The western values Ukraine is defending are becoming more apparent by the day.

  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    The point I’m making is very simple and should be obvious. When the regime has to grab people off the street and force them to fight, then it has no legitimacy. This isn’t a case of people willingly defending their country, it’s fascist regime backed by the west that’s forcing people to die in a senseless war. If you can’t understand such basic things then what else is there to say to you.

    • gladflag@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      So if enough people won’t fight the government should shut down and let the invaders take over? Is that your alternative? Civilisations sometimes need to force people to work for a common good. See also vaccines.

      • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        If even an actual invasion does not motivate a sufficient number of people to volunteer to fight for their government, then why should that government be seen as worth preserving?

      • davel@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        The “common good” in bourgeois democracies is the good of the capitalist class at the expense of the working class.

        Wikipedia: Bourgeois revolution

        Bourgeois revolution is a term used in Marxist theory to refer to a social revolution that aims to destroy a feudal system or its vestiges, establish the rule of the bourgeoisie, and create a bourgeois (capitalist) state. In colonised or subjugated countries, bourgeois revolutions often take the form of a war of national independence. The Dutch, English, American, and French revolutions are considered the archetypal bourgeois revolutions, in that they attempted to clear away the remnants of the medieval feudal system, so as to pave the way for the rise of capitalism. The term is usually used in contrast to “proletarian revolution”, and is also sometimes called a “bourgeois-democratic revolution”

        BBC: [Princeton] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

        I don’t mean to imply that Russia isn’t a bourgeoise democracy—it is as well, but at least it’s not under the boot of the imperial core like Ukraine is. Russia emancipated itself from the US neocolonial shock therapy plundering that began with Yeltsin and ended with Putin.

        • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          awesome yes, they should let putin take everything over so he can then shovel Ukrainian and Russian bodies into his next annexation project!

          • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            yeah if they want to surrender that’s their decision, lmao? people in other countries don’t exist to be pawns of US foreign policy, they actually have their own lives and interests

          • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            That’s literally what will happen if Ukraine keeps on fighting. They have sent literally every soldier and every piece of equipment they had into the breach. They have sent multiple times over the budget of Russia’s military in and it’s been destroyed. They are running out of everything. The average age of a Ukrainian soldier has sky rocketed.

            This only stops with a negotiated peace deal.

    • xionzui@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      So basically, a country that is invaded has the option to either roll over and be destroyed or fight back and become “illegitimate” and should be destroyed anyway? Basically an invader has free rein to destroy any country they feel like? That’s some nice victim blaming there. Incredibly abusive thinking.

      • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Who was Ukraine invaded by? Russia only? Or does it count when the USA foments a coup and even sends its regime change agents to oversee the coup, hand picks the successor, and deliberately hand picks someone that will invite the undemocratic nuclear-armed nazi-led transnational NATO to take it’s land for military installations? Because as Russia sees it, a nuclear armed military has been marching across Europe to it’s Ukrainian border across which Europe has invaded Russia twice. Is NATO allowed to move in as long as the USA coups the leaders who are against it?

        Ukraine’s legitimacy in the West is founded on the narrative that it’s a white Christian democratic freedom loving bastion. When it suspends human rights, bans unions, bans communist parties, shells civilians, attacks civilians bridges with civilians on it, enlists Nazis, celebrates Nazis, honors Nazis, and then just starts grabbing men off the street and sending them to die with no training, it loses that legitimacy. Ukraine must surrender and negotiate a peace deal. The only other option is mass murder of its civilian population through forced consignment in a war of attrition that it is badly losing, has always been losing, and has never had a chance of winning.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Alright, let’s roll with that logic: A sovereign government that violates the sovereignty of it’s citizens is illegitimate. Since Ukraine is now violating the sovereignty of it’s citizens for wartime mobilization, it is an illegitimate government. That’s a sound premise, actually. In a vacuum this would be true.

      However, that completely loses the nuance that Ukraine is not the aggressor in this “senseless war”. Ukraine did not violate it’s citizen’s sovereignty, RUSSIA DID by initiating the war of annexation against the sovereign government of Ukraine. By violating the sovereignty of the government, Russia thus violated the sovereignty of every citizen under that government. None of this would have been necessary had the initial aggression not been committed.
      So, now extend your argument: Let’s go ahead and accuse Ukraine of violating human rights with this expansion of power. You must also do so for Russia, who backed Ukraine into this corner in the first place, and who is also committing infinitely worse violations against the civilian territory they have thus far annexed. Are you willing to do that? Because so far, you haven’t.

      You seem to be echoing a large number of Russian propaganda points trying to paint Ukraine as some fascist removed, and not the independent nation being overrun by a expansionist dictatorship that it is. This argument is not in good faith.