To defeat the state, we in the core of imperialism need to make U.S. hegemony too weakened for our ruling class to be able to use it to hold back revolution. And to cripple the beast by attacking it from within its heart, we need to take away the social base Washington depends on to be able to maintain its global war machine; that social base being the U.S. working class.
  • cfgaussian@lemmygrad.mlOP
    31·
    1 year ago

    Who said that Russia is communist? Why does Russia need to be communist for it to be engaged in actions that are objectively anti-imperialist?

    • 💚🌲💙⭐⭐Romulus / Keith 🌹🍺✌⚽@mastodon.cloud
      03·
      1 year ago

      If the only two possible positions are Nato or Russia

      And one favors Russia

      Therefore that Russia > Nato

      And if the assertion is that Russia beating Nato would mean more communism

      And if the options are, again, communism or not communism,

      Then, by dualist logic, Nato = not communism and Russia = communism.

      Because everything can either be one or the other, using the same logic behind “Nato bad, therefore Russia good.”

      • cfgaussian@lemmygrad.mlOP
        51·
        1 year ago

        Russia IS better than NATO. That does not make Russia good. But what they are doing is. You seem unable to distinguish between an action and the entity taking said action.

        “The struggle that the Emir of Afghanistan is waging for the independence of Afghanistan is objectively a revolutionary struggle, despite the monarchist views of the Emir and his associates, for it weakens, disintegrates and undermines imperialism;”

        • J. Stalin, The Foundations of Leninism, 1924

        Was this passage saying that a monarchist regime is good? No. It was saying that the actions taken by said regime in combatting imperialism were objectively beneficial for the global struggle.