the_dunk_tank
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
view the rest of the comments
As we all know here, I am very stupid but I'll give this a shot based on my current understanding.
The USSR was not Imperialist, so when it was sliced up and sold to nationalist Capitalists, there were no readily available colonies to exploit, and Western Powers had already divied up the Global South amongst themselves. With little international exploitation, the Russian Bourgeoisie is Nationalist in character, exploiting their internal proletariat. Meanwhile, Western Powers seek the industrial base of Russia, causing constant conflict.
Russia therefore aligns with BRICS after failing to join NATO and take their "share" of Imperialist super-profits. They tried, and were rejected!
I appreciate the response. I need to probably read more about the topic
Same here, hence the preface, but I did feel comfortable enough in said analysis to post my reply.
I think you could also describe Russian foreign policy in the Middle East (namely Syria) as "adventurism." AFAIK they're still occupying parts of Syria with no real exit strategy. While this was done at the request of Syria's government in order to combat ISIS, Putin hasn't let the opportunity pass him by to build oil pipelines and whatnot.
Russia has always been called "the sick old man of Europe" for a reason.
I wouldn't say "Always"
The first popular usage of the phrase was Tsar Nicholas I calling the Ottoman Empire the sick man in the 1800's, and it was ascribed to alot of nations by alot of nations after WWII.
Nowadays Europe is the sick man of Europe.