r/chomsky • u/Anton_Pannekoek • Sep 02 '24

Article Scott Ritter: On a Highway to Hell (On Nuclear Posture)

https://consortiumnews.com/2024/09/01/scott-ritter-on-a-highway-to-hell/
0 Upvotes

38% Upvoted

110 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-2

u/unity100 Sep 02 '24

That would make me pretty disappointed, because that would mean that their antiempire criticism isn't consistent

On the contrary. If they were against Russia they would be inconsistent: Russia is still continuing the anti-colonial foreign policy of former Soviet Union in aiding smaller countries fight US imperialism and breaking out from it. Smaller countries have no chance against US machinations without the intelligence and military support from countries like Russia. Up until Russia picked up the Soviet policy in early 2010s, the US was able to overthrow governments and take over small countries by using ragtag private armies like the Islamists, far right paramilitaries and whatnot. Russia has been filling the role that China should have been doing, but wasnt.

But most of those ive read from the "rest of the world" were clear about Russia's role in this

I dont know any prominent anti-empire critic that blames Russia for NATO expansion and the event chain that started in 2014. Chomsky included. If there is any blame on them, its because they have been 'working with' the "West" and calling them their "partners" for decades, literally sitting by the side as the US destroyed large swaths of the world.

1

u/tutamean Sep 03 '24 edited Sep 04 '24

Russia is still continuing the anti-colonial foreign policy of former Soviet Union

Russia is literally trying to reconquer it's own empire.

I dont know any prominent anti-empire critic that blames Russia for NATO expansion and the event chain that started in 2014.

Well then these critics are obviously Russian useful idiots, as the so called NATO "expansion" began only after the Russian massacre of Chechnya

Edit: The clown couldn't take how wrong he was, so he blocked me :D

0

u/unity100 Sep 03 '24

Russia is literally trying to reconquer it's own empire.

No, its not 'literally' doing that. Empty emotional rhetoric.

Well then these critics are obviously Russian useful idiot

Like how you are a useful US State Dept. idiot, pushing their latest foreign policy project like a drone?

the so called NATO "expansion" began only after the Russian massacre of Chechnya

The nato expansion began in 1986. Dont make sh*t out of your ass and make statements on subjects you dont know zit about.

Just another Angloamerican liberal...

0

u/Divine_Chaos100 Sep 02 '24

I dont know any prominent anti-empire critic that blames Russia for NATO expansion and the event chain that started in 2014

That's not what i am talking about. What i am talking about is Ritter openly cheering for Russia to win the war and going to russia to give motivational talks to the people who invade Ukraine. And this is the DIRECT OPPOSITE of what Chomsky says: https://newpol.org/interview-on-the-war-in-ukraine-with-noam-chomsky/ first answer: "Ukraine should receive weapons for self-defense", "The flea calls for “ceasefire and total withdrawal of Russian troops” from Ukraine, and argues that a turn towards diplomacy offers a better hope for ending the horrors of Putin’s criminal aggression than continuing the flow of weapons, which escalates the war." He's very clearly not cheering for Russia.

And Russia isn't continuing Soviet policy. Soviet policy was to help SOCIALIST projects around the world to come to fruition. Putin isn't a socialist. He's simply looking for markets.

1

u/unity100 Sep 03 '24

What i am talking about is Ritter openly cheering for Russia to win the war and going to russia to give motivational talks to the people who invade Ukraine

Maybe you havent noticed, but a lot of us in the global south are cheering for Russia to win the war. Not only because it would stop a US imperial project right there and then, but it also means that the US will be either near-bankruptcy or outright bankrupt at the time it ends, making it impossible for US to start a new imperial project and hopefully, effecting some change in its society.

You people still havent noticed that this is an actual proxy war between the US and former colonizer Eu countries and entire rest of the world. That's why the global south is so active in supporting Russia.

OPPOSITE of what Chomsky says

Chomsky is not a prophet. He is wrong on certain things, and he has changed his mind on certain things. He always was an advocacy of peaceful change through activism and voting. But after he hooked up with the former-guerilla girlfriend of his, he saw the other side of the coin and started saying that the powers that be do not understand from any other language than violence and they never let go of power peacefully. There are great differences in the lives of affluent untouchable white collar American professionals from the right ethnosocial background and the ordinary people who had to live in the countries that were affected by US imperialism. Chomsky always saw the world from the former's window. His guerilla girlfriend likely introduced him to the realities he hasnt seen before.

Putin’s criminal aggression

This sounds like the Angloamerican enemy-smearing thing that you people always do to your establishment enemies. Emotional, hollow, baseless sound bite rhetoric: The murderous f*cks who are actively murdering people as of this very moment are not 'criminal', but their enemies are. For some reason, what the psychopathic f*cks who decapitate children in Gaza say about their enemies are taken as truth. Incredible especially because the current US state dept. is comprised of the same people who made the 2003 Iraq War happen.

towards diplomacy

Horsesh*t. There was the 'Minsk agreements' diplomacy, which the West used to build up Ukraine's nazis for 10 years to use Ukraine against Russia. Something which Merkel directly admitted recently.

And Russia isn't continuing Soviet policy. Soviet policy was to help SOCIALIST projects around the world to come to fruition.

A lot of Soviet policy was just helping colonies break away from their former masters. They did not require socialist policies or communist governments to help a nation.

Russia is doing more: Its helping every country break away from the Imperial system.

Putin isn't a socialist.

For someone who says he is not a socialist, he is a very weird non-socialist: The state owns the biggest economic entities, the state sets the economic policy, the corporations are told to follow the state policy or else, and he makes an awful lot of references to policies of the 60s French Socialists...

1

u/Divine_Chaos100 Sep 03 '24

Maybe you havent noticed, but a lot of us in the global south are cheering for Russia to win the war.

I noticed i just don't give a fuck. My criticism of RITTER is that RITTER is biased in the conflict so i am not going to take RITTER seriously. RITTER is not a third world maoist. And, as Chomsky, RITTER is infallible as well (and guess what, people from third world countries are as well but that's A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TOPIC). Literally what i am saying is that i won't take someone's opinion on the conflict seriously after he went to openly cheerlead for one side. That's why i don't take CNN and NYT analysis seriously either.

1

u/unity100 Sep 03 '24

i just don't give a fuck

If you dont give a f*ck about something, dont bring it up. Why do you use something as an argument and then say that you dont give a f*ck...

i won't take someone's opinion on the conflict seriously after he went to openly cheerlead for one side.

With that logic, we must discount the opinions of everyone who is affected in a conflict. From South Americans fighting against US backed militias to even Cuban revolutionaries in Fidel's and Che's time.

1

u/Divine_Chaos100 Sep 03 '24

everyone who is affected in a conflict.

Scott Ritter is not affected in this conflict. Well, he wasn't until he went to Chechnya for some reason.

Edit, also it was you who brought up the "rest of the world", here: https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/1f7163c/scott_ritter_on_a_highway_to_hell_on_nuclear/ll5mqvl/

1

u/unity100 Sep 03 '24

Scott Ritter is not affected in this conflict

That doesnt matter. He supports one side. Everyone affected in any conflict supports one side. If supporting one side invalidates one's views like you said, then we cant listen to anybody.

Edit, also it was you who brought up the "rest of the world", here:

It was because you made a false generalization above that:

Most antiempire critics are not open Russia-simps tho like Ritter

1

u/Divine_Chaos100 Sep 04 '24

That doesnt matter. He supports one side. Everyone affected in any conflict supports one side. If supporting one side invalidates one's views like you said, then we cant listen to anybody.

of course it does fucking matter when you specifically talk about people who the conflict affects and I AM STILL TALKING ABOUT FUCKING SCOTT RITTER.

Is the notion of neutrality new to you or what? You're apparently from the third world, you know what the non-aligned movement was/is, no?

Most antiempire critics are not open Russia-simps tho like Ritter

This still stands, and it was still made in the context of Scott fucking Ritter.

1

u/unity100 Sep 04 '24

of course it does fucking matter when you specifically talk about people who the conflict affects and I AM STILL TALKING ABOUT FUCKING SCOTT RITTER.

Again: Those who are affected by a conflict would have much more bias for the side they support. With your reasoning, they shouldnt be heard.

Is the notion of neutrality new to you or what? 

As the Ukraine War showed, neutrality is horsesh*t. Everyone is either 'on a side', or thinks that they are on a side. The number of people who can detach themselves from everything and interpret things from a distance is few, and even among them, there are biases and preferences. Even the most neutral interpretations of Chomksy on any topic always had certain biases too.