The Pushback against Leftism

Actually, I disagree.

We live in a world built on the double standards and hypocrisies of Western diplomacy. I've lived extensively in Asia, and while I appreciate the positive aspects of western culture (compared to what it's like in other nations), I have little patience with these double standards which excuse Western foreign/domestic policies, while condemning other nations for doing similar.

There is a thing online when it comes to criticism of the US, and other western nations of deflecting away the negatives as if we are somehow better than other nations.. and while our propaganda presented the actions of the US in glowing terms, we are fully aware of their actions throughout history. The truth is there if people want to find it, but there's an unhealthy desire to ignore the truth, by painting it in bright colours of bias.

Putin, and Xi, are playing the game by the same rules set up by the Western powers when they could expand, or dominate their targets. There's been a wide range of military adventures by the US, or even the UK/France over the last 60 years which are on par with anything Russia or China has done beyond their borders.. We sanctioned the destruction of two nations, and the stability of the M.East because some terrorists attacked the US on their soil.. even to the point of conveniently forgetting the lack of evidence for their justifications to invade Iraq. All passed off as being okay because it was Western powers involved.

Nah.. we talk big about having a fair and open culture.. but we're rather intolerant of criticisms that place our western nations on the same level of criticism that non-western nations receive. The outrage over Putins invasion of Ukraine, with their bombings, and attacks, but more people died in the opening weeks of the "Shock and Awe" and subsequent invasion of Iraq. Sure, things are different now, but the outrage displayed was a series of double standards..

Just as your post is a dismissal of criticism of the US. Surely we can acknowledge the negatives of Western foreign policy, while also acknowledging the negatives of Putins behaviour? And yet, we don't. Instead, the negatives of western nations are pushed into the background, while we ensure that Putin is entirely in the limelight.

None of this is seeking to excuse/justify the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I think it was an utterly retarded thing to do, and should be opposed. However, let's not ignore how the US or other Western powers behave. Let's be balanced and logical, in the manner, we pretend to be.

Yet it's the political left who are spending more time condemning the West rather than excoriating Putin and Putin alone.

So your false point was bad to begin with. Now it looks even worse.

Of course it matters. What is the expiry date on past events being relevant? Western society tends to lean heavily towards fast change, and putting the past behind... but that's not the case in other nations. They remember the past. They note how western nations have behaved previously, and factor that into how they interact with the world. And let's be honest here, the Western governments are very quick to point to history if it justifies their positions..

The US invasion of Iraq is still relevant, and likely played some role in Putins decision to invade Ukraine. After all, the US got away with an illegal war, and managed the occupation of that nation for almost two decades, without being hit with war crimes, UN sanctions, etc. Russia has never stopped seeing itself as a superpower.. and the US has repeatedly shown that the rules for normal countries don't apply to superpowers. China will do the same, because the precedence has been set.

Focusing on Putin today, and dismissing what/how western nations have behaved over the last century is just too damn convenient.

We could, but we don't. We find justifications for western actions, and don't extend the same reasoning to other nations, because we're somehow "better" than them. Our culture is better.. although we tend to behave differently abroad. Our laws are better, but our laws don't extend to occupied territories. Our way to wage war is better, but collateral damage is just as impactful, regardless of who is committing it.

Rather than condemn Putin and Putin alone? Nope. No interest in doing that. I'd also blame the Ukrainian leadership, the role of NATO in the region, the threat of US bases in Ukraine within easy striking distance of Russian population centres, etc.

Look back over the last few years, and consider the rhetoric coming out of the US directed towards Russia. Hardly the friendliest of stances... and Putin should simply accept that Ukraine would join the EU/Nato, along with the subsequent military bases? Everything relating to Ukraine, and Russian borders has been intended to provoke a response. Oh, I know Putin wants to bring the former soviet territories back into the fold.. and was going to attempt it regardless of what happened.. but we should acknowledge the position that western powers placed them in.

Putins choices didn't happen in a sterile environment absent the influence of both Ukraine, and Western powers.

Again, though, this is not a justification or excuse for the invasion of Ukraine (because I know some posters will jump at the chance to proclaim their outrage).

You don't remember the 2nd Iraq war all that well, do you? Cause that's exactly what the US/UK did to justify their invasion, when they couldn't verify nuclear weapons, or make any solid link with the attack on the US. They went back over history, picking out every possible justification for their plans.

Yes he would.. No disagreement from me... but he would do so both because it's been done before by other nations, and because he saw himself as a major military superpower, and so, the rules didn't apply to him. (As they don't apply to the US). Putin was wrong though because international community has stood against him, but back before the invasion, I could understand why he would have thought he'd have a free hand, just like the US has had elsewhere.

Exactly.

European countries have had a majority of socialist type governments for the last few decades. It's not as simple as calling them left or right, because they tend to be a mix of both, with agendas that do touch on both elements. People are seeking to simplify these things too much. Politicians have gained their education and training from similar sources, and that will impact on how they perceive the world. Ideologically driven politics hasn't been terribly strong for decades.

This is the problem with importing the left/right argument from the US. They've always been a two party system, and their population has grown to see everything in the light of rep/dem, along with their versions of left/right.. but American politics aren't the same as European politics. Hell, Irish politics isn't the same as French politics. The agendas, interests, backroom deals, etc all contribute to a more complex set of motivations for the policies/agendas implemented.

So you're picking and choosing which left-wing figures are eligible for criticism?

A bit bizarre, as I think they're perfectly entitled to be included in this criticism.

It's not common even among the Trans population though. More likely with those with Asian genetics.. but with westerners the bone structure tends to interfere too much for that to happen without extensive surgery, hormonal treatments, and other tutoring. All of which is expensive, and beyond the means of most people. That's the reality. Most Trans who do get surgery go for years with a single operation, before getting another, and then waiting for years more for their next.. all the while, looking like something between a man and a woman, belonging to neither. Obviously different from the norm.

People talk about how few Trans there are. Grand. But it's worth remembering that those who could actually pass for women, are an extreme minority within the Trans community. Any changes to allow Trans access to female only spaces, gives permission to the whole group, regardless of how far along their transition is.. and then, there's all of those who will never transition, and will simply be men in makeup/drag. (edit: and considering the way Trans beliefs are evolving, soon, we'll be seeing Trans who don't transition, don't wear makeup or do drag, but expect to be treated the same because they identify as being female.. who are still covered as being trans.)

There are a large number of profit driven corporations, and businesses, that are left-leaning in their policies, but will still be firmly focused on exploiting others to gain that profit. The mixing of traditionally left or right beliefs, switching them when it suits their purposes.

Politics is no different. Ideology is no longer a serious factor in how the political parties that succeed in elections operate. They spread themselves to superficially meet the expectations of voters, but also to pander to the corporations within the economy. Ideologically driven parties such as the greens, or labour don't tend to get into power by sticking to their traditional agendas, and instead, over time lose themselves so that they can appeal to more people. It's one of the reasons the left/right narrative is so limiting and impractical. We don't live in a world of Black/white. People, and organisations are not that simple, and predictable, especially over extended periods of time.