I’ve seen several comments on hexbear (I can find links if you haven’t seen them) along the lines of “I’m not pro-Putin… BUT we should give him what he wants in order to end the war quicker”, and as an outsider, I think for sure these comments are actually seen as totally pro-Putin by non-hexbear users, due to how trying to appease dictators has ended for Europe in the past.
As someone who’s probably made one of the comments you’re referring to, it’s less “give Putin what he wants” and more “this war is unwinnable for Ukraine, it should cut its losses (territories that largely don’t want to stay in Ukraine anyway) and negotiate.”
Appeasement doesn’t factor in because Russia has already won what it wants, and continuing a bloody stalemate will be worse for Ukraine than for Russia. Ukraine’s position can only get weaker here.
See what I don’t understand is even if this were true, how is this any different than how American liberals treat countries they illegally invade? Your literal only defense against criticism is “Whataboutism!”.
You will not treat America or Americans the same for occupying Afghanistan for 20 years as you treat Russia and Russians for doing something vaguely similar with far less casualties
I am personally against American invasions and am not trying to say the USA is somehow good or benevolent, I was just pointing out why outsiders may perceive some hexbear users as pro-Putin
I understand that but even you must recognize that English speakers outside communities like ours talk about Russia and China with such overwhelming vitriol they would never DREAM talking about western countries with, despite western countries doing all the things eastern countries are accused of but much worse
The whole ‘appeasement doesn’t work’ argument is understandable, but the only alternative is fighting and dying in the tens of millions in the vain hope that a global superpower will lose to a relatively small, fractional country plagued by instability, military incompetence, and corruption. It’s also not really applicable anyway, while Russia is far more interested in security and stability than global domination.
Either way, there is the short-term solution middle ground of “let’s negotiate on terms that help ensure everyone’s future security (including at least some degree of denazification) to prevent further wars”. Which I think is what most Hexbearians would want in terms of peace. Obviously the long-term issue is that nationstates as they exist are inherently warmongering and that cannot be stopped without fundamental change.
while Russia is far more interested in security and stability than global domination.
This is true, but a lot of libs are completely convinced that Putin is a megalomaniac who desires world domination and I dont think they can be shaken from that belief.
Peace looks like guaranteeing Ukrainian neutrality by taking NATO membership off the table and likely ceding the DPR and LPR to the Russian federation at this point.
We also get a lot of shock at the fact that some of us think, in that situation, Ukraine would have to give independence and security guarantees to the Donbas & Crimea. Many of us think that given the realities of the civil war there over the last 8 years or so, plus this conflict, it’s probably the only way to prevent retributory ethnic cleansing in the region. It has nothing to do with ideas of fairness or sovereignty or any other nebulous concept; it’s about what’s least worst for the working class there.
I’ve seen many other such comments in the past week lurking here, so it definitely comes up every now and then. I can also see the logic behind these comments, even if I don’t agree with the logic myself.
This clearly isn’t pro-putin though it’s anti-war. Those people are intentionally conflating being pro-putin with any attempt to stop the war because they are bloodthirsty liberals detached from the horror this is causing and crucially - they want the war to continue.
None of us are happy this war is happening. The position of trying to get it to end as quickly as possible through any means isn’t pro-putin. It’s pro-human lives.
I’d like to point out some historical examples of how that argument has been used time and time again to push aside any attempts at diplomacy and justify what in hindsight were plainly needless wars of aggression, but which seemed quite justified to people at the time (at least when it started).
I think many of us have more complex views on the conflict, but most people aren’t interested in hearing us out or learning about this history of the conflict, so it’s easier to just say, “Look, practically speaking, Ukraine doesn’t have the capabilities to reclaim all their territories and it’s just going to cause a lot of pointless death if they tried.” And I do believe that’s true, but I’d still be calling for peace if I didn’t.
@HellAwaits@lemm.ee can you link me to a single pro-Putin post please? Just one.
Serious question. I’m genuinely asking you for this in good faith, I want to understand what you’re talking about.
Pro-Putin posts are when you talk about the war without demanding the annihilation of all Ruzzian subhuman orcs.
I’ve seen several comments on hexbear (I can find links if you haven’t seen them) along the lines of “I’m not pro-Putin… BUT we should give him what he wants in order to end the war quicker”, and as an outsider, I think for sure these comments are actually seen as totally pro-Putin by non-hexbear users, due to how trying to appease dictators has ended for Europe in the past.
As someone who’s probably made one of the comments you’re referring to, it’s less “give Putin what he wants” and more “this war is unwinnable for Ukraine, it should cut its losses (territories that largely don’t want to stay in Ukraine anyway) and negotiate.”
Appeasement doesn’t factor in because Russia has already won what it wants, and continuing a bloody stalemate will be worse for Ukraine than for Russia. Ukraine’s position can only get weaker here.
Lol you got nothing
See what I don’t understand is even if this were true, how is this any different than how American liberals treat countries they illegally invade? Your literal only defense against criticism is “Whataboutism!”.
You will not treat America or Americans the same for occupying Afghanistan for 20 years as you treat Russia and Russians for doing something vaguely similar with far less casualties
I am personally against American invasions and am not trying to say the USA is somehow good or benevolent, I was just pointing out why outsiders may perceive some hexbear users as pro-Putin
I understand that but even you must recognize that English speakers outside communities like ours talk about Russia and China with such overwhelming vitriol they would never DREAM talking about western countries with, despite western countries doing all the things eastern countries are accused of but much worse
The whole ‘appeasement doesn’t work’ argument is understandable, but the only alternative is fighting and dying in the tens of millions in the vain hope that a global superpower will lose to a relatively small, fractional country plagued by instability, military incompetence, and corruption. It’s also not really applicable anyway, while Russia is far more interested in security and stability than global domination.
Either way, there is the short-term solution middle ground of “let’s negotiate on terms that help ensure everyone’s future security (including at least some degree of denazification) to prevent further wars”. Which I think is what most Hexbearians would want in terms of peace. Obviously the long-term issue is that nationstates as they exist are inherently warmongering and that cannot be stopped without fundamental change.
This is true, but a lot of libs are completely convinced that Putin is a megalomaniac who desires world domination and I dont think they can be shaken from that belief.
Let’s see those links, champ
If you search for Russia on hexbear, you find comments like this quite quickly, like:
https://hexbear.net/comment/3738463
https://hexbear.net/comment/3765816
I’ve seen many other such comments in the past week lurking here, so it definitely comes up every now and then. I can also see the logic behind these comments, even if I don’t agree with the logic myself.
neither of these comments are pro-putin
This clearly isn’t pro-putin though it’s anti-war. Those people are intentionally conflating being pro-putin with any attempt to stop the war because they are bloodthirsty liberals detached from the horror this is causing and crucially - they want the war to continue.
None of us are happy this war is happening. The position of trying to get it to end as quickly as possible through any means isn’t pro-putin. It’s pro-human lives.
I’d like to point out some historical examples of how that argument has been used time and time again to push aside any attempts at diplomacy and justify what in hindsight were plainly needless wars of aggression, but which seemed quite justified to people at the time (at least when it started).
I think many of us have more complex views on the conflict, but most people aren’t interested in hearing us out or learning about this history of the conflict, so it’s easier to just say, “Look, practically speaking, Ukraine doesn’t have the capabilities to reclaim all their territories and it’s just going to cause a lot of pointless death if they tried.” And I do believe that’s true, but I’d still be calling for peace if I didn’t.