Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The war and "the left" - what do "we" do?

Which of the following would you support?


  • Total voters
    103
Fucking hell, that's awful. I didn't expect quite such pathetic analysis from the Italian FAI
It looks like it's a statement from some kind of wider campaign rather than actually coming from the FAI. Then again they've published it in their paper and it's been posted on the IFA site without further comment.

eta: I'm referring to the second (Italian) statement here - there's an English translation if you scroll down.
 
Last edited:
Finding much of the response of the left to this very depressing and sad to be honest. Think it's called 'cut 'n' paste' analysis in one the Tweets above. Semi-religious in it's unshaking faith they can roll out their own line the same way they always do no matter what the circumstances, and that's the simple answer to it all.
 
Finding much of the response of the left to this very depressing and sad to be honest. Think it's called 'cut 'n' paste' analysis in one the Tweets above. Semi-religious in it's unshaking faith they can roll out their own line the same way they always do no matter what the circumstances, and that's the simple answer to it all.

That said, I also wonder whether there's a certain kneejerk stubbornness not to get swept up in the armchair war mongering that is piggybacking on the moral and emotional revulsion towards the Russian invasion.

I know that I've felt that at times.
 
That said, I also wonder whether there's a certain kneejerk stubbornness not to get swept up in the armchair war mongering that is piggybacking on the moral and emotional revulsion towards the Russian invasion.

I know that I've felt that at times.

I think on some level maybe that's fair enough. There's a good list of historical examples of people losing their senses and politics around stuff that's highly emotional etc. and caution about that is probably sensible as a good starting point, but then surely people can move beyond that and address the reality as it is rather than how they would like it to be?
 
I think on some level maybe that's fair enough. There's a good list of historical examples of people losing their senses and politics around stuff that's highly emotional etc. and caution about that is probably sensible as a good starting point, but then surely people can move beyond that and address the reality as it is rather than how they would like it to be?

Yeah. I don't think the ACG are "losing their senses and politics" - the opposite in fact. I think they're just digging their heels in a bit in a reaction to others "losing their senses and politics", which in turn is also a bit of an obstacle to figuring out what the hell is going on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDC
I think on some level maybe that's fair enough. There's a good list of historical examples of people losing their senses and politics around stuff that's highly emotional etc. and caution about that is probably sensible as a good starting point, but then surely people can move beyond that and address the reality as it is rather than how they would like it to be?
A lot of people want the reality to get bloodier. I'm glad the ACG aren't among them.
 
Yeah. I don't think the ACG are "losing their senses and politics" - the opposite in fact. I think they're just digging their heels in a bit in a reaction to others "losing their senses and politics", which in turn is also a bit of an obstacle to figuring out what the hell is going on.

That was what I meant as well.
 
A lot of people want the reality to get bloodier. I'm glad the ACG aren't among them.

I don't think any of us want that. One of the complexities though is that it what if fighting now reduces the chances of it being more bloody later? I don't know if that position is likely to prove accurate, but plenty of people with lots of knowledge seem to think it's quite possible, so it at least needs to be considered. Isn't the NWBTCW position is by default telling the Ukrainian State and military to surrender isn't it, or at the very least for all the non-military people and groups to withdraw any support for it, and for all arms supply to cease? And then how that is supposed to be managed with massive State involvement and peacekeeping and disarmament etc. I have no idea.

On one hand they're saying NWBTCW, but then also 'well, we don't have any answers.' I mean which is it?
 
Last edited:
I don't think any of us want that. One of the complexities though is that it what if fighting now reduces the chances of it being more bloody later? Effectively the NWBTCW position is by default telling the Ukrainian State and military to surrender isn't it? And how that is supposed to be managed with massive State involvement and peacekeeping and disarmament etc. anyway I have no idea.
In that case you ought to attend the acg meeting where I'm sure your points will be addressed
 
Balancing the fact that the war is an outcome of inter-imperialist conflict with the fact that one imperialist nation has invaded a non-imperialist nation is always gonna be tricky. Ukraine clearly isn’t simply a proxy for nato/us/eu, but it is now unavoidably part of that general nexus and their (ukraines) victory would be taken as a victory for ‘the west’ too. And, unless anyone here has gone Full Mason, no one wants to see Nato strengthened.

This is a decent piece on how Russian imperialism is doing (and why they’re the ‘main enemy’ in this instance)
 
. Isn't the NWBTCW position is by default telling the Ukrainian State and military to surrender isn't it, or at the very least for all the non-military people and groups to withdraw any support for it, and for all arms supply to cease? A
I dunno.

My own personal take on NWBTCW is a refusal to engage in war(s) on behalf of the State or Nation or whatever. How that manifests in relation to any given "war effort" would, for me, vary depending upin circumstance and context.

From the comfort of my armchair I can speculate that were I in Ukraine that would differ depending upon where I was. I guess my priority would be to get my family out, if I could flee too I would. I would want no part of the war...but that might be easier in, say Lviv, than in Kyiv. Were I trapped, I guess I would defend myself and my friend/neighbours etc. from incursion, but .... I dunno. I'm not there, so my speculation here is of little use.

From my safe position in the UK I guess my NWBTCW position manifests as an opposition to British State military engagement in the war. I don't, for example, support a 'no fly zone' enforced by the RAF. Yet, at the same time, that doesn't preclude sending material aid to non-state actors engaged in defending themselves. There's some interesting questions around whether, or how, the class war is present in the midst of the rest of the war, but again, it would be foolish on my part to speculate too much on that from here.

...but then no one is waiting with bated for a statement outlining "chilango's official line on the invasion of Ukraine". Which is fortunate really :D
 
Some parallels with UK and USA communists prior to Germany invading the USSR - they were instructed by Moscow to concentrate on attacking western imperialism/capitalism - and opposing the war - rather than attacking nazi germany cos of the molotov-ribbentop agreement. Only this time much of the anti-imperialist left are doing it freelance without the need for stalin's orders.
 
I don't think any of us want that. One of the complexities though is that it what if fighting now reduces the chances of it being more bloody later? I don't know if that position is likely to prove accurate, but plenty of people with lots of knowledge seem to think it's quite possible, so it at least needs to be considered. Isn't the NWBTCW position is by default telling the Ukrainian State and military to surrender isn't it, or at the very least for all the non-military people and groups to withdraw any support for it, and for all arms supply to cease? And then how that is supposed to be managed with massive State involvement and peacekeeping and disarmament etc. I have no idea.

On one hand they're saying NWBTCW, but then also 'well, we don't have any answers.' I mean which is it?
I'm wondering about the origins of the NWBTCW position or slogan.

If I'm right (and I may be wrong) it was originally coined in the context of WW1, which was that large numbers of young men were being encouraged to sign up to go and fight in what most of us would agree now was an inter imperialist war.

The context for Ukranians whose homes etc have been invaded and destroyed and many of whose families and friends have been murdered is quite different, and for them, No War But The Class War will inevitably sound like a pretty hollow slogan.
 
I mean "No War but the Class War" and "Revolutionary Defeatism" are different, no?

I think the later leads people to have the former as a position, but plenty of people have the former position without the later description? The revolutionary defeatism thing exists mainly in the very small ultraleft/leftcom worlds I think? And yeah, as andysays that has it's roots a hundred years ago, which they never tire of pointing out.
 
Balancing the fact that the war is an outcome of inter-imperialist conflict with the fact that one imperialist nation has invaded a non-imperialist nation is always gonna be tricky. Ukraine clearly isn’t simply a proxy for nato/us/eu, but it is now unavoidably part of that general nexus and their (ukraines) victory would be taken as a victory for ‘the west’ too. And, unless anyone here has gone Full Mason, no one wants to see Nato strengthened.

This is a decent piece on how Russian imperialism is doing (and why they’re the ‘main enemy’ in this instance)
Is it possible to have a defeat of an imperial power that is not also a direct or indirect victory for another?

And on the strengthening of NATO, that us an inevitable outcome of the invasion but I think a Russian victory will result in more strengthening of NATO than a Russian defeat.
 
Is it possible to have a defeat of an imperial power that is not also a direct or indirect victory for another?

Hmm, Chechnya would be the only one I can think of offhand, since the west was fairly supportive as part of the war on terror.
And on the strengthening of NATO, that us an inevitable outcome of the invasion but I think a Russian victory will result in more strengthening of NATO than a Russian defeat.
Nato powers would definitely increase military spending and quite possibly increase in size either way, tho it’d probably be a bit more circumspect about it if Russia had rolled in and won as easily as they thought they were going to.
 
On the NATO thing, I disagree with belboid - in the week of the invasion there were some rather strident funding increases announced, almost entirely based on 20 Divisions of the Red, err... I mean Russian Army piling through the Ukrainian Army like it was confetti. 6 weeks later and while they've not been rowed back on, not much else has been announced, and while the concern level in certainly higher than it was a year ago, there's more than a whiff of 'these Russians, they're a bit shit aren't they?' about.

Finlandoiddoes look set to join NATO in late spring-early summer though...
 
I appear to be on Crack. My apologies - I shall retire immediately.

Gentlemen, Ladies - your pardon.
 
I'm wondering about the origins of the NWBTCW position or slogan.

If I'm right (and I may be wrong) it was originally coined in the context of WW1, which was that large numbers of young men were being encouraged to sign up to go and fight in what most of us would agree now was an inter imperialist war.

The context for Ukranians whose homes etc have been invaded and destroyed and many of whose families and friends have been murdered is quite different, and for them, No War But The Class War will inevitably sound like a pretty hollow slogan.
Yep, the "trenchism" comparisons with WWI don't really hold up, completely different situation. The people in Ukraine have every right to fight for their lives, their families, homes and communities.
 
Yep, the "trenchism" comparisons with WWI don't really hold up, completely different situation. The people in Ukraine have every right to fight for their lives, their families, homes and communities.
I mean, yeah. Agreed.

...but there's something a bit wonky about "us" pontificating whether people have "the right" to defend themselves or not.

We shouldn't (have) let ourselves get into framing it like that.
 
Back
Top Bottom