Authority is indeed a buzzword, however in that case it is about excessive authority (let’s say) presence in government system of Lukashenko and Putin, they are not socialist, their interests lies in being at the top of corrupt post-soviet systems that were designed to be that way, I from CIS myself and every of 15 “free republic™” seems just a different flavour of catalist exploitation, that’s why i ask for clarification about possible socialism
You’re not far off there, however, we tend to support Russia, Belarus, etc despite their current economic governance. It goes much further than just political alignment; anti-imperialism is something that is equally as valuable in the current world dominated by the West and it’s economic hegemony.
Russia defending against NATO expansion, exhausting the resources of a burgeoning Nazi state and it’s collaborators is generally anti-imperialist.
It’s why posts like these are made, to point out that political elements within this countries we do support or applaud for their efforts; even if we don’t always agree with them entirely.
I think you need to challenge that liberal bias that you currently hold. The way you talk about these two gov’t reminds me of the Miami “Cubans” that hold very strong bias against Cuba while ignoring that they are actively being hunted down by ICE in the “Free” and “Democratic” USA. No clarification or source that I share will be able to help if you still hold strong liberalism.
I’m pretty sure Parenti actively disparages Lukashenko specifically in BS&R. Calling him an apologist for hitler at one point iirc.
I found the quote in chapter 6 of the book:
In 1996, Belarus president Alexander Lukashenko, a self-professed admirer of Adolph Hitler s organizational skills, shut down the independent newspapers and radio stations and decreed the opposition parliament defunct. Lukashenko was awarded absolute power in a referendum that claimed an inflated turnout, with no one knowing how many ballots were printed or how they were counted. Some opposition leaders fled for their lives. “Once a rich Soviet republic that produced tractors and TVs, Belarus is now [a] basket case” with a third of the population living “in deep poverty” (San Francisco Bay Guardian, 12/4/96).
Damn, I missed that part when I read it and a Rare L to Parenti. Thanks for pointing this out. It is still a good book to dispel cheap anticommunist rhetoric but maybe there are other books that do a better job in attacking liberalism for beginners 🤔
Funnily enough, Belarus still has their state factory for tractors up and running. They didn’t lose most of their manufacturing compared to the other ex soviet states that fell to neoliberalism. This goes to show how dangerous is to be misinformed as an author.
Considering how soon after the collapse this was I’d say it’s forgiven to hold a pessimistic view of any post soveit leader who didn’t explicitly declare themselves a communist.
He makes similiar remarks about China’s reform and opening up if I’m not mistaken. The whole period was undeniably a dismal time for the international communist movement, and it’s hard imagine someone coming to our current perspective after appreciating the gravity of capitlist victory.
I don’t find it hard to believe Belarus would have been plunged into poverty, the entire soveit trade network collapsed, any country in those conditions would be desolate as can be seen with the entire post soveit world.
Yeah, in Parenti’s defense it’s fair to be skeptical in the 90s. Shit was bleak and there was a lack of clarity going on amidst all the neolib disinfo and triumphalism.
The whole period was undeniably a dismal time for the international communist movement, and it’s hard imagine someone coming to our current perspective after appreciating the gravity of capitlist victory.
Very true. This may explain his views. Thanks for sharing this!
I am not new, i want to say that i as the guy from CIS itself has a tendency to research more, and have russia speaking sources of current communists as Rudoy and Kagarlitsky that clearly suffer from Putin’s regime for example.
Changing one imperalist to another is not an answer and while i get that it is a ww1 situation, i don’t see much of agitation about both sides (Nato, ODKB) losing, more like pure anti NATO narrative without criticism towards what happens to be anti western imperalism (this time it being post-soviet capitalists, exploiting USSRs legacy to the profit of the ones at the top)
You keep using the words regime and imperialism in bad faith which is very common thing from liberals. To avoid rewriting what other comrades have explained, the imperialism accusation against Russia has been discussed before in Lemmygrad:
As for the regime accusation, liberals love accusing non western non aligned countries with that cheap label while ignoring their own countries crimes. From my standpoint, within the ex soviet countries(now capitalist), there are better examples of what a regime does. The worst offender of this is Ukraine governed by the Banderites. From the CIS, we have Uzbekistan or Moldova. Hell, even worse examples of regimes(outside the CIS) are the Keir Starmer regime, the US regime, the German regime and all of the Western countries that banned communist parties and studies. Those offender have even go well beyond to engage in historical revisionism, fascism whitewashing and anti soviet propaganda financed by the Western imperialists.
Once again, it is important to challenge that liberal bias that you currently hold and see the proponents of liberalism, which is the West and their bootlickers, for what they really are.
I am not trying to hypocritically accuse scary-scary russia of being omnipresent bas guy and hence western nazis good, no. What im trying to say is Lemmygrad critically uses RF as a “counter-weight” (as one of answer on first link suggests) or, it is somewhow thinks that Belarus and/or Russia will be a beacon of socialism (not happening) or even worse that they are “everything good, against bad west”
Now, the way you answered my question, from my perspective is you suppose that i am some kind of stupid left-liberal, that does not see the whole picture of current hegemony of the west, and that what i did not like. Now, what i wanted to say is that we, as the communists should be of course using infighting of fascists, capitalists etc to achieve our own goals, however there shouldn’t be any hopes about RF, Belarus or any other entity that is not socialist/communist presenting some kind of “acceptable alternative” that we will bow our head to
What metric determines how “excessive” authority is? Who determines how much authority is too much? What does it look like to exceed one’s authority? Is “excessive” authority inherently bad or is that conditional on how it’s used?
Tldr: beating up anything that opposes current capitalism, including communists (actual revolutionary, not the one of controled opposition like KPRF), hence Lukashenko and his regime couldn’t be a beacon of socialism, he just happens to be using aesthetics with some anti-western narrative to his own profit
Any intelligent regime is going to repress factions that pose a threat to its stability.
Belarus is on the border of NATO. It can’t afford instability for the West to exploit. This is why Lukashenko is involved in Ukraine, why he’s so close to Russia, and why he didn’t join the invasion when his generals threatened to rebel.
I sympathize with my comrades in Belarus but agitating against their government while NATO still exists right on their front door is a misguided decision. KPRF understands this.
Agree, but what does “KRPF understand this” should mean? I don’t see Zuganov being any kind of serious communist after decades of him being a bootlicker of a current regime
And yes, it is obvious that any regime will repress dissidents, the question is, regime of who - DotP repressing reactionaries or capitalists beating any kind of workers movement
Zuganov is one man. A powerful man, sure, but still only one. He isn’t the party as a whole.
I don’t know enough about Zuganov to comment on his commitment to Marxism but I sincerely doubt he’s the only one with power in the party and that none of the 160,000 or so members can do anything to remove him if they think he’s doing a bad job so I can only assume they agree with the direction he’s taken the party.
And when it comes to working against United Russia and working with United Russia while the more based option is to oppose it the smarter move is to work with them and not create instability for the U.S. to exploit.
Oh that’s what i wanted to know, thanks, yeah i agree, we can’t take more “based option” just because - we have to think what how and why we can do
As for Zuganov and KRPF of course there is a possibility for him being removed and party becoming revolutionary vanguard one, but the tendencies shows that at least for now, party is a net that catches everyone who wants to be agaisnt Putin, capitalism etc, but isn’t ready/doesn’t know how to go far enough (as with new generation, veterans of war in Ukraine, they are becoming members of KPRF in hopes for a change that they won’t deliver just like they didn’t for 35 years). So that current putinist regime (a capitalism with post-soviet aesthetics and fascism in disguise) can continue to be (doesn’t mean any other capitalist regime is better)
Writing this sleepy, sry for any errors, anyway thanks comrade for giving your point of view
Authority is indeed a buzzword, however in that case it is about excessive authority (let’s say) presence in government system of Lukashenko and Putin, they are not socialist, their interests lies in being at the top of corrupt post-soviet systems that were designed to be that way, I from CIS myself and every of 15 “free republic™” seems just a different flavour of catalist exploitation, that’s why i ask for clarification about possible socialism
You’re not far off there, however, we tend to support Russia, Belarus, etc despite their current economic governance. It goes much further than just political alignment; anti-imperialism is something that is equally as valuable in the current world dominated by the West and it’s economic hegemony.
Russia defending against NATO expansion, exhausting the resources of a burgeoning Nazi state and it’s collaborators is generally anti-imperialist.
It’s why posts like these are made, to point out that political elements within this countries we do support or applaud for their efforts; even if we don’t always agree with them entirely.
I think you need to challenge that liberal bias that you currently hold. The way you talk about these two gov’t reminds me of the Miami “Cubans” that hold very strong bias against Cuba while ignoring that they are actively being hunted down by ICE in the “Free” and “Democratic” USA. No clarification or source that I share will be able to help if you still hold strong liberalism.
If you are new to marxism, you can check this guide done by one of our comrades -> https://lemmy.ml/post/22417306
and I absolutely recommend this book to dispel liberalism and anticommunist bias:
I’m pretty sure Parenti actively disparages Lukashenko specifically in BS&R. Calling him an apologist for hitler at one point iirc.
I found the quote in chapter 6 of the book:
Link to PDF
-pg 97 paragraph 2
Damn, I missed that part when I read it and a Rare L to Parenti. Thanks for pointing this out. It is still a good book to dispel cheap anticommunist rhetoric but maybe there are other books that do a better job in attacking liberalism for beginners 🤔
Funnily enough, Belarus still has their state factory for tractors up and running. They didn’t lose most of their manufacturing compared to the other ex soviet states that fell to neoliberalism. This goes to show how dangerous is to be misinformed as an author.
Considering how soon after the collapse this was I’d say it’s forgiven to hold a pessimistic view of any post soveit leader who didn’t explicitly declare themselves a communist.
He makes similiar remarks about China’s reform and opening up if I’m not mistaken. The whole period was undeniably a dismal time for the international communist movement, and it’s hard imagine someone coming to our current perspective after appreciating the gravity of capitlist victory.
I don’t find it hard to believe Belarus would have been plunged into poverty, the entire soveit trade network collapsed, any country in those conditions would be desolate as can be seen with the entire post soveit world.
Yeah, in Parenti’s defense it’s fair to be skeptical in the 90s. Shit was bleak and there was a lack of clarity going on amidst all the neolib disinfo and triumphalism.
Very true. This may explain his views. Thanks for sharing this!
I am not new, i want to say that i as the guy from CIS itself has a tendency to research more, and have russia speaking sources of current communists as Rudoy and Kagarlitsky that clearly suffer from Putin’s regime for example.
Changing one imperalist to another is not an answer and while i get that it is a ww1 situation, i don’t see much of agitation about both sides (Nato, ODKB) losing, more like pure anti NATO narrative without criticism towards what happens to be anti western imperalism (this time it being post-soviet capitalists, exploiting USSRs legacy to the profit of the ones at the top)
You keep using the words regime and imperialism in bad faith which is very common thing from liberals. To avoid rewriting what other comrades have explained, the imperialism accusation against Russia has been discussed before in Lemmygrad:
As for the regime accusation, liberals love accusing non western non aligned countries with that cheap label while ignoring their own countries crimes. From my standpoint, within the ex soviet countries(now capitalist), there are better examples of what a regime does. The worst offender of this is Ukraine governed by the Banderites. From the CIS, we have Uzbekistan or Moldova. Hell, even worse examples of regimes(outside the CIS) are the Keir Starmer regime, the US regime, the German regime and all of the Western countries that banned communist parties and studies. Those offender have even go well beyond to engage in historical revisionism, fascism whitewashing and anti soviet propaganda financed by the Western imperialists.
Once again, it is important to challenge that liberal bias that you currently hold and see the proponents of liberalism, which is the West and their bootlickers, for what they really are.
I am not trying to hypocritically accuse scary-scary russia of being omnipresent bas guy and hence western nazis good, no. What im trying to say is Lemmygrad critically uses RF as a “counter-weight” (as one of answer on first link suggests) or, it is somewhow thinks that Belarus and/or Russia will be a beacon of socialism (not happening) or even worse that they are “everything good, against bad west”
Now, the way you answered my question, from my perspective is you suppose that i am some kind of stupid left-liberal, that does not see the whole picture of current hegemony of the west, and that what i did not like. Now, what i wanted to say is that we, as the communists should be of course using infighting of fascists, capitalists etc to achieve our own goals, however there shouldn’t be any hopes about RF, Belarus or any other entity that is not socialist/communist presenting some kind of “acceptable alternative” that we will bow our head to
What metric determines how “excessive” authority is? Who determines how much authority is too much? What does it look like to exceed one’s authority? Is “excessive” authority inherently bad or is that conditional on how it’s used?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KguCywYHg_g&pp=ygUd0KDRg9C00L7QuSDQm9GD0LrQsNGI0LXQvdC60L4%3D there is an explanation i watched. Should have english subtitles
Tldr: beating up anything that opposes current capitalism, including communists (actual revolutionary, not the one of controled opposition like KPRF), hence Lukashenko and his regime couldn’t be a beacon of socialism, he just happens to be using aesthetics with some anti-western narrative to his own profit
Any intelligent regime is going to repress factions that pose a threat to its stability.
Belarus is on the border of NATO. It can’t afford instability for the West to exploit. This is why Lukashenko is involved in Ukraine, why he’s so close to Russia, and why he didn’t join the invasion when his generals threatened to rebel.
I sympathize with my comrades in Belarus but agitating against their government while NATO still exists right on their front door is a misguided decision. KPRF understands this.
Agree, but what does “KRPF understand this” should mean? I don’t see Zuganov being any kind of serious communist after decades of him being a bootlicker of a current regime
And yes, it is obvious that any regime will repress dissidents, the question is, regime of who - DotP repressing reactionaries or capitalists beating any kind of workers movement
Zuganov is one man. A powerful man, sure, but still only one. He isn’t the party as a whole.
I don’t know enough about Zuganov to comment on his commitment to Marxism but I sincerely doubt he’s the only one with power in the party and that none of the 160,000 or so members can do anything to remove him if they think he’s doing a bad job so I can only assume they agree with the direction he’s taken the party.
And when it comes to working against United Russia and working with United Russia while the more based option is to oppose it the smarter move is to work with them and not create instability for the U.S. to exploit.
Oh that’s what i wanted to know, thanks, yeah i agree, we can’t take more “based option” just because - we have to think what how and why we can do
As for Zuganov and KRPF of course there is a possibility for him being removed and party becoming revolutionary vanguard one, but the tendencies shows that at least for now, party is a net that catches everyone who wants to be agaisnt Putin, capitalism etc, but isn’t ready/doesn’t know how to go far enough (as with new generation, veterans of war in Ukraine, they are becoming members of KPRF in hopes for a change that they won’t deliver just like they didn’t for 35 years). So that current putinist regime (a capitalism with post-soviet aesthetics and fascism in disguise) can continue to be (doesn’t mean any other capitalist regime is better)
Writing this sleepy, sry for any errors, anyway thanks comrade for giving your point of view
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy: