• mienshao@lemmy.world
    21·
    13 hours ago

    Gotta love 2025. Is this an alt-right post or an alt-left post? No one can tell. Horseshoe theory, etc etc.

    • anon@lemmings.world
      1·
      2 hours ago

      Yeah, true. I have observed that too in the last few years. If you see someone saying we should not support Ukraine there is a 50/50 chance they are far-left or far-right. Pretty impossible to tell in most cases.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      18·
      8 hours ago

      The right is pro-NATO, as NATO is the main millitant arm propping up western imperialism, and the left is anti-NATO for the same reasons. There’s no “alt-left,” lol.

    • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
      13·
      8 hours ago

      Anyone against NATO is against Western imperialism and would be considered a “leftist” by Western standards (just humane and ethical for the rest of the world). I don’t see what can be misunderstood here.

    • uuldika@lemmy.ml
      11·
      8 hours ago

      I support NATO, in the sense that if NATO dissolved Europe would get eaten like a three-course meal by Russia. Ukraine shows that all too clearly. it has many problems, though.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        11·
        7 hours ago

        There’s no evidence of this, though. Scaremongering about Russia taking Paris and whatnot has no economic backing. Russia has been clear about why it invaded Ukraine, it wants to demillitarize it as it was cozying up to NATO, and NATO has been encircling Russia for decades. If NATO didn’t exist, there would be no reason for the Russo-Ukrainian war to begin with, as Russia doesn’t stand to gain much, if anything, economically.

        • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz
          2·
          2 hours ago

          How many of their NATO neighbors have they attacked vs their non-NATO neighbors? There’s a reason countries want to join it lol

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            3·
            1 hour ago

            Why do you think Russia invaded Ukraine? Like, what is their primary goal. The impetus that drove them to approve the invasion.

            Secondly, what do you think the functioning role of NATO is?

            • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz
              3·
              1 hour ago

              They wanted to prevent them from joining because they couldn’t bully them if they managed to join. I think that answers for both.

              Now your turn to answer my original question, please.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                3·
                1 hour ago

                So the underlying, material reason for why you think Russia invaded Ukraine, was because they wanted to “bully” Ukraine? And that NATO is just an international “anti-bullying” alliance? No, lmao.

                NATO is an alliance of imperialist nations. They band together, agreeing to each exploit their own corner. The biggest players are the US Empire, as well as the former hegemons Germany, the UK, and France. The other NATO members play along so that they can ride along on this system of monopoly capitalism expropriating vast wealth from South America, Africa, Southeast Asia, and more. If countries go against NATO desires economically, they get bombed, like Yugoslavia, Libya, etc.

                NATO promised Gorbachev that they wouldn’t expand eastward, decades ago. This is because originally, NATO was an anti-communist alliance. However, with the fall of the USSR, the west needed a new enemy, so they stuck with Russia even after Russia tried to join NATO. With NATO building up in Ukraine, following the Euromaidan coup of 2014 cementing the Ukrainian Nationalists as the leaders of Ukraine, and their relentless shelling of the donbass region, Russia invaded as it didn’t feel like it wanted a belligerent neighbor, and decided to take pre-emptive action.

                The entire invasion never would have happened without NATO.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                6·
                5 hours ago

                Nothing I said was wrong, nor does that make it “Russian propaganda.” The RF has been clear, they oppose NATO encirclement. Gorbachev was promised decades ago that NATO wouldn’t expand eastward, yet it has over the decades. NATO is used primarily as a threat towards countries that don’t let the west economically dominate them, be it the USSR to Iran to Libya to Yugoslavia to the modern Russian Federation.

                Joining NATO is indeed voluntary, yes. Russia even tried to join it a couple decades ago, and was denied. Russia was barred entry from the imperialist alliance, as if they were allowed in, NATO could not be used as a threat against them to force them to open up their economy more. The ex-soviet now-NATO states faced immense economic crisis and right-wing takeover due to the chaos that ensued when socialism was ended and the USSR dissolved, making them very western-friendly.

                No, I’m not a Trump supporter, I’m a communist. I strongly oppose western imperialism, and based on the evidence we have, there’s no proof that Russia intends on taking on all of Europe. This is just scaremongering to fuel the millitary industrial complex and justify the perpetuation of NATO even after the collapse of the USSR, which it was formed to fight.

                Either Russia is too weak to take Ukraine and thus NATO isn’t even necessary, or it’s strong enough but uninterested in total war and is happy with its level of involvement. The former means NATO isn’t even needed as Russia would be too weak, the latter means NATO isn’t needed as Russia has no plans to expand, nor does it have any economic basis for it.

                I think it’s very telling that you can’t actually dispute any of my points, you just call me Russian and a Trump supporter for stating the standard leftist line on NATO and the Russo-Ukrainian War.