Compare news coverage. Spot media bias. Avoid algorithms. Try Ground News today and get 30% off your subscription by visiting https://ground.news/secondthoug...
A video explaining modern monetary theory and how with a little Marxism it can benefit everyone.
Wow. You are either incredibly dumb or incredibly disingenuous, just as zero thought funnily enough.
Calling it “end to the conflict” is such a slimy way to say what he actually wants. He wants ukraine to give up. He wants ruzzia to get away with everything they have done and to ignore all the atrocities they have committed.
It’s like saying that allies should have given up after Nazi germany and ussr conquered Poland. “Oh, end the conflict, so many people have died!!!” Sure, lets just let nazis happily do their genocide while we look the other way.
Same as ruzzians committing active genocide in ukraine.
US involvement is the thing that actively saves innocent lives in this conflict. Shooting down missiles, giving ukranian soldiers more protection, and more ways to remove invaders from their lands.
And what do you think putting and “end” to the conflict would achieve? Ruzzia would resupply and attack in 5 years again.
If you have watched the video and not noticed the insane amount of lies, something is genuinely wrong with you. It is pure unfiltered ruzzian and Chinese propaganda. Nothing else.
JT, the creator of ST, certainly has expressed various views that many find problematic, respecting Marxism-Leninism and related historic events.
Nevertheless, the ST channel itself is curated to explain values and objectives that are largely noncontroversial in leftist circles, anti-capitalist and socialist. I feel JT deserves some acknowledgment for successfully explaining such ideas while separating some of his own more controversial leanings.
The broad observation is that the political world is not divided between those who criticize NATO and also laud Putin, versus those with sympathies exactly the inverse. It is possible to criticize the practices and alignments of one’s own nation, without having distorted views about another.
Views about the Russian invasion of Ukraine are too nuanced and complex that anyone’s may be reduced meaningfully to a few lines of text. It is helpful to avoid attempting clean demarcations between right versus wrong.
Views about the Ruzzian invasion are not nuanced and complex. You either support a democratic nation that is under attack from a dictatorial fascist regime or you dont.
I am only calling for advancing beyond simplistic generalizations.
At the moment, your response to anyone who challenges your very strong views is to hurl insults. Plainly, any conditions under which a debate might be productive would require a revision of your attitude.
There is no nuance in the Ruzzian invasion of Ukraine.
There is no reason for the invasion. All given have been fabricated by kremlin propaganda as a substitute for a reason (see: shelling of “russians” in the occupied areas, “genocide” of ethnic Russians in the occupied areas and any other “justifications” of the kremlin. All of them have been proven false beyond doubt)
Invasion is illegal not only by international but by russian standards. Russia has broken its own treaty with ukraine both in 2014 and 2021.
Ruzzia is commiting vast majority if not all warcrimes. Be it execution of surrendered soldiers, non-accidental shelling of civilians, mass rape, mass murder, targeting of non militarily important targets for terror and nothing else. I can continue, if need be, there are houndreds, if not thousands of warcrimes commited by this point
Ruzzia is actively commiting genocide in the areas they have taken over. Mass killings and mass rapes are one thing, ruzzians are also kidnapping children on mass, deporting them back to ruzzia and “reeducating” them. This is, by definition, a genocide.
Ruzzia is the country that could stop any of this, at any moment they desire, its their own choice not to do so. Ukraine has no say when the way may end, until the recapture their entire territory (yes, that means Crimea, Crimea is Ukraine and that is not a disputable fact)
These are the main reasons why this conflict has no nuance. Ruzzia is 100% in the wrong, Ukraine is 100% in the right. There are a few times where wars are like this, like ww2 or united states invasion of vietnam (I’m on the side of vietnam, just to make it obvious)
Your arguments are not addressing any position that was actually presented to you.
Even someone who agreed with each point you made, and also agreed that you succeeded in rejecting some position actually presented, would not be justified in also agreeing with your rejection of all nuance.
You are simply not suited to discuss geopolitics if you believe that questions are soluble by simple statements about what is “100% right” versus “100% wrong”.
I’m not going to engage with your personal attacks and you should feel shameful for saying such nasty things to a stranger you hardly know.
The Ukraine-Russia conflict can be viewed in many different ways. One of them is Russia being an aggressor and waging an illegal war of conquest like Nazi Germany, and that’s a valid way to look at the conflict. I’m sure even he would agree of that. However the conflict is also very dangerous, especially with NATO involvement. The biggest threat is actually if the war would escalate into nuclear annihilation because Putin has threatened that if Russia loses, they’re going to start nuking. Have you forgotten about that?
US involvement is the thing that actively saves innocent lives in this conflict. Shooting down missiles, giving ukranian soldiers more protection, and more ways to remove invaders from their lands.
That is your opinion. A missile can be used to shoot a helicopter just as easily on the Ukraine side of the border as on the Russian side of the border.
If we assume that Ukraine would manage to sue for some sort of white peace or extended ceasefire, what would that mean with the supplies that has been lent to Ukraine and the Ukrainian people and all the debt that Ukraine is racking up? Who do you think will have to pay for all that and what would the consequences be for Ukrainians? Probably not very good things. Possibly privatizations, international loans from WTO or other forms of neocolonialism. The intent of involvement from the west is highly suspicious and deserve its own scrutiny.
And what do you think putting and “end” to the conflict would achieve? Ruzzia would resupply and attack in 5 years again.
Maybe so, or maybe there might be a regime change in 5 years? Maybe with some time passing Putin somehow dies? Of sickness, old age or some other reason? In 5 years Putin would be over the average life expectancy of Russians. Maybe the Russians don’t try again in 5 years because they got humiliated this time? The world isn’t static and time changes things.
Second thought released its own video surrounding the Ukraine conflict and in a comment he posted he outlined his positions surrounding the conflict. I quote:
This war doesn’t benefit the average people of Ukraine or Russia. They’re suffering needlessly for the sake of geopolitical jockeying.
Sanctions on Russia will only hurt the everyday citizen, not the oligarchs or the powerful. Sanctions are a brutal, inhumane tool and we should oppose them.
Anti-war is the only principled position. Escalating into a hot war with another nuclear power is a death sentence.
This conflict should be resolved diplomatically. That must include an end to hostilities, as well as a new agreement that prevents NATO expansion towards “unfriendly” states. NATO is a relic of the Cold War, and it doesn’t do anyone any good. A bomb is a bomb, no matter what language you use to make it seem justified.
This is similar to the things he said in your video you linked. What has he lied about? Can you name even one contradiction? That doesn’t mean that he wants Ukraine to surrender or give up, rather that’s just your interpretation of his stance which is blatantly wrong and has no evidence. The fact that you try to claim otherwise because he calls for peace is just slander.
One of them is Russia being an aggressor and waging an illegal war of conquest like Nazi Germany, and that’s a valid way to look at the conflict.
That is the ONLY valid way to look at the conflict. Ruzzia illegaly invaded ukraine both in 2014 and 2021.
I’m sure even he would agree of that.
He would not.
However the conflict is also very dangerous, especially with NATO involvement. The biggest threat is actually if the war would escalate into nuclear annihilation because Putin has threatened that if Russia loses, they’re going to start nuking. Have you forgotten about that?
Those are empty threats, if you have seen the state of Ruzzian equipment you would understand that. The only country that would get annihilated in this conflict would be Ruzzia.
“US involvement is the thing that actively saves innocent lives in this conflict. Shooting down missiles, giving ukranian soldiers more protection, and more ways to remove invaders from their lands.”
That is your opinion. A missile can be used to shoot a helicopter just as easily on the Ukraine side of the border as on the Russian side of the border.
How is that an argument? Both are valid and good ways to protect Ukraine. One less helicopter means one less chance for an innocent ukrainan to be harmed.
If we assume that Ukraine would manage to sue for some sort of white peace or extended ceasefire, what would that mean with the supplies that has been lent to Ukraine and the Ukrainian people and all the debt that Ukraine is racking up? Who do you think will have to pay for all that and what would the consequences be for Ukrainians? Probably not very good things. Possibly privatizations, international loans from WTO or other forms of neocolonialism. The intent of involvement from the west is highly suspicious and deserve its own scrutiny.
Those supplies would be used to defend ukraine and bolster the border with the two fascist nations that border it. Banks have frozen accounts of ork oligarchs, have seized materiel and such. Those can be the start. The international community can band together to help. It would not be the first time.
Europes involvement is not at all suspicious. It’s a brutal attack on a sovereign nation near their borders. You would be insane to not support them.
“And what do you think putting and “end” to the conflict would achieve? Ruzzia would resupply and attack in 5 years again.”
Maybe so, or maybe there might be a regime change in 5 years? Maybe with some time passing Putin somehow dies? Of sickness, old age or some other reason? In 5 years Putin would be over the average life expectancy of Russians. Maybe the Russians don’t try again in 5 years because they got humiliated this time? The world isn’t static and time changes things.
If Ruzzians are not humiliated on the world stage in a way that wakes up even the most politically dead in the country, nothing will change. If we give them ANY concession, nothing will change. Total and absolute withdrawal, that is what needs to happen.
Second thought released its own video surrounding the Ukraine conflict and in a comment he posted he outlined his positions surrounding the conflict. I quote:
This war doesn’t benefit the average people of Ukraine or Russia. They’re suffering needlessly for the sake of geopolitical jockeying.
How hard is it to fucking understand, RUZZIA. INVADED. UKRAINE. People suffer BECAUSE OF RUZZIA, not because of “geopolitical jockeying” Jesus fucking chirst man. The only one who is in fault is ruzzia, if they wanted they could retreat now
Sanctions on Russia will only hurt the everyday citizen, not the oligarchs or the powerful. Sanctions are a brutal, inhumane tool and we should oppose them.
Again, wrong. Sanctions have drastically reduced the capability of ruzzia to make new tanks, weapons, and rockets. Thanks to sanctions, ruzzia is unable to make long range rockets that have been indiscriminately killing civilians.
Anti-war is the only principled position. Escalating into a hot war with another nuclear power is a death sentence.
It absolutely fucking isn’t. Once again, tell that to WW2 veterans who have fought and died for the free world. A just society who accepts unjustifiable people and positions is not just.
This conflict should be resolved diplomatically. That must include an end to hostilities, as well as a new agreement that prevents NATO expansion towards “unfriendly” states. NATO is a relic of the Cold War, and it doesn’t do anyone any good. A bomb is a bomb, no matter what language you use to make it seem justified.
Holy fucking shit here we go. The myth of NATO expansion. Such a funny lie and I am so happy you brought it up. Thankfully it has been completely annihilated. https://youtu.be/FVmmASrAL-Q?si=gN80y0EnM2W1qJuT
This is similar to the things he said in your video you linked. What has he lied about? Can you name even one contradiction? That doesn’t mean that he wants Ukraine to surrender or give up, rather that’s just your interpretation of his stance which is blatantly wrong and has no evidence. The fact that you try to claim otherwise because he calls for peace is just slander.
It isn’t, if I tried to explain every single contradiction and lie he has spouted in that video i would hit the character limit. Instead, I am liking a debunk of dylan burns and keffals.
It isn’t, if I tried to explain every single contradiction and lie he has spouted in that video i would hit the character limit.
No you literally couldn’t because you have nothing to say. If you have something of substance to say, say it. Don’t hide between a long and obnoxious reaction video.
The rest of your post is just… ridiculous. You can argue the 4 points he raised to him if you want, but I’d rather choose not to engage with that nonsense since it’s not my arguments.
You’re not wrong about these arguments such as Russia being the aggressor and them being able to retreat. Nobody is disputing those facts. Preferably I would also like Russia to realize that they did wrong, surrender to Ukraine and pay them war reparations, but I live in the real world where that seems pretty unlikely. That’s why I don’t expect for such an outcome, not because I don’t think it’s the right thing to do. You can scream yourself hoarse about what Russia ought to do, but that’s a factor we cannot control and we should approach the conflict with that in mind.
I do agree with him that we should have anti-war and your argument against that isn’t an argument even. War is just a political event where workers are sent to kill other workers. Anti-war is the position of the worker movement and everybody who are social democrat or more left leaning agrees on that fact. Since you think otherwise, you must be a reactionary and are blowing some sort of dog whistle right now.
This is not WW2, this is a war where one country is a nuclear power, the largest nuclear power in the world in fact! The performance of the Russian army during the conflict doesn’t really mean that they cannot launch nukes. Even if their nukes aren’t fully effective, they can most likely still cause tremendous harm and the threat of the nuclear war isn’t just the initial salvo but the retaliation and the threat of nuclear winter. For us who live in Europe, Russia’s arsenal is a nasty and scary threat, but maybe you don’t care because I assume you live in USA and feel more confident? I think that confidence is also misplaced, there’s no defense against nuclear armageddon. If that happens, billions will die and suffer.
I live next to Ukraine, I have seen the destruction personally, I have lost people I love and see bullshit when it’s there.
In this “political event,” which I would rather describe as a brutal uncalled for attack, Ruzzia sent its own workers (and prisoners) to go indiscriminately murder any and every ukranian they come across. I agree with your definition of war, never said otherwise.
But okay, I will go through the first minute alone and point out every single lie.
Calling euromaidan a “far right coup” is complete lie, it is ruzzian propaganda. Euromaidan was unilateral and supported by left and right. Neonazis joined it, of course as they saw an opportunity. Since then the far right party has been getting less and less support, today being the lowest.
Calling the new government a puppet regime is disingenuous, just like any of his and your claims. First government almost immediately held a public vote, thats how zelenski got into government.
It was never a provocation, it was a civilian uprising
They did not plan a proxy war. Ruzzia started this war for its own imperial means. That reality was not swept under the rug, its a blatant fucking lie.
That is just the first minute. Once again, I am not willing to write paragraph after paragraph when all of this has been debunked much more eloquently by Dylan, someone who knows much more than me, your or zero thought.
I live next to Ukraine, I have seen the destruction personally, I have lost people I love and see bullshit when it’s there.
Ah you’re Polish then I assume? My condolences and I think that maybe that fact makes you quite impartial toward a narrative where Ukraine is seen as the victim, which I agree to, Ukraine IS the victim here.
I agree with your definition of war, never said otherwise.
Yet you’re pro-war. So you apparently agree with my definition but are also pro-war. Therefore workers should fight each other if the ends justify the means? Is that right?
Calling euromaidan a “far right coup” is complete lie, it is ruzzian propaganda. Euromaidan was unilateral and supported by left and right. Neonazis joined it, of course as they saw an opportunity. Since then the far right party has been getting less and less support, today being the lowest.
When a ML says “far right”, he might mean a neonazi, a conservative or a liberal. On the political scale from that perspective a “centrist” would be a social democrat. However the far right party might stand in polls isn’t exactly interesting. If the goal is to make Ukraine compatible with the west like Second Thought claims, then nazi ideology would be counterproductive toward that goal anyway so I’m not sure what you think that proves.
Calling the new government a puppet regime is disingenuous, just like any of his and your claims. First government almost immediately held a public vote, thats how zelenski got into government.
Maybe? I mean if we’re supposed to entertain that argument then we could guess that Russia’s elections in the regions they conquered also prove that there’s a genuine sentiment in breaking off? I don’t think so. Election results isn’t a sign of consent. I would also like to know why he decides to call it a “puppet regime”. At the same time, it’s pretty common for MLs to be suspicious of any cooperation with the west. It sounds like something he would have said on his own channel but maybe it greater detail argue why that is the case.
They (USA and EU) did not plan a proxy war. Ruzzia started this war for its own imperial means. That reality was not swept under the rug, its a blatant fucking lie.
Okay and you’re sure about this why? In the video Dylan doesn’t give any explanation either why he thinks otherwise. If Ukraine really is a puppet state and the protests were backed by USA, maybe that was the plan?
I have to admit that the things you bring up weren’t the things I expected you to want to highlight since you seemed to argue that he has a different stance toward the conflict between his own channel and the video you posted, which doesn’t seem to be the case. The video you posted of Dylan is just nitpicking on the points presented in the video. Dylan doesn’t give his own evidence to his claims and while the burden of proof is on Second Thought it’s important to realize that he’s talking about this topic to a completely different audience who already are (or at least should be) informed of what he’s talking about. He’s hardly trying to present a case to convince outsiders, so making a nitpicking video against it is very easy, because the format isn’t meant to convince anyone. Why should I be impressed or convinced by Dylan? Come on…
Ah you’re Polish then I assume? My condolences and I think that maybe that fact makes you quite impartial toward a narrative where Ukraine is seen as the victim, which I agree to, Ukraine IS the victim here.
Nope, however, my country has suffered under soviets and nazis alike, I don’t want that to happen again.
Yet you’re pro-war. So you apparently agree with my definition but are also pro-war. Therefore workers should fight each other if the ends justify the means? Is that right?
If defending yourself against a fascist invasion is pro war, so be it. Let me ask you: what the fuck was ukraine supposed to do? Lay down their weapons? Let the orks kill their men, rape their women and children? Should we let countries invade eachother for no fucking reason? Or should we fight back and try our hardest to defeat tyranny?
And once again and I will never stop saying this: ruzzia started this war. Not Ukraine. They are defending themselves. Kremlin always has a choice, for Ukraine, not fighting means certain death. War does not justify any means because there js no justification. Its a brutal invasion.
When a ML says “far right”, he might mean a neonazi, a conservative or a liberal. On the political scale from that perspective a “centrist” would be a social democrat. However the far right party might stand in polls isn’t exactly interesting. If the goal is to make Ukraine compatible with the west like Second Thought claims, then nazi ideology would be counterproductive toward that goal anyway so I’m not sure what you think that proves.
Its his words, not mine. He called it a far right coup backed by US. Both of these are lies.
Maybe? I mean if we’re supposed to entertain that argument then we could guess that Russia’s elections in the regions they conquered also prove that there’s a genuine sentiment in breaking off? I don’t think so. Election results isn’t a sign of consent. I would also like to know why he decides to call it a “puppet regime”. At the same time, it’s pretty common for MLs to be suspicious of any cooperation with the west. It sounds like something he would have said on his own channel but maybe it greater detail argue why that is the case.
He calls it that because he is spouting ruzzian propaganda. Hopefully we could at least agree on that.
Okay and you’re sure about this why? In the video Dylan doesn’t give any explanation either why he thinks otherwise. If Ukraine really is a puppet state and the protests were backed by USA, maybe that was the plan?
That is a rather big if there buddy. Dylan does give explanation why it wasn’t and if not in this video, he absolutely debunked it in his video about euromaidan. Also he does give counter evidence against the claim that it was backed by US. Did US send its troops? No. Their Diplomats? Their people to protest? No. They were supporting it because they rose up against their former president and in the same way against ruzzia. Obviously US would be happy about it, i am not blind. But there is no evidence for the fact it was “backed” by the us
I have to admit that the things you bring up weren’t the things I expected you to want to highlight since you seemed to argue that he has a different stance toward the conflict between his own channel and the video you posted, which doesn’t seem to be the case.
You must have misunderstood me then, his videos are on his main channel are not so overt because he hides his true colours.
The video you posted of Dylan is just nitpicking on the points presented in the video. Dylan doesn’t give his own evidence to his claims and while the burden of proof is on Second Thought it’s important to realize that he’s talking about this topic to a completely different audience who already are (or at least should be) informed of what he’s talking about. He’s hardly trying to present a case to convince outsiders, so making a nitpicking video against it is very easy, because the format isn’t meant to convince anyone. Why should I be impressed or convinced by Dylan? Come on…
I do disagree with that. I can’t change your mind on the fact you think it’s nitpicking and I don’t intend to. You have a right to have that opinion.
Also I just want to point out that just because I despise ruzzia with every fibre of my being, I do not like the US. They have done some really fucked up things and their domestic politics are awful. But right now, they support a country that deserves support. I don’t want this war to go on, I really don’t. I love ukranian cities and their people, their beautiful nature and their tasty food. I want to see my ukrainan friends again.
But it was taken, some are dead, some fight as I speak. Hopefully, some day, I’ll be able to hug them somewhere in a Ukranian beach in crimea. That’s all I want.
If defending yourself against a fascist invasion is pro war, so be it. Let me ask you: what the fuck was ukraine supposed to do? Lay down their weapons? Let the orks kill their men, rape their women and children? Should we let countries invade eachother for no fucking reason? Or should we fight back and try our hardest to defeat tyranny?
I wholeheartedly support people seeking to protect their loved ones, but war isn’t that. War is when you fight for a capitalist state in order to reach their political goals. That’s true both in offense as well as in defense. For Russia that interest is to steal Ukrainian land to reach Putin’s flimsy goals, whereas for Ukraine, it’s to preserve the independence and integrity of their country. But unless you’re looking at something like literal nazis who are looking to exterminate you, then you’re not looking at death when you get defeated, you instead have new management. The Ukrainian people doesn’t disappear because Ukraine disappears.
The path toward war isn’t instant. Ukraine has a history with Russia that can easily put them at odds with Russian interests. Their previous governments understood this and tried to keep a good relationship with Russia. War was the price they had to pay for rejecting Russia and moving closer to Europe and USA. Belarus doesn’t have this problem because they managed to collaborate with Russia. In a world where might makes right (like in capitalist worlds), then this is the logical outcome of geopolitical competition. The obvious way to protect the interests of the Ukrainian state would have been to keep the nuclear weapons because then they could at least threaten Russia with nuclear war. That’s how geopolitics works in capitalism.
The best way to protect the interest of the people would be to have socialist governments in both countries. Then there would be no need for war.
And once again and I will never stop saying this: ruzzia started this war. Not Ukraine. They are defending themselves. Kremlin always has a choice, for Ukraine, not fighting means certain death. War does not justify any means because there js no justification. Its a brutal invasion.
For Ukraine not fighting means death of the state. You seem to think that Ukrainian state and the people are the same, but they’re not. Workers are workers independent of state. We are just slaves to be used by the capitalist states as they wish and we shouldn’t be loyal to them just like we should be loyal to our employers. Russia has chosen to use their slaves to invade Ukraine and that most certainly means death and destruction (especially considering how Russia’s military has conducted the war) so to end the war is to conclude the war as quickly as possible.
Ukraine can surrender, although I don’t think that’s a good option. Especially for the sake of setting a precedent in geopolitics since that means that (like you said); it validates the invasion and wars of conquest which is a bad thing and shouldn’t be validated.
But once again I will reiterate I don’t expect Russia to give up either. The conflict will therefore continue until either Russia decides that they can’t fight anymore or Ukraine collapse. The worst case scenario would be if Russia decides to make good on their threats and decide to launch nukes and that might happen if Ukraine becomes seen as a serious threat.
Its his words, not mine. He called it a far right coup backed by US. Both of these are lies.
Yes it is his words, spoken to a specific audience.
He calls it that because he is spouting ruzzian propaganda. Hopefully we could at least agree on that.
If that’s the case than that would surprise me. I wonder what stake MLs would have in supporting modern Russia since it’s a capitalist dystopia run by oligarchs. Now if it was Soviet propaganda on the other hand, I would understand. That’s why I highly doubt your claims of them lying and spouting Russian propaganda, because lying for the sake of Russia doesn’t make any sense.
That is a rather big if there buddy. Dylan does give explanation why it wasn’t and if not in this video, he absolutely debunked it in his video about euromaidan. Also he does give counter evidence against the claim that it was backed by US. Did US send its troops? No. Their Diplomats? Their people to protest? No. They were supporting it because they rose up against their former president and in the same way against ruzzia. Obviously US would be happy about it, i am not blind. But there is no evidence for the fact it was “backed” by the us
That’s not counter evidence, that’s conjecture. You don’t have to send troops. Every country will have people to challenge the status quo. It’s not like USA sent troops to Al-Quaida or the Lybian rebels or created them from nothing, they were already there! They could support groups with weapons, supplies, communication or training or some other way. Now with that being said, I don’t think US armed the rebels or supplied them and I would be surprised if Second Thought are hinting at that. I’m curious myself what they actually are referring to, but I doubt they have actually released a video on the subject. I never came across a video on their main channel about it and I don’t want to listen through all of the deprogram either.
You must have misunderstood me then, his videos are on his main channel are not so overt because he hides his true colours.
In this case you must be misunderstanding me. He’s open about his biases. They’re not exactly hiding that they’re all MLs. That’s why I said that his stance doesn’t seem any different. It’s similar talking points, similar rhetoric. Just a different format.
Also I just want to point out that just because I despise ruzzia with every fibre of my being, I do not like the US. They have done some really fucked up things and their domestic politics are awful.
Yes it’s terrible that the world has become the plaything of all these large countries USA, Russia and China. I am strictly against USA in its current form as well and I’m also against Putin’s Russia. They are two very dangerous countries and it’s truly a travesty that they hold the largest nuclear arsenals to subjugate the rest of the world with.
But right now, they support a country that deserves support. I don’t want this war to go on, I really don’t. I love ukranian cities and their people, their beautiful nature and their tasty food. I want to see my ukrainan friends again.
But it was taken, some are dead, some fight as I speak. Hopefully, some day, I’ll be able to hug them somewhere in a Ukranian beach in crimea. That’s all I want.
My personal stance since the conflict began has mostly been speaking in favor of Ukraine and against Russia, even if I am seemingly taken a pro-Russian stance here (I’m not). I don’t have a stake either in Russia or Ukraine. They’re both capitalist countries who are doing what capitalist countries do. The thing I want to avoid is nuclear armageddon and I certainly dislike USA lording over everything and increasing the risk.
Advanced "both side"ing going on here. What does it even mean to call an end to conflict? Russia is welcome to go back home and lick its wound, why is the onus on Ukraine to end conflict?
And end US involvement? So Russia can overrun an independent country?
That you have to ask Second Thought. This is what he has said about the conflict:
This war doesn’t benefit the average people of Ukraine or Russia. They’re suffering needlessly for the sake of geopolitical jockeying.
Sanctions on Russia will only hurt the everyday citizen, not the oligarchs or the powerful. Sanctions are a brutal, inhumane tool and we should oppose them.
Anti-war is the only principled position. Escalating into a hot war with another nuclear power is a death sentence.
This conflict should be resolved diplomatically. That must include an end to hostilities, as well as a new agreement that prevents NATO expansion towards “unfriendly” states. NATO is a relic of the Cold War, and it doesn’t do anyone any good. A bomb is a bomb, no matter what language you use to make it seem justified.
Not really. Even in the video you yourself links he’s calling an end to the conflict between Ukraine and Russia and an end to US involvement.
Wow. You are either incredibly dumb or incredibly disingenuous, just as zero thought funnily enough.
Calling it “end to the conflict” is such a slimy way to say what he actually wants. He wants ukraine to give up. He wants ruzzia to get away with everything they have done and to ignore all the atrocities they have committed.
It’s like saying that allies should have given up after Nazi germany and ussr conquered Poland. “Oh, end the conflict, so many people have died!!!” Sure, lets just let nazis happily do their genocide while we look the other way. Same as ruzzians committing active genocide in ukraine.
US involvement is the thing that actively saves innocent lives in this conflict. Shooting down missiles, giving ukranian soldiers more protection, and more ways to remove invaders from their lands.
And what do you think putting and “end” to the conflict would achieve? Ruzzia would resupply and attack in 5 years again.
If you have watched the video and not noticed the insane amount of lies, something is genuinely wrong with you. It is pure unfiltered ruzzian and Chinese propaganda. Nothing else.
JT, the creator of ST, certainly has expressed various views that many find problematic, respecting Marxism-Leninism and related historic events.
Nevertheless, the ST channel itself is curated to explain values and objectives that are largely noncontroversial in leftist circles, anti-capitalist and socialist. I feel JT deserves some acknowledgment for successfully explaining such ideas while separating some of his own more controversial leanings.
The broad observation is that the political world is not divided between those who criticize NATO and also laud Putin, versus those with sympathies exactly the inverse. It is possible to criticize the practices and alignments of one’s own nation, without having distorted views about another.
Views about the Russian invasion of Ukraine are too nuanced and complex that anyone’s may be reduced meaningfully to a few lines of text. It is helpful to avoid attempting clean demarcations between right versus wrong.
Views about the Ruzzian invasion are not nuanced and complex. You either support a democratic nation that is under attack from a dictatorial fascist regime or you dont.
No, I wouldn’t expect you to recognize nuance or complexity on any subject.
Everyone who holds a different view from you, who emphasizes different objectives, concerns, or values, is by your description slimy and stupid.
No one can make you engage nuance. All I can do is reiterate that the subject is broader than what may be captured in your curt generalizations.
Oh, let me bow upon you my centrist deity!!
Do give me the nuance then. Where is the fucking nuance in this brutal attack?
I am not seeking a debate on the subject.
I am only calling for advancing beyond simplistic generalizations.
At the moment, your response to anyone who challenges your very strong views is to hurl insults. Plainly, any conditions under which a debate might be productive would require a revision of your attitude.
There is no nuance in the Ruzzian invasion of Ukraine.
There is no reason for the invasion. All given have been fabricated by kremlin propaganda as a substitute for a reason (see: shelling of “russians” in the occupied areas, “genocide” of ethnic Russians in the occupied areas and any other “justifications” of the kremlin. All of them have been proven false beyond doubt)
Invasion is illegal not only by international but by russian standards. Russia has broken its own treaty with ukraine both in 2014 and 2021.
Ruzzia is commiting vast majority if not all warcrimes. Be it execution of surrendered soldiers, non-accidental shelling of civilians, mass rape, mass murder, targeting of non militarily important targets for terror and nothing else. I can continue, if need be, there are houndreds, if not thousands of warcrimes commited by this point
Ruzzia is actively commiting genocide in the areas they have taken over. Mass killings and mass rapes are one thing, ruzzians are also kidnapping children on mass, deporting them back to ruzzia and “reeducating” them. This is, by definition, a genocide.
Ruzzia is the country that could stop any of this, at any moment they desire, its their own choice not to do so. Ukraine has no say when the way may end, until the recapture their entire territory (yes, that means Crimea, Crimea is Ukraine and that is not a disputable fact)
These are the main reasons why this conflict has no nuance. Ruzzia is 100% in the wrong, Ukraine is 100% in the right. There are a few times where wars are like this, like ww2 or united states invasion of vietnam (I’m on the side of vietnam, just to make it obvious)
Your arguments are not addressing any position that was actually presented to you.
Even someone who agreed with each point you made, and also agreed that you succeeded in rejecting some position actually presented, would not be justified in also agreeing with your rejection of all nuance.
You are simply not suited to discuss geopolitics if you believe that questions are soluble by simple statements about what is “100% right” versus “100% wrong”.
I’m not going to engage with your personal attacks and you should feel shameful for saying such nasty things to a stranger you hardly know.
The Ukraine-Russia conflict can be viewed in many different ways. One of them is Russia being an aggressor and waging an illegal war of conquest like Nazi Germany, and that’s a valid way to look at the conflict. I’m sure even he would agree of that. However the conflict is also very dangerous, especially with NATO involvement. The biggest threat is actually if the war would escalate into nuclear annihilation because Putin has threatened that if Russia loses, they’re going to start nuking. Have you forgotten about that?
That is your opinion. A missile can be used to shoot a helicopter just as easily on the Ukraine side of the border as on the Russian side of the border.
If we assume that Ukraine would manage to sue for some sort of white peace or extended ceasefire, what would that mean with the supplies that has been lent to Ukraine and the Ukrainian people and all the debt that Ukraine is racking up? Who do you think will have to pay for all that and what would the consequences be for Ukrainians? Probably not very good things. Possibly privatizations, international loans from WTO or other forms of neocolonialism. The intent of involvement from the west is highly suspicious and deserve its own scrutiny.
Maybe so, or maybe there might be a regime change in 5 years? Maybe with some time passing Putin somehow dies? Of sickness, old age or some other reason? In 5 years Putin would be over the average life expectancy of Russians. Maybe the Russians don’t try again in 5 years because they got humiliated this time? The world isn’t static and time changes things.
Second thought released its own video surrounding the Ukraine conflict and in a comment he posted he outlined his positions surrounding the conflict. I quote:
This is similar to the things he said in your video you linked. What has he lied about? Can you name even one contradiction? That doesn’t mean that he wants Ukraine to surrender or give up, rather that’s just your interpretation of his stance which is blatantly wrong and has no evidence. The fact that you try to claim otherwise because he calls for peace is just slander.
That is the ONLY valid way to look at the conflict. Ruzzia illegaly invaded ukraine both in 2014 and 2021.
He would not.
Those are empty threats, if you have seen the state of Ruzzian equipment you would understand that. The only country that would get annihilated in this conflict would be Ruzzia.
How is that an argument? Both are valid and good ways to protect Ukraine. One less helicopter means one less chance for an innocent ukrainan to be harmed.
Those supplies would be used to defend ukraine and bolster the border with the two fascist nations that border it. Banks have frozen accounts of ork oligarchs, have seized materiel and such. Those can be the start. The international community can band together to help. It would not be the first time.
Europes involvement is not at all suspicious. It’s a brutal attack on a sovereign nation near their borders. You would be insane to not support them.
If Ruzzians are not humiliated on the world stage in a way that wakes up even the most politically dead in the country, nothing will change. If we give them ANY concession, nothing will change. Total and absolute withdrawal, that is what needs to happen.
How hard is it to fucking understand, RUZZIA. INVADED. UKRAINE. People suffer BECAUSE OF RUZZIA, not because of “geopolitical jockeying” Jesus fucking chirst man. The only one who is in fault is ruzzia, if they wanted they could retreat now
Again, wrong. Sanctions have drastically reduced the capability of ruzzia to make new tanks, weapons, and rockets. Thanks to sanctions, ruzzia is unable to make long range rockets that have been indiscriminately killing civilians.
It absolutely fucking isn’t. Once again, tell that to WW2 veterans who have fought and died for the free world. A just society who accepts unjustifiable people and positions is not just.
Holy fucking shit here we go. The myth of NATO expansion. Such a funny lie and I am so happy you brought it up. Thankfully it has been completely annihilated. https://youtu.be/FVmmASrAL-Q?si=gN80y0EnM2W1qJuT
It isn’t, if I tried to explain every single contradiction and lie he has spouted in that video i would hit the character limit. Instead, I am liking a debunk of dylan burns and keffals.
https://youtu.be/hg-9Fa4MbMY?si=kPqzJwEdWBXtJwl8
No you literally couldn’t because you have nothing to say. If you have something of substance to say, say it. Don’t hide between a long and obnoxious reaction video.
The rest of your post is just… ridiculous. You can argue the 4 points he raised to him if you want, but I’d rather choose not to engage with that nonsense since it’s not my arguments.
You’re not wrong about these arguments such as Russia being the aggressor and them being able to retreat. Nobody is disputing those facts. Preferably I would also like Russia to realize that they did wrong, surrender to Ukraine and pay them war reparations, but I live in the real world where that seems pretty unlikely. That’s why I don’t expect for such an outcome, not because I don’t think it’s the right thing to do. You can scream yourself hoarse about what Russia ought to do, but that’s a factor we cannot control and we should approach the conflict with that in mind.
I do agree with him that we should have anti-war and your argument against that isn’t an argument even. War is just a political event where workers are sent to kill other workers. Anti-war is the position of the worker movement and everybody who are social democrat or more left leaning agrees on that fact. Since you think otherwise, you must be a reactionary and are blowing some sort of dog whistle right now.
This is not WW2, this is a war where one country is a nuclear power, the largest nuclear power in the world in fact! The performance of the Russian army during the conflict doesn’t really mean that they cannot launch nukes. Even if their nukes aren’t fully effective, they can most likely still cause tremendous harm and the threat of the nuclear war isn’t just the initial salvo but the retaliation and the threat of nuclear winter. For us who live in Europe, Russia’s arsenal is a nasty and scary threat, but maybe you don’t care because I assume you live in USA and feel more confident? I think that confidence is also misplaced, there’s no defense against nuclear armageddon. If that happens, billions will die and suffer.
I live next to Ukraine, I have seen the destruction personally, I have lost people I love and see bullshit when it’s there.
In this “political event,” which I would rather describe as a brutal uncalled for attack, Ruzzia sent its own workers (and prisoners) to go indiscriminately murder any and every ukranian they come across. I agree with your definition of war, never said otherwise.
But okay, I will go through the first minute alone and point out every single lie.
Calling euromaidan a “far right coup” is complete lie, it is ruzzian propaganda. Euromaidan was unilateral and supported by left and right. Neonazis joined it, of course as they saw an opportunity. Since then the far right party has been getting less and less support, today being the lowest.
Calling the new government a puppet regime is disingenuous, just like any of his and your claims. First government almost immediately held a public vote, thats how zelenski got into government.
It was never a provocation, it was a civilian uprising
They did not plan a proxy war. Ruzzia started this war for its own imperial means. That reality was not swept under the rug, its a blatant fucking lie.
That is just the first minute. Once again, I am not willing to write paragraph after paragraph when all of this has been debunked much more eloquently by Dylan, someone who knows much more than me, your or zero thought.
https://youtu.be/hg-9Fa4MbMY?si=PMoRahRzIsofExEF
Ah you’re Polish then I assume? My condolences and I think that maybe that fact makes you quite impartial toward a narrative where Ukraine is seen as the victim, which I agree to, Ukraine IS the victim here.
Yet you’re pro-war. So you apparently agree with my definition but are also pro-war. Therefore workers should fight each other if the ends justify the means? Is that right?
When a ML says “far right”, he might mean a neonazi, a conservative or a liberal. On the political scale from that perspective a “centrist” would be a social democrat. However the far right party might stand in polls isn’t exactly interesting. If the goal is to make Ukraine compatible with the west like Second Thought claims, then nazi ideology would be counterproductive toward that goal anyway so I’m not sure what you think that proves.
Maybe? I mean if we’re supposed to entertain that argument then we could guess that Russia’s elections in the regions they conquered also prove that there’s a genuine sentiment in breaking off? I don’t think so. Election results isn’t a sign of consent. I would also like to know why he decides to call it a “puppet regime”. At the same time, it’s pretty common for MLs to be suspicious of any cooperation with the west. It sounds like something he would have said on his own channel but maybe it greater detail argue why that is the case.
Okay and you’re sure about this why? In the video Dylan doesn’t give any explanation either why he thinks otherwise. If Ukraine really is a puppet state and the protests were backed by USA, maybe that was the plan?
I have to admit that the things you bring up weren’t the things I expected you to want to highlight since you seemed to argue that he has a different stance toward the conflict between his own channel and the video you posted, which doesn’t seem to be the case. The video you posted of Dylan is just nitpicking on the points presented in the video. Dylan doesn’t give his own evidence to his claims and while the burden of proof is on Second Thought it’s important to realize that he’s talking about this topic to a completely different audience who already are (or at least should be) informed of what he’s talking about. He’s hardly trying to present a case to convince outsiders, so making a nitpicking video against it is very easy, because the format isn’t meant to convince anyone. Why should I be impressed or convinced by Dylan? Come on…
Nope, however, my country has suffered under soviets and nazis alike, I don’t want that to happen again.
If defending yourself against a fascist invasion is pro war, so be it. Let me ask you: what the fuck was ukraine supposed to do? Lay down their weapons? Let the orks kill their men, rape their women and children? Should we let countries invade eachother for no fucking reason? Or should we fight back and try our hardest to defeat tyranny?
And once again and I will never stop saying this: ruzzia started this war. Not Ukraine. They are defending themselves. Kremlin always has a choice, for Ukraine, not fighting means certain death. War does not justify any means because there js no justification. Its a brutal invasion.
Its his words, not mine. He called it a far right coup backed by US. Both of these are lies.
He calls it that because he is spouting ruzzian propaganda. Hopefully we could at least agree on that.
That is a rather big if there buddy. Dylan does give explanation why it wasn’t and if not in this video, he absolutely debunked it in his video about euromaidan. Also he does give counter evidence against the claim that it was backed by US. Did US send its troops? No. Their Diplomats? Their people to protest? No. They were supporting it because they rose up against their former president and in the same way against ruzzia. Obviously US would be happy about it, i am not blind. But there is no evidence for the fact it was “backed” by the us
You must have misunderstood me then, his videos are on his main channel are not so overt because he hides his true colours.
I do disagree with that. I can’t change your mind on the fact you think it’s nitpicking and I don’t intend to. You have a right to have that opinion.
Also I just want to point out that just because I despise ruzzia with every fibre of my being, I do not like the US. They have done some really fucked up things and their domestic politics are awful. But right now, they support a country that deserves support. I don’t want this war to go on, I really don’t. I love ukranian cities and their people, their beautiful nature and their tasty food. I want to see my ukrainan friends again.
But it was taken, some are dead, some fight as I speak. Hopefully, some day, I’ll be able to hug them somewhere in a Ukranian beach in crimea. That’s all I want.
I wholeheartedly support people seeking to protect their loved ones, but war isn’t that. War is when you fight for a capitalist state in order to reach their political goals. That’s true both in offense as well as in defense. For Russia that interest is to steal Ukrainian land to reach Putin’s flimsy goals, whereas for Ukraine, it’s to preserve the independence and integrity of their country. But unless you’re looking at something like literal nazis who are looking to exterminate you, then you’re not looking at death when you get defeated, you instead have new management. The Ukrainian people doesn’t disappear because Ukraine disappears.
The path toward war isn’t instant. Ukraine has a history with Russia that can easily put them at odds with Russian interests. Their previous governments understood this and tried to keep a good relationship with Russia. War was the price they had to pay for rejecting Russia and moving closer to Europe and USA. Belarus doesn’t have this problem because they managed to collaborate with Russia. In a world where might makes right (like in capitalist worlds), then this is the logical outcome of geopolitical competition. The obvious way to protect the interests of the Ukrainian state would have been to keep the nuclear weapons because then they could at least threaten Russia with nuclear war. That’s how geopolitics works in capitalism.
The best way to protect the interest of the people would be to have socialist governments in both countries. Then there would be no need for war.
For Ukraine not fighting means death of the state. You seem to think that Ukrainian state and the people are the same, but they’re not. Workers are workers independent of state. We are just slaves to be used by the capitalist states as they wish and we shouldn’t be loyal to them just like we should be loyal to our employers. Russia has chosen to use their slaves to invade Ukraine and that most certainly means death and destruction (especially considering how Russia’s military has conducted the war) so to end the war is to conclude the war as quickly as possible.
Ukraine can surrender, although I don’t think that’s a good option. Especially for the sake of setting a precedent in geopolitics since that means that (like you said); it validates the invasion and wars of conquest which is a bad thing and shouldn’t be validated.
But once again I will reiterate I don’t expect Russia to give up either. The conflict will therefore continue until either Russia decides that they can’t fight anymore or Ukraine collapse. The worst case scenario would be if Russia decides to make good on their threats and decide to launch nukes and that might happen if Ukraine becomes seen as a serious threat.
Yes it is his words, spoken to a specific audience.
If that’s the case than that would surprise me. I wonder what stake MLs would have in supporting modern Russia since it’s a capitalist dystopia run by oligarchs. Now if it was Soviet propaganda on the other hand, I would understand. That’s why I highly doubt your claims of them lying and spouting Russian propaganda, because lying for the sake of Russia doesn’t make any sense.
That’s not counter evidence, that’s conjecture. You don’t have to send troops. Every country will have people to challenge the status quo. It’s not like USA sent troops to Al-Quaida or the Lybian rebels or created them from nothing, they were already there! They could support groups with weapons, supplies, communication or training or some other way. Now with that being said, I don’t think US armed the rebels or supplied them and I would be surprised if Second Thought are hinting at that. I’m curious myself what they actually are referring to, but I doubt they have actually released a video on the subject. I never came across a video on their main channel about it and I don’t want to listen through all of the deprogram either.
In this case you must be misunderstanding me. He’s open about his biases. They’re not exactly hiding that they’re all MLs. That’s why I said that his stance doesn’t seem any different. It’s similar talking points, similar rhetoric. Just a different format.
Yes it’s terrible that the world has become the plaything of all these large countries USA, Russia and China. I am strictly against USA in its current form as well and I’m also against Putin’s Russia. They are two very dangerous countries and it’s truly a travesty that they hold the largest nuclear arsenals to subjugate the rest of the world with.
My personal stance since the conflict began has mostly been speaking in favor of Ukraine and against Russia, even if I am seemingly taken a pro-Russian stance here (I’m not). I don’t have a stake either in Russia or Ukraine. They’re both capitalist countries who are doing what capitalist countries do. The thing I want to avoid is nuclear armageddon and I certainly dislike USA lording over everything and increasing the risk.
Advanced "both side"ing going on here. What does it even mean to call an end to conflict? Russia is welcome to go back home and lick its wound, why is the onus on Ukraine to end conflict?
And end US involvement? So Russia can overrun an independent country?
That you have to ask Second Thought. This is what he has said about the conflict:
You should read the thread if you’re interested.