Mick Lynch's time is up
- Thread starter steveseagull
- Start date
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
The Russian government thought they could quickly annex the East and install a puppet regime in Kyiv without facing too many obstacles. Had they succeeded, as they did in 2014, the "West"' would have cared little. They failed and as a consequence they are fucked.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
Many cunts.
TopCat
Putin fanboy
How much of the world are you calling cunts? Most of Africa? Loads are not with the West’s propaganda line. Grow up.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
Wow you really are cunt.
TopCat
Putin fanboy
Have we reached that point now? You just shout cunt cunt and up The EU and NATO?
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
Pretty much yes, I suppose the only reason not to is because you disagree with the vast majority of the Ukrainian people.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
There’s a big difference between analysing and discussing Ukraine’s geopolitics and external relations in the period leading up to the war, and using it as some kind of gotcha or whataboutery to minimise or deflect from Russian culpability, as Lynch and TopCat are doing.
Smokeandsteam
Working Class First
Wow, this thread has degenerated quickly.
3 quick points:
1. It is perfectly possible to support Ukraine and hope for the military defeat of Russia whilst recognising that a) NATO is not a force for good and b) holding serious concerns about the politics of some of the Ukrainian political class and some of those doing the fighting.
2. The fact that posters on here cannot see what is happening here: that Lynch is being smeared and stitched up to undermine the RMT and the dispute is not just disappointing, it’s disturbing.
3. If anyone can point to where Lynch has sought to “minimise or deflect from Russian culpability” either post it or retract it. The RMT statement - that as the GS he is required to advocate - is crystal clear
3 quick points:
1. It is perfectly possible to support Ukraine and hope for the military defeat of Russia whilst recognising that a) NATO is not a force for good and b) holding serious concerns about the politics of some of the Ukrainian political class and some of those doing the fighting.
2. The fact that posters on here cannot see what is happening here: that Lynch is being smeared and stitched up to undermine the RMT and the dispute is not just disappointing, it’s disturbing.
3. If anyone can point to where Lynch has sought to “minimise or deflect from Russian culpability” either post it or retract it. The RMT statement - that as the GS he is required to advocate - is crystal clear
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
Thats how these time is up threads tend to go
Sure but that‘s not what he’s doing. Read his comments on China too and his politics are clear - the West is equally culpable.
Smeared how exactly? He’s the one giving out his views about China and Ukraine in interviews during the dispute.
In the above interview.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Never gonna be put across like that though is it. Especially not coming from a bloke the papers would love to have some dirt on.
Karl Masks
Birds Angel Delight
1 This is true. The difference between criticism of the likes of NATO isn't the same as saying Putin was provoked into bombing and murder. He chose that, he is to blame.
2 I think it is a mistake for Mick to be drawn on topics like this is precisely because it is an exercise in poisoning the well. It is an obvious smear attempt and it will do him no credit
3 I certainly don't believe Mick's intentions are dishonest or that he's genuinely pro Putin. Doesn't mean that he can't be wrong in what he says. Being mistaken on Ukraine doesn't equal supporting the Russian regime.
This is a topic that will never win him any support and is an obvious trap or at least a line of questioning that will be used as such
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Karl , who do you think is attempting to smear Lynch and what do you think their purpose is?
Karl Masks
Birds Angel Delight
TBC, as a trade union leader who has become prominent it's certainly in the interests of the ruling class to see him defanged or his popularity reduced. I'm not suggesting these interviews are the result of shadowy smoking men in darkened rooms, but that hsi comments on Ukraine will be ammo the right can use against him. Similar to how Jeremy Corbyn was treated. The left just has to be extra careful in these sorts of dialogues. It's BS, as I say I don't think Mick is a baddie for his views, I just think he's wrong on this. That doesn't mean he should be thrown under a bus. His comments can be used against him though.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
The interview, along with the wholly selective headline on Twitter , was in the New Statesman .
Smokeandsteam
Working Class First
On 1. As far as I can see Lynch makes a series of factual statements and in the very next paragraph the NS has to confirm that Lynch and the RMT condemned the Russian invasion and demanded withdrawal. I can’t see any comment from him that Putin was provoked.
On 2. Yes. The interesting question is why the NS wanted to draw him into a debate about geo-political issues. Personally, I think you are right. But he seems like the sort of person who if asked a question will just answer it.
On 3. I agree on the general point, but I ask again what has he said about Ukraine that is ‘wrong’?
TopCat
Putin fanboy
The telegraph and Guardian all in agreement with platinumsage and the like. Swivel eye corner. This is pure monster frothing liberal though. As Putin’s war spreads panic across Europe, Ukrainians must fear a stab in the back
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
teqniq
DisMembered
Smear job by the establishment was fairly inevitable i suppose:
www.councilestatemedia.uk
Council Estate Media
For months now, we've seen ridiculous articles in rags like The Daily Mail, claiming the union movement is supportive of Putin's Russia.
Karl Masks
Birds Angel Delight
That Putin wasn't responsible for the invasion, NATO is, and that Ukraine is full of Nazis such that 'denazification' is further justification
Serge Forward
Just enjoyin' my coffee.
Can you quote the bit in the article where he says that please. I can't find it.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Where does he say that ?
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
I think his China comments were worse. When asked about the Uyghurs he mentions slaves in Leicester, like those people who when asked about the trans-atlantic slave trade say that the Welsh were enslaved by the Saxons, or when asked about the holocaust immediately point to Stalin or whatever.
Karl Masks
Birds Angel Delight
Quoted from the article:
“The EU also provoked a lot of the trouble in Ukraine. It was all about being pro-EU and all the rest of it,” he said, referring to the pro-EU Maidan revolution in Ukraine in 2014. “There were a lot of corrupt politicians in Ukraine. And while they were doing that, there were an awful lot of people [in Ukraine] playing with Nazi imagery, and going back to the [Second World] war, and all that. So, it’s not just that this stuff has sprung from one place.”
The initial tweet that sparked this discussion carried that quote as well.
These comments get used against people like Mick. That is my only concern. I don't think he's a Putin apologist, nor an idiot. Unlike, for example, Chris Williamson or George Galloway who more explicitly say that. But the media wont' care and will lump him in the same. It's a problem, IMO, for the left.
I think i've said all I care too on this and have made it clear I think Mick is a good guy, and he has my full support as a working class person.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Struggling to overlay this quote from the interview with you saying he said " Putin wasn't responsible for the invasion, NATO is, and that Ukraine is full of Nazis such that 'denazification' is further justification" to be brutally honest.
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
I'm getting very sick of seeing online leftists declaring how important it is to be against imperialism and therefore why it's important to take the view of Russia or China. Both Russia and China are capitalist countries with imperial inclinations themselves (albeit less successful than the US). I just find it mad that anyone would mouth off so much about imperialism and not see Russia and China as also imperalist. Really does my nut it. It makes me feel that my politics is actually quite different to those people.
Israel is less of an imperial power than China or Russia, but if during one of their wars on Gaza, somebody started talking about the Hamas Charter, everybody would recognise it as an Israeli talking point and would see that as either apologism or fence sitting. I think it's the latter in the case of Mick Lynch wrt Russia/Ukraine, but its still a terrible position. I disagree with platinumsage that trade unionists shouldn't talk world politics, it's good that they're internationalists and thinking and talking about these questions, but it's no good trying to sweep political problems under the carpet because the media are trying to do gottchas on Mick Lynch. These problems aren't going to go away and the gottchas aren't going to stop.
Similar threads
