Live Conflict Ukraine-Russia War

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
7,918
Reactions
21 12,494
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
There is a lot of irony in the fact that the so called Western hard right supports Russia, the heir of the Soviet Union.
There is no irony, the Russia of today actually stands for many hard right-leaning Westerner principles. Such as :

  1. Patriarchy
  2. Race supremacy
  3. Anti-LGBTQ
  4. Extreme nationalism
So the irony is when Right-wingers don't support Russia.

Irony is of course modern Europe standing for democracy and supports liberalism when if you look at their history, democracy wasn't accepted widely until the 19th century.
 

contricusc

Well-known member
Messages
352
Reactions
1 520
Nation of residence
Panama
Nation of origin
Romania
There is no irony, the Russia of today actually stands for many hard right-leaning Westerner principles. Such as :
  1. Patriarchy
  2. Race supremacy
  3. Anti-LGBTQ
  4. Extreme nationalism
So the irony is when Right-wingers don't support Russia.

Russia is the heir of the Soviet Union, which was the bringer of communism and the destroyer of the golden age of European nationalism and far right.

The far right was destroyed in Europe after losing the war against the Soviet Union and against communism. By being the heir of the Soviet Union, Russia represents the enemy of the European hard right.

This is why real nationalistic and hard right movements, like the ones in Ukraine, Poland or the Baltics hate Russia. The so called far right movements in Western Europe are basically the former centrist people who were left behind when the European political landscape moved so far to the left. They are wrongly labeled far right in order to be discredited by the left leaning media. They are just the former conservatives.

Irony is of course modern Europe standing for democracy and supports liberalism when if you look at their history, democracy wasn't accepted widely until the 19th century.

That’s because the totalitarian side of Europe lost the war against the democratic side (which was supported by the United States).
 

contricusc

Well-known member
Messages
352
Reactions
1 520
Nation of residence
Panama
Nation of origin
Romania
Right wingers especially the far right think Russia is either Tsardom of Russia or the Russian Empire.

Russian Empire that traditional empire which held Orthodox Church and monarchy on top.

Right wingers dont realise Russian nationalists tend to praise both Tsars and the Soviet Union even if many are anti commie they still praise the Soviet Union for being a strong empire that kept Russia on top.

Yes, you are right. The stupidity of thinking that an ex KGB officer represents the Tsardom shows the illiteracy of the current European far right. Russia is the heir of the Soviet Union, and the current leaders are all former Communist Party members.
 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
7,918
Reactions
21 12,494
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Russia is the heir of the Soviet Union, which was the bringer of communism and the destroyer of the golden age of European nationalism and far right.
Heir, but not communist... It's the successor state of the USSR when it comes to nukes, army, and a bit of territory but not in value.
Seeing this from the lens of the far right, Russia is an ideal country. It doesn't help that in their own country their values are steadily eroded by the Tsunami of the left.

The far right was destroyed in Europe after losing the war against the Soviet Union and against communism. By being the heir of the Soviet Union, Russia represents the enemy of the European hard right.

The far right was destroyed by the combined power of the U.S. and Soviet Union...the Soviet Union failed some years later, but not the U.S, The irony is yesterday far-right powers like Germany, Italy, and Austria readily and happily accommodate the U.S that kills their dream of supremacy.

So the irony is actually with NATO
This is why real nationalistic and hard right movements, like the ones in Ukraine, Poland or the Baltics hate Russia. The so called far right movements in Western Europe are basically the former centrist people who were left behind when the European political landscape moved so far to the left. They are wrongly labeled far right in order to be discredited by the left leaning media. They are just the former conservatives.

The only reason why these (Ukraine, Poland, Baltics) hate Russia is solely because Russia is their former overlord, most of the time they share the same view on issues such as patriarchy, same-sex relationship, race, etc . no wonder Nazis battalion sprawled up in these countries, Russia has Wagner PMC, Ukraine has Azov.

ada-militer-neonazi-bernama-batalion-azov-di-ukraina-tapi-barat-bungkam-hxx.jpg

image



That’s because the totalitarian side of Europe lost the war against the democratic side (which was supported by the United States).
Totalitarian is not an ideology, it's a nature...looking from neutrality lens, today's Europe is basically a bastion of totalitarian democracy by not giving an inch to any ideology besides democracy such as Nazism, Communism, Anarchism etc.

So yes the totalitarian nature stays, but the accepted ideology does transform, and that makes Europe the bigger irony than the far-right supporting Russia.

I mean at some point Europe unites to launch a military campaign to subdue democracy.
 

contricusc

Well-known member
Messages
352
Reactions
1 520
Nation of residence
Panama
Nation of origin
Romania
Totalitarian is not an ideology, it's a nature...looking from neutrality lens, today's Europe is basically a bastion of totalitarian democracy by not giving an inch to any ideology besides democracy such as Nazism, Communism, Anarchism etc.

So yes the totalitarian nature stays, but the accepted ideology does transform, and that makes Europe the bigger irony than the far-right supporting Russia.

By definition democracy is not totalitarian, because it allows a wide range of parties and ideas. Leaders come and go without the need for revolutions or lost wars. In order to preserve itself, a democracy must defend itself from totalitarian ideas such as Nazism or Communism, because once such ideoligy takes hold, democracy is disbanded.

You can have a wide spectrum of parties and potential leaders in a democracy, which means it is not totalitarian. People also enjoy greater individual freedom than in an authoritarian regime, which makes democracy the least totalitarian system.

While a democracy still has rules, it is much more permissive with dissent and oposing ideas.
 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
7,918
Reactions
21 12,494
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
By definition democracy is not totalitarian,
If everything is measured by mere definition then not one ideology is totalitarian. There's no hint of totalitarianism in either Communism, Fascism, Islamism etc.

The only difference is perception.

In a democracy, legitimacy comes from popular support. In a communism, legitimacy comes from workers and farmers, in Fascism legitimacy comes from race etc.

Not one has any hint of totalitarianism by merely looking at definition.

because it allows a wide range of parties and ideas.
Bull, where is the fascist party of Germany now?
Leaders come and go without the need for revolutions or lost wars. In order to preserve itself, a democracy must defend itself from totalitarian ideas such as Nazism or Communism, because once such ideoligy takes hold, democracy is disbanded.

You can have a wide spectrum of parties and potential leaders in a democracy, which means it is not totalitarian. People also enjoy greater individual freedom than in an authoritarian regime, which makes democracy the least totalitarian system.
Not quite, every country including those with democracy stamp on it have red lines. The only difference is what they perceive as red lines.

Democracies could be just as brutal as communists and fascist when it comes to stomping out movements/opposition that they view as a threat to their ideology.

Just like Russia in Ukraine today, in the past we have seen democracies stomping out potential threat by physically occupying UN member states. (Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003).
 

Anastasius

Contributor
Moderator
Azerbaijan Moderator
Messages
1,335
Reactions
3 2,941
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
There is a lot of irony in the fact that the so called Western hard right supports Russia, the heir of the Soviet Union.
Many of those who do so tend to be on the Russian payroll but even aside from that there it's not particularly ironic. The USSR may have been economically leftist but it was overwhelmingly culturally right-wing with only minor left-wing elements. There is a popular tendency among American right-wing figures to blame Soviet subversion for the rise of progressive ideology in American politics but that's not really true, a lot of that ideology has its roots in American political movements of the 19th century which predated the Soviet Union by a good 2-3 decades if not more. In fact the modern focus on social issues as part of socialist thought was almost exclusively birthed in the US. Even Karl Marx by modern standards was closer to a social conservative.
 

Bogeyman 

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
8,493
Reactions
61 29,693
Website
twitter.com
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey

Relic

Contributor
Canada Correspondent
Messages
1,460
Reactions
12 2,446
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada

“If the attack came from the Baltic republics, there must be an adequate response”, Lieutenant General Andrey Gurulev commented on the attacks on Pskov He further said: “We have a competent agency that has to figure it out, answer this question, which will be probably not public. Based on their conclusions, where the drones were launched from, there will be appropriate actions”
This general is an obese clown... Like seemingly 90% of Russian military leadership. What an embarrassing slob. 🤡

By his logic, I guess the West should supply all the munitions neccessary for Ukraine to flatten Minsk in Belarus, considering they've been allowing Russia to attack Ukraine from their territory since the beginning of the war. Maybe turning Minsk to rubble and killing a couple thousand Belarussians civilians along the way would get the point across.

Let's be honest, they weren't launched from Estonia. This is typical Russian propaganda. They got embarrassed due to their own incompetence, so they need someone to blame. These trolls talking about WW3 make me laugh. The Russian army is having its ass handed to it by one of the poorest countries in Europe. They want NOTHING to do with NATO. The VKS would be shattered in days, their entire Northern Naval fleet would be erased from existence and tens of thousands of citizens in Western cities in Russia would be hammered by thousands of aviation launched cruise missiles and glide bombs. Russia can't even win the war they're fighting, what the hell would they do if NATO put 250,000 troops onto the offensive on this fictitious Estonian front, and fielded 5000 Bradley, Marder, Rosomak and CV90 IFVs, 5000 mixed variant APCs, 3000 Abrams and Leopard 2 MBTs, 800 pieces of 155mm artillery, 100 HIMARS and M270s, backed up by hundreds of Apache helicopters and more than 1000 4th and 5th generation attack aircraft from across Europe?

Short of resulting to a nuclear standoff, any confrontation with NATO would be an absolute massacre for Russia and they damn well know it.
 

Relic

Contributor
Canada Correspondent
Messages
1,460
Reactions
12 2,446
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
Ukrainian forces have entered verbove from the west. First visual confirmation that the 1st defensive line has been breached.
Russia is absolutely panicking down there. Ukraine has caused soooo much attrition to their artillery in the south over the last 3 months and Russians have no clue how to fight a war without simply using artillery to destroy a settlement before trying to capture it. They're such low skilled fighters, deeply lacking the equipment they need, especially at night. They are basically stuck in World War 2 as far as tactics are concerned and they have ability to properly integrate their technologies. Furthermore, the people they've drafted are incredibly low skilled and often deeply uneducated / low IQ. Their morale is horrible and they received almost no training before being deployed to the war zone. They're literally there as meat.

This is the time for the West to load up 6 more Ukraine brigades with Western armor and smash the Putin's clowns all the way to Melitipol. Most importantly, there is an opportunity to inflict horrendous casualties on the Russians as they retreat to their next defensive lines. Nothing breaks morale better than killing and maming a unit to the point that it becomes combat ineffective. Using GMLRS and cluster munitions against the Russians retreating (often by foot) will be terrifying for them, especially at night. Maximizing the number of caskets sent home to Russia won't sit well with their citizens either.
 

contricusc

Well-known member
Messages
352
Reactions
1 520
Nation of residence
Panama
Nation of origin
Romania
Bull, where is the fascist party of Germany now?

Accepting a wide range of ideas doesn’t mean accepting ALL ideas. Being more accepting and tolerant doesn’t mean tolerating anything.

There is always a certain degree of totalitarianism in any form of government. The democratic systems are the least totalitarian forms of government in today’s world.

For you, something must be either white or black. In the real world, most things are various shades of grey.

Democracy is the least totalitarian and autocratic system of government we have right now. By being the least, it doesn’t mean it is 100% tolerant to dissent. It means it is the least repressive.
 

contricusc

Well-known member
Messages
352
Reactions
1 520
Nation of residence
Panama
Nation of origin
Romania
The USSR may have been economically leftist but it was overwhelmingly culturally right-wing with only minor left-wing elements.

First of all, you can’t be economically leftist while being culturally right-wing. If you prohibit private property and promote economic collectivism, you can’t be culturally right wing, which promotes individualism.

The Soviet Union was internationalist, the opposite of nationalism. The Soviet Union was atheist, the opposit of religious. The Soviet Union was collectivist, the opposite of individualism.

There was nothing conservative about the Soviet Union. Anti private property, anti individualism, anti religion, anti monarchy, anti nationalism, etc. The Soviet Union was the nightmare of all right wingers.
 

FiReFTW

Active member
Messages
54
Reactions
1 56
Nation of residence
Switzerland
Nation of origin
Switzerland
This general is an obese clown... Like seemingly 90% of Russian military leadership. What an embarrassing slob. 🤡

By his logic, I guess the West should supply all the munitions neccessary for Ukraine to flatten Minsk in Belarus, considering they've been allowing Russia to attack Ukraine from their territory since the beginning of the war. Maybe turning Minsk to rubble and killing a couple thousand Belarussians civilians along the way would get the point across.

Let's be honest, they weren't launched from Estonia. This is typical Russian propaganda. They got embarrassed due to their own incompetence, so they need someone to blame. These trolls talking about WW3 make me laugh. The Russian army is having its ass handed to it by one of the poorest countries in Europe. They want NOTHING to do with NATO. The VKS would be shattered in days, their entire Northern Naval fleet would be erased from existence and tens of thousands of citizens in Western cities in Russia would be hammered by thousands of aviation launched cruise missiles and glide bombs. Russia can't even win the war they're fighting, what the hell would they do if NATO put 250,000 troops onto the offensive on this fictitious Estonian front, and fielded 5000 Bradley, Marder, Rosomak and CV90 IFVs, 5000 mixed variant APCs, 3000 Abrams and Leopard 2 MBTs, 800 pieces of 155mm artillery, 100 HIMARS and M270s, backed up by hundreds of Apache helicopters and more than 1000 4th and 5th generation attack aircraft from across Europe?

Short of resulting to a nuclear standoff, any confrontation with NATO would be an absolute massacre for Russia and they damn well know it.

One of the poorest countries in Europe?
Go back and check what kind of army Ukraine had before the Russian invasion, it had the biggest ground army in Europe based on equipment, plus they have been trained and prepared by NATO to fight this war since 2014.
And the whole war that Ukraine is fighting is backed by NATO training, communications, intelligence gathering, AWACS cover and a constant stream of endless equipment, ammo, rations... everything

And Russia invaded with what? 150.000 troops at most? That fact alone is absolutely ridicilous and laughable and shows the inept of the Russian MOD.

Im not disagreeing with you completely, im just saying that this invasion was a massive blunder by Russia, tactically and strategically they were completely inept and made a ton of blunders and it has been handled poorly at every step from the start, but Ukraine pre invasion was packed with russian weaponry from the 70s mostly and Russia has far more modern equipment, yet that 70s russian equipment is not mentioned that it did well, only how Russia performed badly.

Considering everything Russia should have done way better but it was not due to equipment or even that much troops (somewhat it was) but it was mostly from tactics and strategies, the commanders that field the armies seem to be completely inept and incompetent, using horrible tactics, decision making etc... but still Ukraine lost a lot of troops and equipment even considering the massive backing of NATO.

NATO would obliterate Russian conventional forces for sure, completely agree with you, but they would also take quite some casualties, your making it seem like they would steamroll the whole russian army with little to no losses. Also your making it seem like Russia is fighting talibans or Iraq in the gulf war, when it was fighting the largest conventional army in Europe from the start with the full backing of NATO.

Never underestimate the enemy.
 

Anastasius

Contributor
Moderator
Azerbaijan Moderator
Messages
1,335
Reactions
3 2,941
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
First of all, you can’t be economically leftist while being culturally right-wing. If you prohibit private property and promote economic collectivism, you can’t be culturally right wing, which promotes individualism.

The Soviet Union was internationalist, the opposite of nationalism. The Soviet Union was atheist, the opposit of religious. The Soviet Union was collectivist, the opposite of individualism.

There was nothing conservative about the Soviet Union. Anti private property, anti individualism, anti religion, anti monarchy, anti nationalism, etc. The Soviet Union was the nightmare of all right wingers.
1) Of course you can. Quite a few former communist states were exactly this way. What you just described with private property falls under the purview of economic leftism. In terms of social ideology, USSR adhered to many traditionalist views. They tried going the "freedom to do anything" approach popular with modern Western leftists and it lasted only a decade before they walked it back. Hell, China is this way although I suppose you could argue whether they are truly economic leftists.

2) Soviet Union very much had nationalist underpinnings especially after Stalin took over. Russian identity was pushed above all else and Soviet education openly praised several tsars (depending on how "strong" they were and how much they contributed to the ideal of Big Russia). Hell my own country, Azerbaijan, had our history outright rewritten to remove the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic from any records as well as movements aimed at freedom from Russia. Most Azerbaijanis didn't even learn of the ADR's existence until after the USSR's fall. This was all a concerted effort to Russify everyone under the Soviet sphere of influence because it was essentially just Russian imperialism under another name.
 
Last edited:

Mailman

Active member
Messages
99
Reactions
183
Nation of residence
Estonia
Nation of origin
Estonia
The only reason why these (Ukraine, Poland, Baltics) hate Russia is solely because Russia is their former overlord, most of the time they share the same view on issues such as patriarchy, same-sex relationship, race, etc . no wonder Nazis battalion sprawled up in these countries, Russia has Wagner PMC, Ukraine has Azov.
Strong oversimplification, there are so much more reasons to hate Russia. We are russofobs, because- how to put it nicely- lovely way of behaving in occupied countries. Endless killing and raping in form of well kept Mongol traditions. Holodomor in Ukraine is another example. So it is much more personal. By the way, it were german landlords, who ruled most of Baltics for 700 years, so rather look there. Ironicly, it took only one year of Russian occupation to fix this hatred- Nazi German soldiers were greeted as liberators in 1940 in Estonia.

Though, I agree it might look like it from the reasonable distance. For me, it is much easier to find common language with russians than indonesians. Not because we hate people coming from other cultures, althoug I take some credits regarding xenofobia. Common nominator in Europe is christianity and Russia belongs to this family.
 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
7,918
Reactions
21 12,494
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Strong oversimplification, there are so much more reasons to hate Russia. We are russofobs, because- how to put it nicely- lovely way of behaving in occupied countries. Endless killing and raping in form of well kept Mongol traditions. Holodomor in Ukraine is another example. So it is much more personal. By the way, it were german landlords, who ruled most of Baltics for 700 years, so rather look there. Ironicly, it took only one year of Russian occupation to fix this hatred- Nazi German soldiers were greeted as liberators in 1940 in Estonia.

Again this does not disprove my earlier claim, that your hate towards Russia is solely because at some point in history you were under Russia's thumbs, nothing from your disprove my earlier counter-claim towards contricusc that Russia stands for what the right wingers believe in and its only natural for the right wingers with the exceptiuon of Polish, Ukrainian, Baltics right wingers to support Russia.

One way to tell if someone is being sincere with their word is, if their complaints are applicable to their friends, you see endless killing and raping is what your American buddies has been doing ever since its inception. yet, not many in the Baltics actually voiced hate towards the Americans because they had never had any experience with American raping and killing.

Last time I check the US is the role model in Europe for human rights and freedom no ? In the end all pointed out that this hate from Ukraine, Poland and the Baltics is just mere dislike of being under Russia at some point in time.

The Russians aren't any different from the Americans or anyone out there, they need to expand.

+Holodomor is a sad event although many propagandists today painted it as genocide, which the Russians did for fun. it is not genocide...more like mass unintentional manslaughter but not genocide. mass manslaughter has been the norm for much of human history.


Accepting a wide range of ideas doesn’t mean accepting ALL ideas. Being more accepting and tolerant doesn’t mean tolerating anything.

There is always a certain degree of totalitarianism in any form of government. The democratic systems are the least totalitarian forms of government in today’s world.

For you, something must be either white or black. In the real world, most things are various shades of grey.

Democracy is the least totalitarian and autocratic system of government we have right now. By being the least, it doesn’t mean it is 100% tolerant to dissent. It means it is the least repressive.
In the end, a select party or groups in the state have the final say on which one is acceptable or not...which makes them just another version of a totalitarian society with a different name. Let's call it totalitarian democracy

Not much different in Russia where they have parties, but the state has a say on which parties are allowed to exist and preserve the order.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom