Davin News Server

On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 11:52:56 -0000 (UTC),  Bradley K. Sherman says...  

> Only one of us responds to "Kremlin Girl".
> 

All you homos on the left are Kremlin Girls...

STILL can't understand why the BLM/Drag-Queen/Gay/Socialist/Fascist/Antifa /Marxist/Communist/Racist/Insurrectionist/Liberal/Democrat crowd 
is so in hate with Russia these days.

They LOVED Russian politics, i.e., Socialism/Communism until Trump whooped that wide-load Clinton's fat ass, even AFTER making up that 
bullshit story about Trump and the Russians.

Fucking hypocrites.

https://i.imgur.com/8CTB1Y3.png

It was CLINTON who was in collusion with Putin and Russia.

https://i.imgur.com/vIFOdKN.png
https://imgur.com/pIMc3DI.jpg
https://imgur.com/pWbZPrK.jpg

The Left's Peculiar Alignment With Russia

The left has ALWAYS been aligned with Russia, until Clinton had the fake dossier made up.

The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, over 30 years ago, marked a significant turning point in history, symbolizing the end of the Cold War 
and the dismantling of the Soviet Union. It was not the "end of history" as predicted by American political scientist Francis Fukuyama, but 
still the world significantly changed-particularly the left that needed to reinvent itself to survive.

In certain parts of the world, particularly in Latin America and pockets of the left in Europe, there seems to be a refusal to acknowledge 
the fall of the Wall. This translates into some of the left's support for Russia and their silence in the face of the country's aggression 
and illegal invasion of Ukraine, a refusal to support democratic governments, and an outdated anti-Americanism.

One possible explanation for the left's support for Russia is rooted in historical ideological affinity. Many leftist movements and leaders 
have traditionally admired the principles associated with the Soviet Union and its role in challenging Western capitalism, even though it 
resulted in a redundant failure. This historical legacy still influences their stance today, blurring the line between ideology and 
geopolitical reality.

The same can be said for the support of China and even North Korea that, despite the former being aggressively capitalist and authoritarian 
and the latter a hermit and likewise an authoritarian state, they dwell in the imaginary of part of the left as poles of resistance to 
global capitalism.

The left's alignment with Russia can also be attributed to a deep-rooted anti-imperialist sentiment and anti-Americanism. For some, 
Russia's resistance against perceived American hegemony and its willingness to challenge Western influence resonate with their ideological 
opposition to capitalist domination. The fact that Russia seeks to exercise its "imperial" power over neighboring countries, in particular 
those that were part of the USSR, escapes the left-or is simply ignored.

This often leads to a sympathetic view of Russia's actions for some, overshadowing concerns about aggression and invasion or the fact that 
Russia is as capitalist as any Western country-only without the same success.

The shifting geopolitical landscape has witnessed some left-wing leaders aligning with Russia as part of a broader realignment strategy. 
This may involve forging alliances with non-Western powers to counterbalance Western influence or to secure economic and political support. 
Venezuela is an example as it sought Russia as an alternative to a U.S.-led blockade of its economy. In this context, support for Russia 
becomes a strategic choice rather than just a reflection of ideological consistency.

The idea of seeking alignment with the Global South or non-Western states can be a good thing. Brazil adopted a similar policy during the 
first two Lula governments with a certain degree of success. But now, in his third term, the dose of the medicine is killing the patient-in 
this case Brazilian foreign policy. The world has changed, and as Felippe Ramos explained, a political analyst at the New School for Social 
Research, "In 2003, when Lula became president for the first time, Putin was still being born as a leader. Relations with the West were 
good and promising. In China the commodities boom was starting, and the country had an excellent relationship with the U.S."

Except, he continued, "The world has changed and Brazil and Lula's vision of an alignment outside the Western sphere has become even more 
ideological, while China and Russia are no longer on good terms with the U.S. or experiencing the same economic bonanza that justified, for 
example, the creation of the BRICS."

Despite immense international pressure, Brazilian President Lula da Silva continues undisguisedly to support Russia in the conflict with 
Ukraine, despite declaring several times that he actually seeks neutrality. A visit by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, refusal by 
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to meet during the G7 meeting, and a personal call to Putin by Lula to assure him that he would not 
get involved in the conflict are only some of the unequivocal demonstrations of Brazil's alignment with the Russian aggressor.

But Lula is not the only left-wing leader to adopt such a position. In Latin America, the common position of left-wing leaders (with the 
notable exception of Gabriel Boric, president of Chile) is to support the Russian dictator. Even in Europe, many left-wing parties have 
difficulty in strongly condemning the Russian invasion-they remain ambiguous.

The rise of populist and nationalist movements across the globe impacted the left's stance on Russia. Some left-wing leaders ironically 
have found common ground with right-wing populist leaders who espouse anti-establishment narratives and challenge the liberal international 
order. This convergence of interests blurs ideological lines and leads to shared support for Russia, whose leader, Vladimir Putin, is known 
for supporting the far right particularly in Europe.

The prevalence of propaganda and disinformation campaigns cannot be ignored when examining the left's support for Russia. Russia has been 
accused of using sophisticated information warfare tactics to manipulate public opinion, and influence political discourse and the 
dissemination of misleading narratives and conspiracy theories can sway the perception of events, making it harder to form a united 
condemnation of Russia's actions. This leads to the creed that Ukraine is full of Nazis, or that the country doesn't even exist.

The left's support for Russia or its silence on the country's aggression and invasion of Ukraine is a complex issue rooted in historical, 
ideological, and geopolitical factors that, nonetheless, lead to a discourse that goes against basic human rights and leaves only sheer and 
misguided ideology.