this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2025
70 points (64.2% liked)
Memes
53548 readers
955 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
These are a lot of assertions that you've stated as fact without any proof - can you provide independent non-government sanctioned sources for your claims?
Sure, here are even some western government sanctioned sources.
Groups like Azov have been folded in officially. The Kiev regime upholds Stepan Bandera and uses likeness for propaganda. Nazis infest Ukrainian leadership:
The east supported Yanukovych, and that's why the far-right Banderites couping him kicked off the war.
There's an abundance of evidence, just like there is for the genocide of Palestine. Liberals tend to downplay both.
Valid, those sources do paint a pretty appalling picture of Ukraine and it's massive Neo-Nazi problem - I can argue on the specific numbers as they don't fully reflect what you said but I agree that there are real issues with Azov's integration, Bandera glorification, and the disproportionate far-right influence.
However, I'd ask you to also acknowledge that Russia has an equally serious neo-Nazi problem that fundamentally undermines the "denazification" justification for the invasion. And I don't think it's whataboutism to pointing out that the stated moral basis for the war is hypocritical. And this is clearly established by both Russian state and independent media:
1.Putin himself admitted Wagner PMC was fully state-funded:
2.Wagner's neo-Nazi leadership:
3."Rusich" leader Aleksey Milchakov - is an openly psychopathic Nazi:
4.Neo-Nazi Russian Imperial Movement (RIM) founder Denis Gariyev received at least 15 million rubles worth of government contracts from Russia's FSB, FSO, and Ministry of Internal Affairs
5.Putin's contradictions:
So my point overall: Ukraine absolutely has a far-right problem that needs addressing and the US and Europe are propping them up as they align with their neoliberal and geopolitical values. But Russia claiming to "denazify" Ukraine while:
...makes "denazification" a cynical propaganda justification rather than a genuine moral concern.
So I think if we're serious about being anti-imperialist we have to recognize that if it's bad for neolibs to use Nazis in Ukraine for their imperial interests then it's also bad for Russia to use Nazis for their own imperialist goals.
It's possible for two imperialist forces to be bad - and you can then start comparing which is worse but at that point you're doing imperialist apologia which imo isn't a serious critique for a socialist to be doing.
There are 2 critical errors you're making here, and thus why your critique falls flat and lifeless:
The Nazis in Ukraine aren't just emboldened by the state, but in control of it. Russia is governed by nationalists, not by Nazis. Ukraine isn't simply using Nazis to further their aims, but the west is using Ukrainian Nazis to further their aims.
Russia is not imperialist. It has a paltry amount of finance capital, and no colonies nor neo-colonies. Its status as a capitalist nation no longer imperialized by the west like they were in the 90s strategically aligns then with the global south. This is why, say, the Sahel States turned to Russia for support in their national revolution against imperialism. Russia doesn't participate in unequal exchange, it doesn't keep tech monopoly nor does it undermine global south development.
I'm not doing imperialist apologia, you're incorrectly identifying this as an inter-imperialist proxy war and as a consequence misanalyze the situation. This is why reading theory and studying the class components of the states involved, and their positions in world imperialism, are necessary.
This is always where the conversation ends
Sometimes they just ignore you and repeat what they already said.
*Often