently arising and being manufactured in all of Europe. This means the conditions for European fascism are developing as we speak. Being cold is the acute threat we're facing within the next months. But we're at risk of being so literally frozen in shock we'll be missing the neoliberal therapy that's coming for us. Finance capital will not leave this crisis unexploited. This will lead to conditions ever closer to fascism if we don't fight back. I highly recommend [Ben Norton's interview with Michael Hudson](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEZBOaPKWjw) on the topic and [Multipolarista's reporting on it in general](https://multipolarista.com/2022/09/09/zelensky-selling-ukraine-wall-street/).

Good geopolitical context for the current flare-up in relation to Russia and US interests. Shocking how blatant it all is really. Also everyone has to read the 2019 RAND report which he constantly quotes. It's essential reading at this point to understand US behaviour in regards to Russia and its frontiers since 2020.

With things being as crazy as they are and have been the past 2 years I've been seriously considering building up a stock of emergency supplies to last for a week or two ever since the first Covid lockdown. You know, not to survive the apocalypse, but to bridge short-term supply disruptions (eg toilet paper, sunflower oil, pasta, etc) and just to be safe and not rely on delivery services in cases like quarantine. But I'm not exactly loaded, so I've put it off so far to save the money. Winter slowly approaching has me thinking again tho. How do you feel about this? Already got your bunker set up? Think it's a waste of time, space and money? What would you reckon is essential? Any guides/lists?

Apparently they withdrew from Izyum behind the Oskol river during the night. Unconfirmed reports are UAF crosses the Siversky Donets river largerly uncontested and are either fighting in or have already pushed the Russians out of Lyman. All of this in the span of a few days without much resistance in crucial areas that took the allies months to take. No idea what to even say to this tbh.

I can't link the relevant Telegram and Twitter posts atm, but reports are about 60 Ukrainian commandos landed just east of the power plant this morning. RAF started shelling the area and engaged them with planes and helicopters. The Russians also claim they sunk 2 more landing ships due west of the plant. Situation isn't yet fully resolved from what I can tell. First, just wtf are these lunatics doing. Second, the inspectors arrived in the region yesterday iirc and were supposed to inspect the plant today or in the coming days. The Russians pulled out their forces from neighboring Enerhodar for this visit. Essentially the Ukrainians used the visit as shield for an amphibious assault on a *nuclear power plant*. That's the least nefarious interpretation here. What in the world would they have done had they seized the plant. Take the inspectors hostage? Do a PR piece for the world showing the planet they themselves shelled and attacked under their controlled to the world, using the inspectors to give the story credit? Just wtf. Edit: Seems like the UAF are currently detaining the column of inspectors at a checkpoint about 20km from the frontline.

There's fighting going on in the city that started after Shia militas stormed the Green Zone and the presidential palace. Combat footage is all over twitter right now, talks of civil war is coming up, neighbors are closing their borders, but honestly I don't really get what's going on. Pro-Iran vs Anti-Iran militias and interests are playing a role from what I've gathered, but that's about it. Anyone more familiar with Iraq and today's events?

In case anyone still has a doubt about wiki's leanings

[Source](https://twitter.com/JavierBlas/status/1562725207118594048) Bro I don't even know how I'll be able to use my PC let alone heat my house this winter lol

Despicable, vile freak

With almost 6 months of this war approaching, I think it's time to kinda recap, reevaluate and redicuss this war. Curious what yous think about the state of the armies, the strategies of either side, what are your predictions, what do you think the goals are and who's closer to achieving them? I'll go first and mostly talk about the Russian side to keep it shorter and because it's the active party mostly. # Strategy Honestly even after 6 months I find this incredibly hard to pin down. What are their plans with this war geopolitically and on the ground? Yes, we've heard "demilitarization" and "denazification" when things first started, talk about creating a multipolar world has since started too. But let's be real, that's all incredibly vague and the Russians really aren't communicating anything more specific at all. The liberation of Donbass is the one concrete goal I can make out. Do they want a landlocked Ukraine, destroy it completely, demilitarize and destabilize the entire West, just liberate Donbass? I don't know and to me it feels like they didn't start this war with a clear, concrete goal. Maybe they had one but didn't anticipate the dimensions this would take, maybe it's all going according to plan - I'm just unable to tell and to me it feels like nobody on either side is able to tell either. What's the strategy on the ground? Again, Russia is obv tight lipped about this, but I still can't tell this one either. What feels somewhat certain is the following - The pace is absurdly slow - This whole thing has mostly become a positional artillery war of attrition - Russia is unwilling or incapable of sacrificing large amounts of men, civilians and equipment in big armored assaults - Size of the invasion force has been constant despite Russia being outnumbered So where does that leave us? My most generous interpretation is that Russia is content with shelling the Ukrainians to hell, while fixing its own economy, doing its best to erode US and EU positions around the world and deepening their internal crises. That they're unimpressed with the fallout of sanctions, they don't care about completing things fast at all and really the kinetic war has been relegated to second priority, behind the larger economic and geopolitical calculations. That it's useful, because the West needs to dig itself deeper into the mess the longer this goes on and because it allows Russia to demilitarize NATO at a comfy pace without engaging it directly. The least favourable interpretation is that Russia is not capable of going any faster than it is currently, either because it isn't viable politically (eg declaration of war, higher casualties) or it militarily just can't. That they didn't have a clear plan going into this, got caught off-guard by the Wests rabid response and now don't have the means or the plans to end both the kinetic war and the fires it started. No idea which is closer to the truth and I'm not going to be a smartass and just say it's something in the middle. It doesn't feel super well thought out and planned, it doesn't feel like a panicked, incompetent adventure at all either and it also doesn't feel like some mix of the two. # Predictions Always hard to make in war and politics, but especially so in this war. Just a couple I feel somewhat confident in - This war isn't ending this year - Ukraine doesn't have and won't have any offensive potential - Russian offensives on Kharkiv, Odessa, Nikolaev, etc are hopium. They won't assault them, they won't encircle them and they won't besiege them this year. If they could or wanted to they would've done so early in the war - Bakhmut-Siversk line will take at least another month to take/break - Unless UAF collapses somehow, Slavyansk & Kramatorsk won't fall this year Fall and winter are approaching and I'd imagine that'll slow the absurdly slow pace even further at some point. But I reckon winter will decide this war anyway with the economic and social crisis really kicking the EU in the gut by then. They won't be able to support Ukraine past a point and Ukraine is simply not capable of surviving without foreign help anymore. Other than that I only see a few options how this whole thing could change its dynamic. A declaration of war and mobilization, a collapse of the West, a collapse of the UAF or deployment of Russian reserves in Ukraine after the referendums to free up more regulars for combat. Last one seems most likely, but no idea if that'll really change things that much. # Bottom line Rereading this feels like a whole lot of "idk", but honestly, despite heavily engaging with this conflict almost everyday for the past 6 months, that's still pretty much where I'm at. It's uniquely strange to me and just very hard to really make sense of - propaganda and fog of war certainly aren't helping. Keen on reading your opinions and whether you guys have been able to make more sense of it than my dumbass. Cheers

Has there ever been a more based country?

>The United States has shipped about a third of its existing arsenal of Stinger anti-air and Javelin anti-armor missiles to Ukraine >Ellen Lord [...] said Stingers cannot be replaced “within the next couple of years” because its production line has been shut down. Even simple items, such as diodes, used to regulate voltage for these systems could be difficult to obtain. >“Even with Javelin, we are probably five years” away from replenishing that stock despite its manufacturing line remaining open, she added. World class economy. 5 years to replenish 1/3 of its stockpile...

So I've had this as audiobook in my library for a while and thought I'd finally give it a go on a long train ride, because I'm out of other stuff to listen to. But my god...there's some useful stuff here, but I'm barely a chapter in and she's already insinuated the Tinyman massacre (on students wanting neoliberal reforms) happened so China could implement neoliberal reforms/shock doctrine, repeatedly compared China's economic model to Russia and the US and coined the term "corporatism", because neoliberalisms natural conlusion "isn't capitalism or neoliberalism or neoconservatism". Is it even worth going through the rest of it or could other works provide the same info without this anti-communist libshit? Edit: >From Chile to China to Iraq torture has been a silent partner in the free-market crusade I'm going insane. Also why in the world would anyone describe torture as a SILENT partner ffs

From a Trot-paper, still a decent summary of the speech and some explanations and context for non-Germans I reckon. If anyone's interested I can put up her speech in full as well. # **Baerbock's New York war speech** The foreign-policy keynote address, which German foreign minister and Green-politician Annalena Baerbock held in the New School in New York on 2. August, demands a reply. Some lies are so outrageous they can develop a devastating momentum if they stay unchallenged. Embedded in phrases about freedom, democracy and human rights and reminiscences about Hannah Arendt, who as a Jew fled Germany from the Nazis and taught from 1967-1975 at New School, Baerbock created the vision of a world dominated by the USA and Germany. She not only declared to fight Russia but China as well and justified this imperialistic great-power fantasy with breathtaking falsifications, omissions and distortions. In 1989 US-president George Bush had made Germany the famous offer of a "joint partnership in leadership", claimed Baerbock. But then Germany had been to busy with reunification to accept the offer. Today this has changed: "Now is the moment that we have to create it: a joint partnership in leadership." Such a partnership in leadership would be "no romantic project to bring back good old transatlantic times", Baerbock continued. By good old romantic times she meant the Cold War, over the course of which the world teethered on the edge of nuclear annihilation multiple times. Back then the Greens had still protested against nuclear weapons. But meanwhile Baerbock has - like Dr. Strangelove in Stanley Kubricks famous movie - learned to love the Bomb and thinks about using it herself. In a particularily bizarre part of her speech she describes children asking at breakfast: "Mum, what are nuclear weapons?", to then assure: "I really do like NATO" These children's grandparents had taken to the streets in the 80s to protest against rearmament. "Now these grandparents, mothers, fathers and their childrens discuss rearmament at breakfast." Baerbock here is obviously talking about herself and about the well-off clientele of the Greens, not about the large majority of the population that doesn't have the slightest inclination to be turned to ashes for German great-power fantasies. Over the entire course of her speech Baerbock repeatedly makes the point that the desired "partnership in leadership" has to be understood militarily. "In Germany we have given up on the long cherished German conviction of 'change by trade'", she said. It seems change by military force has taken its place. Russia's war against Ukraine has prompted the German government to "question some long cherished sercurity-policy positions: Germany has set up a special budget of €100bn with which we want to strengthen our Bundeswehr. We have revised principles of arms exports that were established for decades so that Germany now counts to Ukraines strongest military and financial supporters. And we have increased our contribution to NATO." But this is only the beginning: "It's our goal to strengthen the European pillar of NATO further...and for the long term." The EU has to be aligned strategically - "as a union which is capable to act eye to eye with the United States: in a partnership in leadership". And one that has to "become a stronger security-political actor", integrate its arms industries further and be "capable of carrying out military missions to stabilize regions in its neighborhood". **Brazen lies** After its barbaric crimes in two world wars German militarism had to measure itself. Now Baerbock is chaining one brazen lie after the other to justify its resurgence. This starts with the claim 24. February - the day of the Russian attack on Ukraine - has "changed our world": "President Putin wants a world in which might makes right rules, not the might of rights, in which great powers can consume smaller states at will." "I'm 40 years old, have been born in West-Germany and have luckily never experienced war or dictatorship", Baerbock continues. But now president Putin is supposedly assaulting "the European peace order, the international order not theoretically - his atttack is brutal reality". Baerbock may be relatively young (in truth she's 41). Yet the claim she has "never experienced war or dictatorship", is plainly absurd. Since her 10th birthday the USA, with which she's striving for a "partnership in leadership", is parctically continuously at war. Not only is it following "might makes right" in that and ignoring all the rules of international law, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Libya and Syria it has destroyed entire societies, killed hundreds of thousands and displaced millions. By now it's openly preparing for war against its economic rival China. Baerbock was 18 when then Green foreign minister Joschka Fischer gave green light for the involvement of the Bundeswehr in the illegal NATO-war against Yugoslavia. And she was 33, MoP and member of the leadership of the Greens, when they played an active role in the right-wing coup in Kiew, which laid the foundation for todays war. Elected president Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown with the aid of fascistic militias and replaced by a pro-Western puppet. Already then the German government announced it wanted to become a political and military great-power again. Just before the coup in Kiew three high-ranking officials of the state and government - president Joachim Gauck, foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier (SPD) and minister of defence Ursula von der Leyen (CDU) - had declared this in almost identical speeches at the Munich security conference. Baerbock's claim the massive rearmament of the Bundeswehr is a reaction to the Russian attack on Ukraine is thus an obvious lie. Rather the war has been a welcome pretext to realize the rearmament plans, which the population strongly disaproves, at break-neck speed. Since the coup in 2014 NATO has armed Ukraine systematically, promised NATO-membership and sabotaged all efforts for a peaceful solution. Russian president Putin reacted as expected of a right-wing nationalist and a representative of the Russian oligarchy and as hoped by NATO: He struck militarily. Ever since NATO has exploited this reactionary attack ruthelessly. It's waging a proxy war against Russia on the back of the Ukrainian population and is doing everything to continue it to the defeat of the Russian army - even if it costs a massive amount of human lives. Its goal: Neutralize Russia as geopolitical rival, unhindered access to its enormous resources and splitting up of its enormous territory. Domestically, in the USA as in Europe, the war against Russia and the offensive against China are destractions from increasing social tensions. Against this background Baerbock's invocation of "transatlantic community of values" and "irrevocable transatlantic partnership" - she uses the word "transatlantic" no less than 30 times over the course of her speech - can only cause nausea. It's a partnership of bandits. Baerbock wants the "transatlantic partnership in leadership" explicitly to extend to the conflict with China. "It can not be in our interest that China creates excessive economic dependencies", she declares and announces a new "China strategy" in her ministry "which is to be released next year and which comprehensively takes into account the strategic considerations here in the United States". Baerbock meanders about the daily fight for "peace, freedom and security" and the "irrevocable human dignity", while she's really preparing another explosion of German militarism. Yet she's markedly selective when it comes to human dignity and human rights. Violations - real and alledged - are always invoked when they harm a geopolitical rival, as in the case of the Uyghurs in China. They are ignored and minimized when they're committed by allies. Baerbock just three weeks ago greeted Egyptian dictator and butcher of Kairo, Abdelfattah al-Sisi, in Germany as ally in the fight against climate change. Al-Sisi's police has killed thousands of protesters, tortured tens of thousands in its dungeons and executes hundreds every year. **Leading party of German militarism** The Greens have become the leading party of German militarism. For it they're even sacrificing their political core topic, environment politics. To continue the war in Ukraine they're now for longer runtimes for nuclear- and coal-powerplants, for the suspension of renaturation of agricultural land and for the abolition of other environmental protection measures they've been fighting for for decades. Spiegel-reporter Dirk Kurbjuweit recently attested the Greens they've replaced the conservative CDU "as German state-party". "They are for arms deliveries, despite having pacifistic roots, they are temporarily for coal, despite it harming the climate, they are open for a debate about nuclear power, despite emerging from the anti-nuclear-power movement." They're supposedly doing all of this not to increase their chances of winning elections, but "so that Germany and Europe manage the crisis better. Thus the Greens, former protest-party, have become the German state-party, a title which so far has been claimed by the CDU." 1/2

[Source](https://mobile.twitter.com/sashasjason/status/1555819445297115136) These schmucks are literally calling the Amnesty report a display of white privilege and "totalitarianism" lmao

Don't know what to say to this honestly. Modern Russia with its history in the USSR, the devastation of the 90s and its current place in the world is just such a uniquely interesting and weird player.

Lowest hanging fruit, I know, but it's the first post of his I've seen in months and it's so utterly and unabashedly pro-imperialist, just had to post it. Man's literally sporting the US, Taiwan and Kosov flag now too. Beyond parody.

[Thread for more gems like title](https://twitter.com/MLinOesterreich/status/1553395987179311105) How do these people manage to come up with the most dogshit, anti-intellectual nonsense takes all the damn time