Bro you can’t expect him to unfurl hammer and sickle on kremlin but atleast he took a hard stance on NATO and Russia’s sovereignty that takes huge balls. Even China doesn’t want a direct confrontation with US.
He is a nationalistic pragmatist. He despises communists and has made that very clear, if he had the chance to unfurl the hammer and sickle he would never do it.
It just so happens that the national and economic interests of Russia are anti-west and trending in the direction of China. If NATO and the US were friendly to Russia, Putin would be the first one signing on to work with them and cooperate.
I think you’re misunderstanding ComradeSalad if you took away them “feel[ing] smug about how bad imaginary Putin … is”.
It is worth pointing this out because Putin did repeatedly try to make friendly terms with the West but it refused (and then tried to gaslight us into thinking none of that happened)
You’re right. Putin is a Marxist Leninist at heart who loves the working class and Soviet Union and is not primarily driven by the capitalistic desires of Russia’s bourgeoisie class at all.
He is a shining example of what we should all aspire to be.
Happy? Imagine getting riled up at an analogy and running to uncritically defend Putin from any and all complaint. I’m not a liberal, there’s no need to immediately say anything negative about someone that is situationally aligned with the leftist movement is hearsay.
None of us here are saying that Russia is a shining beacon of communism. I think though that a binary “good” and “bad” isn’t how the world works — there are varying degrees of good and bad.
If we had an evil scale where higher = more evil like some people would like to have, and the Putin administration is some finite number, post-Euromaidan Ukrainian government is a higher one, and the US is definitely infinity.
Totally agreed, all I really meant was that all mentioned above are comfortably in the very bad territory, its just that as you say the US is at -infinity
Bro can you tell that to Nepalese maoists who wanted to overthrow their wretched monarchy and got slaughtered by the help of CPC. What great motivation china provided to them?
I don’t know about this specifically, but China’s typically taken a neutral route when it comes to international affairs. And that’s for better or worse I guess. They haven’t really funded external communist groups nor have they embroiled themselves within proxy wars. Last time I think they did that was the Korean War?
And that’s fair to criticize but China’s pretty consistent on how it tries to achieve very neutral terms internationally. China even trades weapons with Israel, which sucks.
Pretty much what you should expect. One of the people the west installed into power to take out communism the first place so of course he’s against it. When you listen to what he has to say it’s very clear that the only thing Putin wants back is Russia’s position as a world superpower. He sees the USSR as little more than “that time we were really really strong” without considering why it was so strong in the first place.
It seems he also knows why it was strong , I read his Valdai speeches of 2016-2022. In one seminar he said directly that USSR in early days concentrated the resources in the hands of state like education , military and industry , he also said without it USSR could have never won the WW2. He said it directly , he also said USSR didn’t innovate in tech and science (1980s) and thats why it collapsed. In recent speeches of 2022 when he talked about great Russians , he clearly omitted Tsar Nicholas 2 , Lenin and Stalin . Then he said why he did that , because “its not the time for Russia to get indulge in a inner political struggle” . Putin actually shits on USSR to get the job done (also he may dislike communism in a way ) but if he repeats USSR language , the opposition in enemy countries will get the talking point he is a bad commie wants to restore USSR. He always says this "I don’t like to talk about historical figures " , that means he knows about Russian mentality and how Russia’s population sentiment towards USSR.
Fyodor Lukyanov: You made a powerful statement when you said that the current model of capitalism has run its course and no longer offers a solution to international issues. One hears this a lot these days, but you are referring to our country’s unfortunate experience in the 20th century when we were actually rejecting capitalism, but this did not work out for us either. Does this mean that this is where we want to return? Where are we headed with this dysfunctional capitalist model?
Vladimir Putin: I also said that there were no ready-made recipes. It is true that what we are currently witnessing, for example on the energy markets, as we will probably discuss later, demonstrates that this kind of capitalism does not work. All they do is talk about the “invisible hand” of the market, only to get $1,500 or $2,000 per 1,000 cubic metres. Is this market-based approach to regulation any good?
When everything goes well and there is stability, economic actors around the world demand more freedom for themselves and a smaller role for the state in the economy. However, when challenges arise, especially at a global scale, they want the government to interfere.
I remember 2008 and 2009 and the global financial crisis very well. I was Prime Minister at the time, and spoke to many Russian business leaders, who were viewed as successful up to that point, and everything is fine with them now, by the way. They came to me and were ready to give up their companies that were worth tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars, for a ruble. Why? They had to assume responsibility for their workforce and for the future of these companies. It was easier for them just to keep what they earned and shift their responsibility to others.
At the time, we agreed that the state would lend them its shoulder: they kept their businesses, while the state paid off their margin loans and assumed responsibility, to a certain extent. Together with the businesses, we found a solution. As a result, we saved Russia’s largest private companies, and enabled the state to make a profit afterwards. We actually made money because when the companies were back on their feet, they paid back what they owed the state. The state made quite a profit.
In this regard, we do need to work together and explore each other’s experience. Other countries also had positive experiences in making the state and the market work in tune with each other. The People’s Republic of China is a case in point. While the Communist Party retains its leading role there, the country has a viable market and its institutions are quite effective. This is an obvious fact.
For this reason, there are no ready-made recipes. Wild capitalism does not work either, as I have already said, and I am ready to repeat this, as I have just demonstrated using these examples.
That seems to reinforce that he liked the USSR for what it was, not because the communist but because it was a powerhouse. It’s very possible that he’s aligning with communism simply because it’s popular and opposes his biggest political opponent, which is a very smart move. At the very least it’s worth considering that anticapitalism isn’t necessarily pro-socialism.
Bro I am not saying he is a communist and he also says that openly what I am trying to say here , he knows the policies which led to the greatness of USSR or it functioned smoothly . Not saying he is correct in all possible way but he is trying to say here that USSR worked and the central planning or socialism saved the Russian state from Hitler. You cannot hear this from other political head of states , they will completely reject USSR’s achievements and will demonize it to the extreme as some sort of evil entity.
Okay I see the angle you’re coming from. Someone who was around during socialism is going to be more supportive than one who actively denounces it. Not really an enviable position to be in.
Unfortunately he’s also been shitting on USSR and Lenin, from what I’ve heard from the Q/A
Bro you can’t expect him to unfurl hammer and sickle on kremlin but atleast he took a hard stance on NATO and Russia’s sovereignty that takes huge balls. Even China doesn’t want a direct confrontation with US.
He is a nationalistic pragmatist. He despises communists and has made that very clear, if he had the chance to unfurl the hammer and sickle he would never do it.
It just so happens that the national and economic interests of Russia are anti-west and trending in the direction of China. If NATO and the US were friendly to Russia, Putin would be the first one signing on to work with them and cooperate.
deleted by creator
I agree, that’s why that would never happen in any reality. I’m just saying in the hypothetical that if it did happen by some insane metric.
deleted by creator
I think you’re misunderstanding ComradeSalad if you took away them “feel[ing] smug about how bad imaginary Putin … is”.
It is worth pointing this out because Putin did repeatedly try to make friendly terms with the West but it refused (and then tried to gaslight us into thinking none of that happened)
You’re right. Putin is a Marxist Leninist at heart who loves the working class and Soviet Union and is not primarily driven by the capitalistic desires of Russia’s bourgeoisie class at all.
He is a shining example of what we should all aspire to be.
Happy? Imagine getting riled up at an analogy and running to uncritically defend Putin from any and all complaint. I’m not a liberal, there’s no need to immediately say anything negative about someone that is situationally aligned with the leftist movement is hearsay.
Be respectful to other ppl here, or we won’t hesitate to issue temp bans.
deleted by creator
Putin is bad and so is russia, being opportunistically able to align against nazis is just a good strategic move, but its not the motivation
deleted by creator
I’m a clown for recognizing that Putin is no proponent of communism or queer or black liberation?
ok
Its good when our enemies are fighting each other, but that doesn’t make some of them suddenly our friends
None of us here are saying that Russia is a shining beacon of communism. I think though that a binary “good” and “bad” isn’t how the world works — there are varying degrees of good and bad.
If we had an evil scale where higher = more evil like some people would like to have, and the Putin administration is some finite number, post-Euromaidan Ukrainian government is a higher one, and the US is definitely infinity.
Totally agreed, all I really meant was that all mentioned above are comfortably in the very bad territory, its just that as you say the US is at -infinity
Bro can you tell that to Nepalese maoists who wanted to overthrow their wretched monarchy and got slaughtered by the help of CPC. What great motivation china provided to them?
I don’t understand what you’re talking about/ what I’m looking at, can you explain what you mean?
Also, I’m not a liberal in case you thought I was doing the western liberal version of putler bad
good lord …
… is it really that bad to ask for clarification about the random wiki screenshot and historical event you brought up?
Okay sure, don’t try to educate someone who’s asking to be educated, be a fucking loser lmao
also don’t call me bro, my pronouns are right there
I don’t know about this specifically, but China’s typically taken a neutral route when it comes to international affairs. And that’s for better or worse I guess. They haven’t really funded external communist groups nor have they embroiled themselves within proxy wars. Last time I think they did that was the Korean War?
And that’s fair to criticize but China’s pretty consistent on how it tries to achieve very neutral terms internationally. China even trades weapons with Israel, which sucks.
Pretty much what you should expect. One of the people the west installed into power to take out communism the first place so of course he’s against it. When you listen to what he has to say it’s very clear that the only thing Putin wants back is Russia’s position as a world superpower. He sees the USSR as little more than “that time we were really really strong” without considering why it was so strong in the first place.
It seems he also knows why it was strong , I read his Valdai speeches of 2016-2022. In one seminar he said directly that USSR in early days concentrated the resources in the hands of state like education , military and industry , he also said without it USSR could have never won the WW2. He said it directly , he also said USSR didn’t innovate in tech and science (1980s) and thats why it collapsed. In recent speeches of 2022 when he talked about great Russians , he clearly omitted Tsar Nicholas 2 , Lenin and Stalin . Then he said why he did that , because “its not the time for Russia to get indulge in a inner political struggle” . Putin actually shits on USSR to get the job done (also he may dislike communism in a way ) but if he repeats USSR language , the opposition in enemy countries will get the talking point he is a bad commie wants to restore USSR. He always says this "I don’t like to talk about historical figures " , that means he knows about Russian mentality and how Russia’s population sentiment towards USSR.
https://valdaiclub.com/events/posts/articles/vladimir-putin-meets-with-members-of-the-valdai-discussion-club-transcript-of-the-18th-plenary-session/
Fyodor Lukyanov: You made a powerful statement when you said that the current model of capitalism has run its course and no longer offers a solution to international issues. One hears this a lot these days, but you are referring to our country’s unfortunate experience in the 20th century when we were actually rejecting capitalism, but this did not work out for us either. Does this mean that this is where we want to return? Where are we headed with this dysfunctional capitalist model?
Vladimir Putin: I also said that there were no ready-made recipes. It is true that what we are currently witnessing, for example on the energy markets, as we will probably discuss later, demonstrates that this kind of capitalism does not work. All they do is talk about the “invisible hand” of the market, only to get $1,500 or $2,000 per 1,000 cubic metres. Is this market-based approach to regulation any good?
When everything goes well and there is stability, economic actors around the world demand more freedom for themselves and a smaller role for the state in the economy. However, when challenges arise, especially at a global scale, they want the government to interfere.
I remember 2008 and 2009 and the global financial crisis very well. I was Prime Minister at the time, and spoke to many Russian business leaders, who were viewed as successful up to that point, and everything is fine with them now, by the way. They came to me and were ready to give up their companies that were worth tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars, for a ruble. Why? They had to assume responsibility for their workforce and for the future of these companies. It was easier for them just to keep what they earned and shift their responsibility to others.
At the time, we agreed that the state would lend them its shoulder: they kept their businesses, while the state paid off their margin loans and assumed responsibility, to a certain extent. Together with the businesses, we found a solution. As a result, we saved Russia’s largest private companies, and enabled the state to make a profit afterwards. We actually made money because when the companies were back on their feet, they paid back what they owed the state. The state made quite a profit.
In this regard, we do need to work together and explore each other’s experience. Other countries also had positive experiences in making the state and the market work in tune with each other. The People’s Republic of China is a case in point. While the Communist Party retains its leading role there, the country has a viable market and its institutions are quite effective. This is an obvious fact.
For this reason, there are no ready-made recipes. Wild capitalism does not work either, as I have already said, and I am ready to repeat this, as I have just demonstrated using these examples.
That seems to reinforce that he liked the USSR for what it was, not because the communist but because it was a powerhouse. It’s very possible that he’s aligning with communism simply because it’s popular and opposes his biggest political opponent, which is a very smart move. At the very least it’s worth considering that anticapitalism isn’t necessarily pro-socialism.
Bro I am not saying he is a communist and he also says that openly what I am trying to say here , he knows the policies which led to the greatness of USSR or it functioned smoothly . Not saying he is correct in all possible way but he is trying to say here that USSR worked and the central planning or socialism saved the Russian state from Hitler. You cannot hear this from other political head of states , they will completely reject USSR’s achievements and will demonize it to the extreme as some sort of evil entity.
Okay I see the angle you’re coming from. Someone who was around during socialism is going to be more supportive than one who actively denounces it. Not really an enviable position to be in.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
He is still less revisionist about them than the west and vocally opposes that extra amount of revisionism that makes up the difference