A 'Hard Left' view of the War in Ukraine

[Doug1943]

Just like the 'Right', what we generally call the 'Left' consists of many currents of thought.

Holding our attention right now is the 'woke' component of the Left, who by traditional definitions, are hardly 'Left' at all. (Traditionally, the Left believed in civilizational progress; science and reason; the rule of law (they just wanted it extended to previously-marginalized groups, with equal rights for all). The 'woke Left' hardly even pays lip service to these ideals now.)

And there are still traditional liberals, who adhere to the ideals mentioned above, but believe they can be achieved within a market economy, albeit one in which the state intervenes a good deal to help 'level the playing field'.

And then there is the 'Hard Left', which includes as its main, but not only, component various species of explicit Marxists.

Although people on the Right tend to lump the whole Left together, they are wrong to do so.

The differences are significant for political strategy, since we (on the Right) need to be able to make temporary alliances with those parts of the Left with whom we agree on specific issues. (For example, there is a current on the Left which opposes most forms of gun control -- these are people who are planning, explicitly, to kill us some day.

But for the moment we have a point of agreement. If we could unite with Stalin to defeat Hitler, we can unite with these people to defeat extremist gun control measures. See, for example, The Socialist Rifle Association, here: [ Socialist Rifle Association ]. By the way, these people are just as quarrelsome as some on the Right are, and at the moment, they're arguing among themselves. It's worth going to this link and reading about their latest internal dispute.)

And ... some of the explicitly Marxist Left are not-stupids (. They are very misguided, wrong in many things, refusing to learn from history ... but they're not ignorant and not stupid. (And often at odds with their emotional, reason-scorning pals in the 'Woke' part of the Left.)

One of their organizations is sponsoring discussion on the Ukraine war today.

I suspect it will be well worth listening to.

It will be here:

The war in Ukraine and how to stop it: An online discussion of socialist anti-war strategy

Saturday, February 25, 1pm US Eastern

www.wsws.org

 

[JoeC]

I give no quarter to fools. The seeds of this war were planted by their messiah back in 2014 and now has been propagated by his sycophant Biden.We are on the verge of WW3 because emotionally driven morons can't see past their own feelings to make sound judgements. If you don't want to see a regional war metastasize into a global nuclear conflict, stop stoking the Ukrainian military with arms and money.Zelensky is thug in his own right. The faux cry of defending democracy makes my blood boil.YooCrane is not even a democratic state, they are single party autocracy.

Now you have China siding with Russia. And if it comes down to us vs them, there will be no winners.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Just like the 'Right', what we generally call the 'Left' consists of many currents of thought.

Holding our attention right now is the 'woke' component of the Left, who by traditional definitions, are hardly 'Left' at all. (Traditionally, the Left believed in civilizational progress; science and reason; the rule of law (they just wanted it extended to previously-marginalized groups, with equal rights for all). The 'woke Left' hardly even pays lip service to these ideals now.)

And there are still traditional liberals, who adhere to the ideals mentioned above, but believe they can be achieved within a market economy, albeit one in which the state intervenes a good deal to help 'level the playing field'.

And then there is the 'Hard Left', which includes as its main, but not only, component various species of explicit Marxists.

Although people on the Right tend to lump the whole Left together, they are wrong to do so.

The differences are significant for political strategy, since we (on the Right) need to be able to make temporary alliances with those parts of the Left with whom we agree on specific issues. (For example, there is a current on the Left which opposes most forms of gun control -- these are people who are planning, explicitly, to kill us some day.

But for the moment we have a point of agreement. If we could unite with Stalin to defeat Hitler, we can unite with these people to defeat extremist gun control measures. See, for example, The Socialist Rifle Association, here: [ Socialist Rifle Association ]. By the way, these people are just as quarrelsome as some on the Right are, and at the moment, they're arguing among themselves. It's worth going to this link and reading about their latest internal dispute.)

And ... some of the explicitly Marxist Left are not-stupids (. They are very misguided, wrong in many things, refusing to learn from history ... but they're not ignorant and not stupid. (And often at odds with their emotional, reason-scorning pals in the 'Woke' part of the Left.)

One of their organizations is sponsoring discussion on the Ukraine war today.

I suspect it will be well worth listening to.

It will be here:

The war in Ukraine and how to stop it: An online discussion of socialist anti-war strategy

Saturday, February 25, 1pm US Eastern

www.wsws.org

Great OP!

The “anti war” Left is never anti war whenever a democrat is in the White House and are now out war drumming Dick Cheney and Bill Kristol!

 

[August West]

Just like the 'Right', what we generally call the 'Left' consists of many currents of thought.

Holding our attention right now is the 'woke' component of the Left, who by traditional definitions, are hardly 'Left' at all. (Traditionally, the Left believed in civilizational progress; science and reason; the rule of law (they just wanted it extended to previously-marginalized groups, with equal rights for all). The 'woke Left' hardly even pays lip service to these ideals now.)

And there are still traditional liberals, who adhere to the ideals mentioned above, but believe they can be achieved within a market economy, albeit one in which the state intervenes a good deal to help 'level the playing field'.

And then there is the 'Hard Left', which includes as its main, but not only, component various species of explicit Marxists.

Although people on the Right tend to lump the whole Left together, they are wrong to do so.

The differences are significant for political strategy, since we (on the Right) need to be able to make temporary alliances with those parts of the Left with whom we agree on specific issues. (For example, there is a current on the Left which opposes most forms of gun control -- these are people who are planning, explicitly, to kill us some day.

But for the moment we have a point of agreement. If we could unite with Stalin to defeat Hitler, we can unite with these people to defeat extremist gun control measures. See, for example, The Socialist Rifle Association, here: [ Socialist Rifle Association ]. By the way, these people are just as quarrelsome as some on the Right are, and at the moment, they're arguing among themselves. It's worth going to this link and reading about their latest internal dispute.)

And ... some of the explicitly Marxist Left are not-stupids (. They are very misguided, wrong in many things, refusing to learn from history ... but they're not ignorant and not stupid. (And often at odds with their emotional, reason-scorning pals in the 'Woke' part of the Left.)

One of their organizations is sponsoring discussion on the Ukraine war today.

I suspect it will be well worth listening to.

It will be here:

The war in Ukraine and how to stop it: An online discussion of socialist anti-war strategy

Saturday, February 25, 1pm US Eastern

www.wsws.org

Define Woke for us.

 

[j-mac]

Define Woke for us.

In addition to meaning aware and progressive, many people now interpret woke to be a way to describe people who would rather silence their critics than listen to them.

 

[Doug1943]

Great OP!

The “anti war” Left is never anti war whenever a democrat is in the White House and are now out war drumming Dick Cheney and Bill Kristol!

Thank you for the kind compliment!

Well, just the 'mainstream' Left. There is a not-insignificant part of the Left -- for example The Nation magazine -- who have remained true to their earlier attitude.

Admittedly, many of these folks are the blame-America-first people, but they do perform a useful service in breaking the official government monologue about the Battle Between Total Good and Pure Evil. Even if they don't give us the pleasure of seeing leftists trying to play the unaccustomed role of Patriot.

 

[Doug1943]

In addition to meaning aware and progressive, many people now interpret woke to be a way to describe people who would rather silence their critics than listen to them.

Yes. Back in the early 60s, when I was just a teenager, my (Unitarian) Sunday School teacher was the head of the ACLU in Houston. I joined them. But now .... although they haven't quite broken with committment to Free Speech absolutism, I expect them to do so soon, like the rest of the Left. Sad.

 

[Doug1943]

Define Woke for us.

Yes, it's a bit tricky. But then so is trying to 'define' 'Right', 'Left', 'liberal', 'conservative', etc. Like some Supreme Court justice once said, it's hard to define, but you know it when you see it.

Here are a couple of tests: no 'woke' person can answer them honestly -- (and probably even non-woke Leftist can't either, but let that pass -- these tests catch the essence of 'wokeism')

(1) Imagine you're walking down a lonely street at night and hear footsteps behind you, turn around, and feel relieved to see that the people behind you are not young Blacks. Yes or no?

The most extreme 'woke' person will have to say 'No!' ... and then be drowned out by the imaginary laughter of everyone reading their response. So they just dont' answer at all. The less extreme won't answer, since they know their answer will be the same as every other sane person, which is 'Yes'.

(2) Suppose the United States had to accept 50 million new immigrants, chosen at random, but could chose the countries they came from.

Three choices -- all the people being t indigenous (ie, with ancestors going back a couple of hundred years or more) inhabitants of

(1) European countries
(2) East Asian countries (Korea, Japan, China, Vietnam)
(4) Latin America
(3) Sub-saharan (ie Black, not Muslim-majority) countries, and/or the Black nations of the Caribbean.

For even more revealing fun, put the areas into rank order.

Which would you choose? or would you be indifferent to the choice?

Again, the 'woke' would have to either claim they would like 25 million more Black people, or refuse to answer the question. As I said, the worst thing about 'woke' is its increasing the tendency to force people to lie about reality.

I, as a Rightwing fascist homophobic transphobic racist fundamentalist anti-democratic embodiment of Pure Evil, will happily say that (1) I would feel relieved (just like you) and (2) that my choice of continental area would be (1) [European] with (2) [Asians] running a very close second, and (3) getting a look in .... and all possibly switchable depending on what I've been reading recently re immigrants bringing their culture with them vs the rate of assimilation to (traditional) American values re. law-abidingness and hard work.

My concern would be how easy they would assimilate to becoming 'Americans' in the traditional sense. (And for our libertarian friends, don't automatically and optimistically assume that hard-working law-abiding Asians will just naturally keep those qualities in a disintegrating society. Look how the Japanese treated the Chinese not so long ago.)

Fifty years ago I might have been indifferent, being (1) on the Left then, and (2) living in an era in which our school system indoctrinated the youth in how lucky they were to be living in the best country in the world.

Neither are no longer the case, thus my caution on which population sub-groups we should enlarge.

How about you?

 

[Doug1943]

I give no quarter to fools. The seeds of this war were planted by their messiah back in 2014 and now has been propagated by his sycophant Biden.We are on the verge of WW3 because emotionally driven morons can't see past their own feelings to make sound judgements. If you don't want to see a regional war metastasize into a global nuclear conflict, stop stoking the Ukrainian military with arms and money.Zelensky is thug in his own right. The faux cry of defending democracy makes my blood boil.YooCrane is not even a democratic state, they are single party autocracy.

Now you have China siding with Russia. And if it comes down to us vs them, there will be no winners.

I think you're overstating the case re. Ukraine. Ukraine is about where Russia would be if -- in my opinion -- we had treated them like we did Poland, thirty years ago.

Plus: firing the first shot, even if you have been provoked, loses you a lot of moral high ground. Now you might say, with the moral high ground and five dollars you can get a cup of coffee at Starbucks, but it's actually quite valuable to have. Putin has driven a lot of good people into the pro-war camp by going first, and by not doing what he could have done to explain the Russian case to European/American popular opinion.

It's like WWI -- many historians believe the Great Powers 'sleepwalked' into that war, although others blame Germany. Whatever the case, there is plenty of blame to go around. Thus, when the German diplomat signing the Treaty of Versailles shook his head and said to the Allied diplomats, "Gentlemen, whatever will history say of us?", the French diplomat was able to snap back, "Well, whatever she says, she will not say, that Belgium invaded Germany!"

 

[August West]

Great OP!

The “anti war” Left is never anti war whenever a democrat is in the White House and are now out war drumming Dick Cheney and Bill Kristol

Yes, it's a bit tricky. But then so is trying to 'define' 'Right', 'Left', 'liberal', 'conservative', etc. Like some Supreme Court justice once said, it's hard to define, but you know it when you see it.

Here are a couple of tests: no 'woke' person can answer them honestly -- (and probably even non-woke Leftist can't either, but let that pass -- these tests catch the essence of 'wokeism')

(1) Imagine you're walking down a lonely street at night and hear footsteps behind you, turn around, and feel relieved to see that the people behind you are not young Blacks. Yes or no?

The most extreme 'woke' person will have to say 'No!' ... and then be drowned out by the imaginary laughter of everyone reading their response. So they just dont' answer at all. The less extreme won't answer, since they know their answer will be the same as every other sane person, which is 'Yes'.

(2) Suppose the United States had to accept 50 million new immigrants, chosen at random, but could chose the countries they came from.

Three choices -- all the people being t indigenous (ie, with ancestors going back a couple of hundred years or more) inhabitants of

(1) European countries
(2) East Asian countries (Korea, Japan, China, Vietnam)
(4) Latin America
(3) Sub-saharan (ie Black, not Muslim-majority) countries, and/or the Black nations of the Caribbean.

For even more revealing fun, put the areas into rank order.

Which would you choose? or would you be indifferent to the choice?

Again, the 'woke' would have to either claim they would like 25 million more Black people, or refuse to answer the question. As I said, the worst thing about 'woke' is its increasing the tendency to force people to lie about reality.

I, as a Rightwing fascist homophobic transphobic racist fundamentalist anti-democratic embodiment of Pure Evil, will happily say that (1) I would feel relieved (just like you) and (2) that my choice of continental area would be (1) [European] with (2) [Asians] running a very close second, and (3) getting a look in .... and all possibly switchable depending on what I've been reading recently re immigrants bringing their culture with them vs the rate of assimilation to (traditional) American values re. law-abidingness and hard work.

My concern would be how easy they would assimilate to becoming 'Americans' in the traditional sense. (And for our libertarian friends, don't automatically and optimistically assume that hard-working law-abiding Asians will just naturally keep those qualities in a disintegrating society. Look how the Japanese treated the Chinese not so long ago.)

Fifty years ago I might have been indifferent, being (1) on the Left then, and (2) living in an era in which our school system indoctrinated the youth in how lucky they were to be living in the best country in the world.

Neither are no longer the case, thus my caution on which population sub-groups we should enlarge.

How about you?

If we had 25 million more Black people who were on the same footing as white people I would have no problem. I have a friend who is a retired high school teacher who still calls Black people the N word. He believes that after Appomattox, white people became color blind. He sure as hell isn`t.

 

[August West]

Yes. Back in the early 60s, when I was just a teenager, my (Unitarian) Sunday School teacher was the head of the ACLU in Houston. I joined them. But now .... although they haven't quite broken with committment to Free Speech absolutism, I expect them to do so soon, like the rest of the Left. Sad.

It was the right who tried to ban a book about Roberto Clemente in the loser state of Florida. They tried but those damn leftist "woke" people stopped them. Better luck next time.

Roberto Clemente book removed from Florida public schools pending review over discrimination references

“His story is his story. He went through racism. It’s something that can’t be changed,” Clemente's son, Roberto Clemente Jr., told NBC News.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Blaster]

Great OP!

The “anti war” Left is never anti war whenever a democrat is in the White House and are now out war drumming Dick Cheney and Bill Kristol!

Cheney and Kristol would have fit in nicely with Democrats.

 

[j-mac]

If we had 25 million more Black people who were on the same footing as white people I would have no problem.

Who says they aren't? At least at the starting line a black child, and and a white child are a blank slate...So, the question should be where do they start to take different paths....?

 

[Blaster]

Who says they aren't? At least at the starting line a black child, and and a white child are a blank slate...So, the question should be where do they start to take different paths....?

More white children are raised in two parent homes in safe communities while many blacks are raised by a mother or grandmother in a high crime area.

 

[JoeC]

I think you're overstating the case re. Ukraine. Ukraine is about where Russia would be if -- in my opinion -- we had treated them like we did Poland, thirty years ago.

Plus: firing the first shot, even if you have been provoked, loses you a lot of moral high ground. Now you might say, with the moral high ground and five dollars you can get a cup of coffee at Starbucks, but it's actually quite valuable to have. Putin has driven a lot of good people into the pro-war camp by going first, and by not doing what he could have done to explain the Russian case to European/American popular opinion.

It's like WWI -- many historians believe the Great Powers 'sleepwalked' into that war, although others blame Germany. Whatever the case, there is plenty of blame to go around. Thus, when the German diplomat signing the Treaty of Versailles shook his head and said to the Allied diplomats, "Gentlemen, whatever will history say of us?", the French diplomat was able to snap back, "Well, whatever she says, she will not say, that Belgium invaded Germany!"

It has been said somewhere that the victor gets to write the history. I suspect that's true. I think Putin exercised some restraint through negotiations with Ukraine prior to the "first shot". If my understanding is correct all Putin wanted to begin with was the Donbass region where a lot of Russian separatist wanted to go back to Russia control. Couple that with NATO expansion and the buffer Ukraine provided Russia I can see Putin's position.

I don't believe and never will believe that Russia had designs on Eastern Europe.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If we had 25 million more Black people who were on the same footing as white people I would have no problem. I have a friend who is a retired high school teacher who still calls Black people the N word. He believes that after Appomattox, white people became color blind. He sure as hell isn`t.

I don’t give a fuck about your one offs and that we live in an imperfect world. WE HAD A BLACK PRESIDENT— FOR 2 TERMS!!

Granted, he wasn’t an American, but a born in Kenya cheap-o knockoff, but still

 

[Blaster]

It has been said somewhere that the victor gets to write the history. I suspect that's true. I think Putin exercised some restraint through negotiations with Ukraine prior to the "first shot". If my understanding is correct all Putin wanted to begin with was the Donbass region where a lot of Russian separatist wanted to go back to Russia control. Couple that with NATO expansion and the buffer Ukraine provided Russia I can see Putin's position.

I don't believe and never will believe that Russia had designs on Eastern Europe.

I agree.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Thank you for the kind compliment!

Well, just the 'mainstream' Left. There is a not-insignificant part of the Left -- for example The Nation magazine -- who have remained true to their earlier attitude.

Admittedly, many of these folks are the blame-America-first people, but they do perform a useful service in breaking the official government monologue about the Battle Between Total Good and Pure Evil. Even if they don't give us the pleasure of seeing leftists trying to play the unaccustomed role of Patriot.

Welcome, Doug!

 

[j-mac]

More white children are raised in two parent homes in safe communities while many blacks are raised by a mother or grandmother in a high crime area.

I agree, but we have to ask why that became the path?

 

[Blaster]

I agree, but we have to ask why that became the path?

Black men deserted their family responsibility which has led to violent behavior among young blacks.