Image: one of our POW camps filled with captured soldiers of the Christmas regime.
Season's greetings, fellow godless communists. I'm here to disseminate orders from our Supreme Communist Dictator as we once again find ourselves fighting against the very concept of Christmas. As a reminder, by the end of our five-year plan, we plan to be in a position to attack and dethrone God, but this intermediate step is required to fulfil this directive. Our forces in the field have made significant, if gradual, progress since you received your mission update last year. It has been difficult, but we have developed a series of defensive lines to prepare for a counteroffensive out of Lapland that will try and reach the Gulf of Bothnia in an attempt to cut the land bridge that we have set up across Scandinavia.
Currently, we foresee a few major threats. General Santa Clauswitz has been developing many tools in his workshop, including artillery-launched snowballs, barbed tinsel, and reinforced gingerbread armor plating for his tanks and infantry carriers. President Frostyy has made the following public statement: "The socialists who wish to destroy us have no idea what their defenses are about to face. Democracy will always defeat autocracy. Christmas will always triumph over X-mas. The leaders of the axis facing us are all on the naughty list and will be tried for crimes against festivity once this war is over."
Delusional as this may be, the next couple days will be the most dangerous as they stage their counteroffensive, and we need everybody to pitch in and get into defensive positions. We expect this to be the last major push that they will make before collapse. Please report any Christmas trees, mistletoe, or general symbology of the Christmas regime to your superiors.
Over and out.
The weekly update is here on the website.
The Country of the Week is Finland! Feel free to chime in with books, essays, longform articles, even stories and anecdotes or rants. More detail here.
The bulletins site is here!
The RSS feed is here.
Last week's thread is here.
Israel-Palestine Conflict
Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:
UNRWA daily-ish reports on Israel's destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.
English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news (and has automated posting when the person running it goes to sleep).
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.
English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.
Various sources that are covering the Ukraine conflict are also covering the one in Palestine, like Rybar.
Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Sources:
Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.
Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.
Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:
Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.
https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.
Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:
Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.
I had a chat with a friend, an actually friendly disagreement about the war in Ukraine.
Friend is a western leftist, pro-Palestinian while being anti-Hamas, very strongly feminist which drives a lot of their views against Iran and Hamas, sees (alleged) violence against women by Russia and Hamas as key reasons for disliking them. Further friend really dislikes the patriarchalism that is a latent feature of Arab or Islamic liberation movements which is a very valid criticism, but I think friend strays into allowing this to become a shield for imperialism.
Friend acknowledged the atrocities and thousands of deaths during the pre-war / internal civil war phase. Friend emphasized this by citing some specific atrocities such as that church that got burned down with people inside.
Friend recognizes the right of self-determination for the people in Donbas, Crimea, etc. Friend somewhat counters this with the argument that while right of self determination is important, it isn’t worth tens or hundreds of thousands dying over. It’s worth adding friend is of a national subgroup with separatist ambitions and friend sympathizes with separatism, but makes the solidly materialist point that nationalism isn’t worth mass death.
Friend also didn’t exactly agree but didn’t push back against the idea that Ukraine was hardly democratic, seemed to agree or at least not contest that bad actors have major influence in Ukraine, and agrees that Ukraine has a big problem with nationalism.
I think the key disagreement I have with friend is that I think Putin honestly did seek some reasonable peace but the west stymied this, while friend seems to see Russia as the primary aggressor and that Putin isn’t really motivated by ideals of self-determination but is really motivated by revanchism and nationalism.
Friend also expresses obvious disgust for sexual violence against women in the conflict and the targeting of civilian infrastructure, which is expressed as a reason to dislike Russia here so implicitly believes the sexual violence and is a problem for Russia and not Ukraine, and also because it is cities within Ukraine that are struck with missiles and destroyed and not really much significant targeting of Russian civilian infrastructure.
I have my own thoughts about the discussion and I think it mostly comes down to seeing Russia as the aggressor, believing the narratives regarding sexual violence by Russian soldiers as an endemic issue, and the fact that Russia overmatches Ukraine leading to an instinct to support the apparent underdog.
I have my own thoughts but I’m curious how y’all would respond here to a genuinely good faith disagreement along these lines.
I'd advise your friend to recognize the number one butcher and denier of Arab women is the US and it's regional allies, you can't have feminism if an American made bomb blows every woman in a square block radius to smithereens, also whether they like it or not the only armed force defending the women of Gaza from an entire army of murderous rapists and baby killers is Hamas and its allies
Your friend should recognize the people of Donbass and Crimea didn't choose to have their democratically elected government in Kiev overthrown by fascists in 2014, they didn't choose to have their languages and identities suppressed, their fellow workers burned alive in Odessa, they didn't choose to have neo-nazi gangs attempt to take over entire cities in the Donbass
Minimizing the agency of the west and the fascists who took over Ukraine is frankly a coping mechanism to deny the fact the Russians and Putin had every liberal-ass, money-making stability-at-all-cost-ass incentive to accept a peace deal (a la Minsk) while the West and its Ukrainian allies openly courted unnecessary war and proudly beat the drums
Yeah I think that’s where I also land: emphasize the moral agency of the west in Ukraine. It’s not simply the west supporting the smol bean Ukraine but the west manipulating Ukraine into fighting a proxy war to the detriment of Ukraine and the benefit of the west.
This doesn’t address the sexual violence issue but I guess that becomes a question of competing narratives and a discussion about manufacturing consent.
When it comes to feminism and Islamic liberation movements, I think friend becomes an idealist. The USA isn’t blowing people up in Iraq because they’re women which means it isn’t a feminist issue. I guess here I need to tack materialist like you suggest. I’ve previously talked about the need for multiple liberations in Palestine - one for Palestinians, another for Palestinian women, etc and that one need for liberation doesn’t counter another but I wonder if there’s a better way to frame this.
I mean, it's literally as easy as asking a simple question
If the US military invades another country, while STATESIDE it is infamous for misogyny, sexual violence and rape against its own members, aren't the women of said country by definition at risk from such an organization and isn't it the duty of any feminist to opposes said organization and its imperialist activities that makes life harder for millions of women in the invaded region
Also I'd point out the not-so-subtle shift your friend makes between Ukraine and the Middle East, when the US invades it's not a feminist issue, but when Russia does suddenly it is? Inconsistency like that points to a lack of seriousness
This is pretty solid. I’ve been trying to work out how to say “feminism isn’t a shield for imperialism” but I can’t quite figure out a way to say that which isn’t simply justifying other forms of patriarchy, and honestly I’ve been trying to work out to what extent as a white male anti-imperialist I perhaps, likely, underweight feminism vis a vis imperialism but the double standards angle is food for thought.
Do we have an active feminist comm?
No Russian government would allow a bunch of Russophobic neonazis with a massive army supplied by NATO that is ethnically cleansing the Russian ethnic minority living near the Ukrainian-Russian border and has air their desire to eventually move on to Russia itself to prosper. It doesn't matter if Russia is socialist, fascist, feudal, neoliberal, social democratic, and so on. A sovereign Russia, regardless of ruling ideology, would be compelled by pure geopolitical interests to do something about the Russophobic neonazi menace across their border including but not limited to marching troops across the border to break the backs of the Banderites. The only exception is if Russia is not actually sovereign but completely run by compradors who take marching orders from their Western masters and are ordered by their Western masters to stand down.
That's what your friend wants. Your friend wants Russia and every other country in the world to kowtow to the West, the alleged source of civilization.
Russia has exercised the war with much more restraint than the US in any war and especially Isreal indiscriminately bombing Gaza today... also found it interesting lately to see interviews from the female prisoners exchanged in Gaza.
I agree with your take that the mechanics of geopolitics force Russia into this position and that Russia is actually being defensive more than aggressive here, despite being the invader.
But with friend I don’t think the morality of it hinges upon the geopolitical mechanics since what matters is people suffering and the geopolitical mechanics argument seems to boil down to either Russian nationalism or opposition to western hegemony rather than the Ukrainian war itself.
I think the most friendly way of approaching that would be to highlight the agency of the west in derailing the peace negotiations and pointing out how I see the west as responsible for what is happening to Ukraine, and I really do think it is a fucking crime what the west is doing to Ukraine.
Like, yes Russia invaded and so Russia has agency here. The geopolitical mechanics argument is really to deny the agency of Russia, which isn’t perfect since actually Russia could have chosen to eat dust and accept humiliation and strategic defeat rather than destroy Ukraine. The geopolitical mechanical argument is to point out that this simply wasn’t going to happen which shifts the moral agency to the west.
I think maybe to highlight the ways in which the west derailed reasonable peace is the most friendly way to approach that?
Directly denying the moral agency of Russia by pointing to geopolitical mechanics I think isn’t correct. Since that makes Russia a force of nature or a wild beast instead of a modern state capable of making moral choices. But pointing out how Russia, as a moral actor, sought compromise rather than war and the west rejected moral compromise and pushed for war seems to get at that better. I think?
I disagree with this specific point. Fascists will inevitably attempt to destroy their designated enemy. If the enemy is internal, the mode of destruction is the concentration camp, and if the enemy is external, the mode of destruction is invasion. You can already see this is in action in the Donbass, where Ukrainian neonazis have begun to move in to exterminate their designated enemy, in this case Russians. I don't think anyone would be surprised if a transphobic fascist party that ran exclusively on how trans people are destroying society would begin building concentration camps to put trans people in, so this shouldn't be too surprising if a fascist society who wants to exterminate Russians would eventually invade the country where all the Russians are, a country that borders them no less. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is just beating the Russophobic fascists to the punch.
On this point, the only answer is to agree - without a doubt, it was an incredibly terrible mistake for Ukraine to allow their explicitly Nazi militias to spend eight years targeting women and children with artillery, killing thousands of innocents. Russia took the initiative to stop this - if they want the death of innocents to end and the ones perpetrating the killing refuse to stop, well, someone has to step in and make them stop.
Ukraine was the most corrupt country in Europe before Russia invaded. It seems incredibly unlikely that they would have gotten any less corrupt, and likely have become even more corrupt.
Your friend sounds like they simply don't know or understand that the conflict has been going on since 2014 and Putin made many attempts at peace, all of which were violated by Ukraine, not Russia.
Again, you should remind or inform your friend that Ukraine had been using artillery to target schools, hospitals, and infrastructure for a decade before Russian forces rolled over the border. The "not much targeting of Russian infrastructure" is simply because Ukraine lacks the ability to do it - they've clearly made attempts with their piddly drone strikes. This is a limitation of weaponry, not intent.
Your friend sounds nice but quite ignorant about the conflict.
edit: The reality is, the average idealist liberal simply cannot be convinced by facts. They operate on vibes-based analysis. No amount of showing them the actual history of the conflict is going to make them suddenly realize America is evil, Ukraine is a pawn and America doesn't care how many slavs die, and Russia while not a shining beacon of leftism at least regards other slavs as humans.
This was my take too. I think picking apart the brain worms in this person is possible but mostly it depends on how open to changing their mind they are. 420stalin69 needs to decide whether their friend is open to change their mind and then choose the time to work carefully... or realize that there is nothing to be gained from further discourse in the near future.
It may be helpful to talk about other topics that undermine their position without it being obvious to them. I think a discussion of the right wing coup and purges in Indonesia (as discussed in The Jakarta Method) and then comparing them to Ukraine's far right coup and the repression of Russian speaking Ukrainians might be beneficial to highlight that the only reason Donbas wasn't mass murdered was because Russia stopped it.