>>17837985>>17837988>>17838021>>17838072Let me be explicit: my critique was never “Russia is utopia.” It was that the breakdown of U.S.–Russian cooperation following the Alaska sale marked a catastrophic shift in the global balance of potential, away from sovereign development and toward Anglo-financier dominance, executed first through the "Great Game," then through color revolutions, NATO expansion, and neoliberal looting.
>“It was the Jewish Bolsheviks!”As if the Bolsheviks dropped out of the sky unaided by the same British and Wall Street-linked networks that funded Trotsky’s return and collapsed the German-Russian collaboration before WWI. See the work of Antony C. Sutton on the matter. Every time you invoke “Jewish Bolsheviks” as an end-all explanation, you’re protecting the higher-level structure, which is the supranational financier empire, which weaponized both communism and fascism to obliterate sovereign resistance.
>“Russia is the aggressor in Ukraine”Yes, and Napoleon was the aggressor in 1812 (if you erase the buildup, ignore the British angle, and pretend no provocations occurred). The Ukraine crisis is a consequence of decades of NATO-backed regime change, IMF economic rapine, and the systematic rejection of all post-Cold War security dialogue. You cheer the destruction of one Slavic nation by another while Lockheed Martin counts your moral righteousness in dividends. You think this is about defending the West. In fact, you’re cheering for its decomposition, because what passes for “the West” today is a burnt-out technocratic empire governed by hedge funds, not nations.
I warn you, that if you don’t break with this imperial operating system, you will end up the same way, looted, isolated, and baited into endless wars, wondering how you got here while scrolling TikTok in a collapsing mall. This goes for any country which deserves sovereignty, which is every country.