Couldn't agree more to everything you said.

I think a lot of people see it that way, a culture they traded for dollars and a box set of Friends

And when you put it that way, oof. Not white but my parents traded much of theirs off for the bible and that didn't turn out well (as an understatement). Europe and the west will be spending a long time recovering, or trying to recover, from the "whiteness" they inflicted on themselves.

As someone whose partner is white I think I understand them a bit better seeing your comment as well. For me even if I wasn't raised in it and reconnecting with it is something I'll be doing all my life as a result, the identity and pride in it has always been strong (thanks to being a minority- the choice is either pride or shame IMO). I've often thought being white and having such easy assimilation must be both a blessing and a curse- but seeing you put it that way makes it sound even more wretched yet.

Honestly IMO I think Russia and the BRICS nations could be a step towards the direction where these immigrant populations are more of a boon to their original countries than not. Russia and China in particular are two countries that could be and are doing a hell of a lot to not only export their economic/industrial model (and also collaborate academically, etc) abroad, but also bring people from around the world to see it in action, to see the culture, etc, and develop ties with them firsthand.

People are not just "lost" once they leave, and that this has often been the case is absolutely intentional by the west (destabilization, imperial plunder, etc) making the migrants' home countries destitute and dangerous in comparison, etc. And the knowledge of development and connections between people can absolutely be exercised for good and the benefit of both nations involved, particularly when they can return to their home countries with the assistance and support in recreating or building upon what they saw abroad (something the west has always interfered in on their part).

Both countries are working extensively with the global south, China with its countless BRI/etc projects and Russia as well in its Soviet history as well as presently with security assistance, debt relief/etc, and even helping build a nuclear power plant in Burkina Faso as one highlight that comes to mind (I'm sure there are others, just haven't looked into it). There's no reason that all this training/experience/etc could not be increased with talent coming to these countries to study, or with large student/worker exchanges to really develop a culture of solidarity and multipolarity. And if people wind up staying- particularly those from much less developed or unstable countries- there's still no reason they cannot be to the benefit of both countries in facilitating increased trade and cooperation, or even returning with Russian/Chinese/BRICS/etc support in due time to further develop their home countries in the end.

IMO while you're not entirely incorrect, you're thinking of things n the zero-sum model the west has imposed upon the world- there are other opportunities available, and the Soviet Union's history of doing similar, or China's presently (both without the mass immigration bits, though some immigration did and does occur) are examples of it. It's a more complex and in the short-to-medium-term, more expensive process than the western way of doing things, but I think the end result will be far better for everyone involved.

Glad you're reconsidering, if nothing else, and realizing you're likely still engaging in even more biases yet.

Past that though- I don't think I offered you any less respect than you did me, not that either of us resorted to shit-flinging. You responded to diss/dunk, and I responded in turn, admittedly I shouldn't have fed that fire as neither of us were being nasty about it IMO. Other than the discussion on gender though, I feel I called it as I saw it, and I wasn't attacking you nor "speculating on your position on the Spanish genocides" or "connecting you with the Spanish empire," and I don't think my words could have been reasonably taken as such when taken in their context. I was simply pointing to the bias which I felt was present (and which I'd point out again), which was/is about as western as it gets, the assumptions/extrapolations of what I meant were on your end.

I still won't defend people who enlist themselves to fight in the Russian army, and I definitely won't call that based

As for that- what exactly is it they do that you consider "not based?" Think about it. The Russian nation has a living memory of fascist genocidal aggression, and while Russia may no longer be socialist, I don't think it would be inaccurate to call this an echo of the Great Patriotic War. Look at the atrocities and institutionalized discrimination suffered by the ethnic Russians and other minorities in Ukraine for a decade, or the terror still being inflicted- and documented- upon civilians since the Kursk invasion, and I don't see how it could be called anything but based (and I am not ethnic Russian, nor in any way related to the Russian state- though I feel much of the world which has had similar experiences of persecution and anti-imperialist struggle could and would agree). Meanwhile, what does the Russian army do, exactly? By-and-large I would call it a force for good (Syria, the western Sahel states, etc) and where it is not, it is at least not a force for malice (hell, look at how they treated the Chechens, who today have semi-autonomy- even if that may result in policies that you and I alike might not agree with, it is their internal issue to deal with- and who have been returned to the fold in a manner unthinkable in the west). And the entire world outside the west can see not only the infinite difference between Russia's (or any of the BRICS') foreign policy and that of the west- but the infinite difference between Russia's methods of waging war, compared to those of the west. From Serbia to Libya, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, etc... (not to mention the countless cold war era wars) if Russia had been engaging according to NATO doctrines, I can tell you that Ukrainians would already be freezing, food-insecure if not starving, with much of their vital infrastructure destroyed, and with no small amount of neverending "collateral damage" of civilians. The Russian army is not anything remotely akin to that of anything in the west, and it is better for it, and in the context of defending their nation from imperialist aggression I would call it based, just as I'd call someone fighting for any of the other highly flawed states I mentioned in resistance to imperialism.

It's not nice that I discuss your nationality and gender (well, that bit was brought up by others), but when combined with your biases they are very telling. Even the (presumably Ukranian) that you've been chatting with had to hard disagree with you on the whole "I'm neutral because both sides suck" and "90% Hitler vs 99% Hitler" comparison.

And the only reason why you can think that a nation like Russia is "90% Hitler"- is genuinely because of your privilege or bias (which is not necessarily tied to nationality and definitely not gender in the case of geopolitics, but certainly has some correlation with the former). The only reason why you can wash your hands of the issue (despite recognizing which nation is the true aggressor, and which is acting to ensure its survival) is because you have no stake in the game and have not had comparable experiences, nor learnt appropriate empathy as such (and unlike "smol bean" victims like the Palestinians who can barely resist, or the AES nations which you can easily agree with, supporting Russia is inconvenient to you).

Russia isn't an imperialist nation, and despite your misgivings, by its actions alone it is if anything an anti-imperialist nation, not just in Europe but across the world (and it has been in varying degrees so for a long time, even after the collapse of the Soviet Union- despite the fact they tried to join NATO). Today Russia is actively working to create an anti-imperialist, multipolar, genuinely democratic world order among nations with the rest of the BRICS, and it is actively assisting in the development of the global south as well as their security from western destabilization, from the MENA region to the Sahel or the Caribbean, etc... apart from social issues which are valid (but not remotely comparable in the context given and you know it) criticisms, you have nothing to pin on Russia, save for fearmongering that Russia could in time develop to be like the west (because even as a capitalist state it is not remotely akin to the west and their imperialist world order), despite the fact that Russia's actions are if anything as counterproductive as it could get to developing a worldwide imperialist system like that which the west has established, and that Russia neither has the means, nor the present desire to pursue such a path.

And even if I'm not to point at your gender, admittedly there's no way in hell I won't point out nationality (as someone living in a western country myself, but who also has family elsewhere/was born elsewhere, is not white, etc) in this regard- Russia is NOT guilty of what the white, western imperialist order is actively engaging in as we speak. It is NOT comparable. I'm bringing up your nationality in this regard because the bias is literally that obvious, and it comes from exactly that point. It sucks to hear it, but as someone from a NATO country as well- WE ARE THE BADDIES. Russia is not remotely comparable. It's not a struggle between "90% Hitler and 99% Hitler," at most it's akin to the struggle between, say, the reactionary and non-socialist governments of Poland, Yugoslavia, Greece, etc. vs. the Axis, with the difference being that this time around Russia can properly and fully fend for themselves, thankfully. It's not even the struggle between "genocidal empires Britain/France/USA vs. the Axis," it's "the empire (NATO/the collective west) vs. the rest." There is literally no comparison and I think you and the entire west needs to learn that.

How on Earth are you comparing the Moscow government and economic system to the USA/NATO one? They have nothing in common other than their internal economic structure.

Volunteering to support a nation resisting imperialism, and fighting to defend a nation from literal Nazis (not neo-Nazis even, OG Nazis) being armed and used by the greater worldwide imperialist system of NATO and the collective west so as to further their hegemony is "not based?"

One is really fucking annoyed by he/hims badposting.

mood. It's always the he/hims isn't it (not that I haven't run into plenty of non-masc people with the same brainworms)

The economic and political system that Russia defends is fundamentally identical to that of the NATO block, and it would lead to the same imperialism in other countries if Russia had the upper hand in geopolitics.

And yet it doesn't, and it is actively working against the destruction of the present world imperialist order of the west because it has recognized its common cause- with AES nations, but also with an overwhelming number of capitalist nations of all stripes across the global south (with which it is among the leading actors in creating a system of multipolarity and win-win cooperation whereby the highest form of capital, imperialism, will be truly and utterly defunct). Funny isn't that- is it really so "fundamentally identical," or is that just easier to believe rather than realizing that imperialism is a devil in and of itself in its own right (evolved from and the highest form of capital, but also clinging on to and threatening the world as the system of capital it built around itself crumbles and abandons it)?

Btw, I suppose that the talks for negotiation of peace that China is proposing are equally eurolib as I am?

China and the other AES states (and the overwhelming majority of the global south, or even the non-white western world) aren't going around playing the "both sides" card, they understand exactly what this is and what the necessary stance is. That they are trying to present options for peace doesn't change that.

What's your point, that the lack of communist allies means I need to lend my support to 90% Hitler?

Among many things, my point is that your false equation is disgusting and hideous, to the extent that I can only assume it fills a certain need within the white western psyche to be able to project all their nations' collective crimes of imperialism on others. Putin is a shitlib, but he isn't 90% Hitler or even 25-50% comparable to Klanmala, Genocide Joe, Genocide Drumpf, or the leaders of any western regime- he is actively working against the imperialist world order (out of self-preservation) and actively working in cooperation with the rest of humanity specifically to break free from the global western system of debt enslavement, resource theft, and worldwide destabilization and forever wars. And to describe the resistance of a nation from imperialism (as you can recognize, to your credit) as the resistance of "90% Hitler from 99% Hitler" is hideous and characteristically European and liberal (Eurolib). Was the conflict between the Aztecs and the conquistadors a fight between "90% Hitler and 99% Hitler?" What about the resistance of Ethiopia, of Qing China, of Nasser's Egypt or of the ROC (and the united second front) against the Japanese? Are Hamas, Iran, or the other factions of the resistance "90% Hitler up against the 99% Hitler" of the NATO-Zionist imperialist world order?

They literally sent me Lenin, I'm abiding to Lenin's definition of imperialism on "Imperialism: higher stage of capitalism".

And Russia is in this war to "expand its markets and abuse cheap resources/labor" how? Funnily enough, NATO is the one doing that to Ukraine as we speak, and before their sanctions, this is what Europe and the west at large was doing to Russia.

Forgive me for not believing Putin's intent here is humanitarian development of western-liberalism-affected regions with Russian majority.

"Forgive me for not believing (insert non-western state/leader resisting western aggression here)'s intent is humanitarian development or any such high ideals, they're no saint." That's not the point, I think the sensible analysis would show Putin (being a lib and still having wished to be a comprador then) didn't want this war in the first place. All that said, what I described is what they are engaging in, and you can theorize about the intent (which is surely not just "charity") but the material reality can't be denied.

Famous defender of human rights capitalist Russia, not at all constantly passing laws against minorities (whether women, queer, or national minorities like central-asians), and on a downwards spiral towards fascism

Yes, Russia has its issues with these things (most places do, though Russia is going in the wrong direction with much of it to say the least). Good for you for understanding that. And so surely because Russia is so evil, they also love it when their ethnic kin are getting bombed and pogromed, when their language and religion are suppressed by Ukrainian ethno-nationalists who are being used by the west as a dagger at the belly of Russia.

Your last paragraph is a tirade calling me basically an eurolib and linking me to the Spanish empire (like, seriously, wtf) for not wanting to defend the modern Russian capitalist regime.

If you feel called out by it, then maybe you should be lol. My point was less to link you to the empire (though it surely is interesting, that you Euros and the white west in general seem so eager to offload your imperial guilt onto others through whataboutism) than it was to call you a Eurolib, though- which yes, I do think you are.

Russia has many, many issues (as all states do), and it is an explicitly capitalist, by-and-large reactionary state. But anyone shitting on it (even if they can recognize NATO is objectively worse) by painting it as "imperialist" and comparing it as akin to the west ("90% vs 99% Hitler") is failing to understand its role, both in the current Ukranian conflict and in the broader world economy, which is decidedly not imperialist, and in fact (though they would no doubt much rather have been welcomed into the imperialist fold- Putin himself did try to join NATO after all) anti-imperialist by necessity of survival.

And yes, I think it's a particularly lib thing to want to stand against, or wash your hands of the matter by calling it a "inter-imperialist conflict," as such. If you're only looking to support saints and paragons of virtue (not that Russia is anywhere close to that) you'll find yourself with a very small pool of support or solidarity, though I suppose your Euro conscience will feel better and self-righteous for it. You yourself can recognize that Russia's struggle is if anything, anti-imperialist- it is literally in defense of its nation, as well as (coincidentally or otherwise- more coincidentally than not) the rights of the ethnic Russo-Ukranians, etc from western imperialism. But if you want to sit on the sidelines and "both sides" it, continue being a Eurolib by all means.

Fingers crossed. The scourge of *nglish can be defeated yet!

It might have been the first step, but it sure as hell was a deserved one.