“Multi-polar” literally just means there are multiple “poles” of power. This is in contrast to the “unipolar” world order the US set up after WWII. Unipolarity is the real historical anomaly here.
There is nothing inherently radical about wanting a “multipolar world.” Do you know why we wound up with a unipolar world to start with? The capitalist international system was “multipolar” up until the end of WWII. WWI and WWII were the result of “multipolarity.” America took advantage of the chaos to position themselves as world hegemon. This is not an inherently stable configuration for capitalism so it’s now falling apart after a few generations. Now we have “multiple poles” again when in reality having multiple great powers competing for power, territory, etc has literally always been the norm.
It is plainly in the rational self-interest of every state other than the US to want a multipolar world, but in fact, all it means is the collapse of American hegemony. In itself, the collapse of American hegemony is fine, but we still should care about what comes after it.
As far as I can tell, the only real bright spot is that without American hegemony global capitalism absolutely will be significantly more unstable, although as bright spots go, that’s pretty grim.
deleted by creator
If Russia wants to get on the “civilized” side they have centuries of colonialism, slavery, genocide and imperialism that they will have to catch up on. Don’t think they have it in them to accomplish this in the near future right now.
deleted by creator
Yes please tell me about how the Russian empire has committed atrocities as bad as the genocide of American natives and the Trans-Atlantic slave trade.
Joseph Stalin did his best to even the score. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin#Death_toll_and_accusations_of_genocide
Lenin and Trotsky weren’t far behind! Just ask the Cronstadt citizens or the Ukranian farmers… woops can’t they’ve all been massacred by the red army because they wanted actual communism (anarchy) and not a dictatorship of the proletariat.
Since the downvotes are starting, I strongly recommend to read Emma Goldman’s historical analysis on this topic before you make yourself an opinion :)
Not the commenter you responded to, but here are a few examples:
- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circassian_genocide
- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Terror_(Russia)
- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror
More examples:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_war_crimes
Further reading:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_evolution_of_Russia
Nobody killed more Russians than Stalin did.
Thank you for the Nazi talking point. Hadn’t heard of that before.
deleted by creator
The point isn’t whether whatever threshold of depravity is acceptable. You described the opposition to Russia as “civilized” which is a western chauvinistic and white supremacist point of view. Only wanted to point that out.
deleted by creator
Westoid mad
I wrote something with the same conclusion here:
https://lemmy.ml/post/181612Removed by mod
