General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Pathetic Lives of Putin’s American Dupes [View all]intersectionality
(106 posts)While OP supports the invasion of the Ukraine by warmongering propagandists whose Ukrainian roots originally lied in the demands of fascists, those of us observing without an ideology as far up our bums as OP's ideology, watch in horror. The Ukraine will be destroyed by this, no matter who wins the day. I have met zero Putin apologists on the left (and that's my social circle here in NYC, a much larger place than most, where ideologies are better defined and identities are open for exploration), but it is something that is rampant on the right.
Referring to the lefties as 'Putin apologists' because we recognized the exploitation built into the natural resources trade agreement the EU had proposed, and we recognize the rise of fascism in response to turning down a trade agreement with the EU - a place that has all the countries where fascism was born, dismantled, and is yet again starting to rear its ugly head - would be like calling us unAmeriKKKan because we didn't support the US offering military support to a country whose citizens might revolt at the end of the TPP process and ask one of the old Red countries for a little support.
There are so many parallels between the shitty trade agreement we're trying to rope the Eastern world into right now and what is happening in the Ukraine that I'm absolutely stunned by the lack of support of Ukrainians generally, and then I get to see these posts that have a jingoist oath requirement where people demand taking the 'side' of either the Russians or the EU/west. As if there were only two perspectives. These types of articles and posts obliterate perspective (which, as Nietzsche says, annihilates truth), and are a large part of the 'outrage politics' being written about by Jeffrey Berry and Sarah Sobieraj. I would ask that OP read their book, "The Outrage Industry: Political Opinion Media and the New Incivility," and take some time to reflect on the rhetorical implications of arguments made in OP's article before invoking this type of discourse.