In the social tapestry of post-Soviet nations, an enigmatic phenomenon has quietly taken root that might be called the “neo-Soviet renaissance.” Western commentators typically represent this movement as a misguided and inaccurate “Soviet nostalgia,” one conveniently harnessed by savvy politicians like Vladimir Putin for their own agendas, but this phenomenon is both deeper and more complex.
Beyond such shallow attempts at political instrumentalization, this neo-Soviet revival manifests in myriad forms across society, echoing through art, music, commemorative practices, and even video-games. Its resonance extends far beyond the cultural tactics of the Kremlin. The very fact that Putin’s appeal to Soviet imagery resonates so profoundly, both domestically and on the international stage, points to something more fundamental at work in post-Soviet society—an undercurrent of genuinely popular affection for the Soviet period rooted deep in the collective consciousness. This is not simply confined to an older generation’s nostalgia for the experience of the USSR, but has also taken hold in a younger generation untouched by Soviet life. The core reason for this unexpected resurgence lies in the absence of any attractive alternative that can rival the allure of Soviet life over the past three decades.
In this interview we talked to the Workers’ Front of Ukraine (RFU)—an underground Marxist collective in Ukraine that represents an alternate political manifestation of the neo-Soviet renaissance. On their popular Telegram channel, they criticize both the Ukrainian and Russian governments, capturing the attention of a significant online audience within Ukraine, despite the severe persecution their members have faced. They spoke with us candidly about their perspectives on the war, its origins, and its potential outcomes, as well as the role of revolutionaries in a rapidly evolving landscape. As with all our interviews, the views expressed here do not necessarily represent those of LeftEast editors. We publish them as part of our ongoing efforts to document the resurgent Left in the post-socialist world in its many forms.
–– LeftEast Editorial Board
Tell us briefly about the history of your organization. What’s the mission of the Workers’ Front of Ukraine, when were you founded, and how has your work changed over time? What is the structure of your organization? Do you have connections to other organizations like trade unions?
We are the Workers’ Front of Ukraine – the largest Marxist-Leninist communist organization in Ukraine and one of the few Ukrainian leftist organizations that truly struggles on behalf of the working class. The RFU was founded around the end of 2019 beginning of 2020, starting as a collection of small media channels on Telegram and YouTube. Our mission is to create a workers’ party which will become a vanguard of the working class in Ukraine, make our country socialist again, and in that way bring World Revolution closer to humanity. From the very beginning we have been creating media, sharing our materialist worldview to people, helping them see what’s actually happening in Ukraine and beyond. As our organization began to grow, we also started offline activities. After the beginning of the full-scale war our offline work paused till the hostilities became somewhat sluggish, but luckily now we can continue working both offline and online as best as we are able to.
Even during the hottest days of the war, we managed to agitate and promote progressive ideas, so the war didn’t affect our working process too heavily. However, it became more dangerous to be ourselves and continue our mission, due to rising chauvinism among the masses, the strengthening of reaction, and increasing repressions against dissent, as well as other gifts of a superstructure begotten by the so-called only and the most progressive politico-economic model.
Our organization is built on principles of Democratic Centralism, though at the same time we have no central figure who rules over everything and everybody. The organization consists of different departments which have their own jobs to do, media departments, regional cells, etc.
Currently, we have been establishing connections with any possible so-called “combative” trade unions and other organizations all over the world. We have already some relations to our comrades from “Krasnobai” in Belarus, “ROT Front” and “Simple numbers” (Prostiye chisla) in Russia, “Red Yurta” in Kazakhstan, etc. One of our primary missions is to establish international solidarity with other Marxists and develop principles of collectivism among the workers as best as possible.
What are RFU’s political activities?
As we have previously stated, we are busy with agitation and propaganda, sharing socialist ideas to masses, and finding ways to cooperate with workers. Though it’s quite far from creating a party, since there is no massive communist movement in Ukraine, we will organize workers, help them create trade-unions and soviets. Striking back against the bourgeoisie on the informational frontlines is one of our most important efforts. We want to prepare the Ukrainian working class for its war against the bourgeoisie as well as prepare ourselves.
In recent decades, there has been a rapid growth of political collectives based on a deep study of Marxism-Leninism in many post-Soviet countries which have found a large audience on social networks. What do you see as the significance of these so-called kruzhki (“circles”)? Are they just Marxist reading groups, online subculture of Soviet nostalgics, or something more politically significant?
Initially, such circles were intended for studying and summarizing theory. Of course, there is a huge legacy of Soviet Marxist study, but still there are some theoretical discrepancies which have to be handled. The only way to do that is to learn and develop theory in circles, sort out all the contradictions and prepare a united theoretical base for a future party. All in all, circles can be and normally should be the main basis for creating Marxist organizations. Besides, as in the past, circles can have their agitation and propaganda role also, but the main problem is in their tendency to disintegrate. Normally a united communist party should perform such roles through planning, accumulating sufficient resources, and organized operation. Study circles are not sufficient platforms to work with trade-unions, organize worker protests and strikes, distribute agitation materials, confront the far-right, etc., due to the above-mentioned reasons. That’s why practically speaking, study circles are useful and vital for certain activities during the initial stage of developing a Marxist organization.
What is the current situation with political repression in Ukraine, particularly against the left? Has the RFU suffered any sort of repression and, if so, how has that impacted your work?
As we all know, during wartime the reactionary nature of bourgeois regimes rises to the highest degree. More than thirty years have passed since the Soviet Union collapsed yet today’s capitalists are still scared of the “Red menace.” Anti-communist hysteria has developed into cancel culture and in some cases the dehumanization of activists. Bourgeois media works overtime to defame the communist movement, declaring us publicly to be Kremlin agents. That’s why yes, all non-systemic left-wing organizations in Ukraine suffer from repression. First of all, our activity is forbidden and punishable by law since 2014. Later, public oppression in the media gained momentum. With the beginning of the war, the far-right as well as state security services received full carte blanche to oppress leftists in any way they wish. If you are a leftist who has been caught by the Security Service of Ukraine or by the far right, prepare to be humiliated, accused of collaboration, exposed and arranged on charges (sometimes even non-political charges), beaten to a bloody pulp, tortured, or even killed in some dark SSU dungeon. There have been thousands of politically motivated arrests since the beginning of the war, and the fates of many detainees are not known. Among them there are leftists or those who at least sympathize with the left. People are arrested for using communist symbolism, making comments on social media, saying something pro-Soviet or pro-socialist in public or in the media, publicly declaring a Marxist worldview at university or anywhere else, some have even been reported for using “ugly” words in private conversation.
The most high-profile case of this type was the arrest of the Kononovichi brothers. They were caught by nationalists, transferred to jail by SSU, tortured, seriously injured, and later released on house arrest conditions. Yes, certainly among them there are those who had relations with Simonenko’s Communist Party of Ukraine and with the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, etc., which usually suggests a pro-Russian position. Yet despite that, we still find the actions of the government extremely aggressive and unacceptable.
We have also suffered from this persecution. A year ago, two of our activists were caught by the SSU, accused of fake charges, spied on, and held captive by the security services. Who knows how many such cases will happen in the future. Perhaps there will be more and more, thousands or tens of thousands, as people continually realize the parasitic essence of our politico-economic base and superstructure, and attempt to do something against the system.
Some have attacked the RFU as Stalinists. How do you define your organization in relation to the Soviet Union? What’s your stance on Stalin/Stalinism and what do you see as the significance of the Soviet legacy generally for contemporary Marxists?
Our relationship to the Soviet Union is simple. The USSR was the first country to build socialism, and we believe that we should analyze the Soviet experience in order to prevent the restoration of capitalism in the future, as it happened in the Soviet Union. Therefore, there is no reason to idealize or, on the contrary, try to abandon the Soviet legacy, as many “leftists” like to do. This is a wrong approach and has no practical utility.
We treat Stalin quite respectfully, because he was the person who put Marxist-Leninist theory into practice, built socialism, and laid the foundation for building communism.
Contemporary discussions of Soviet Marxism rarely get beyond Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin. Which Soviet figures post-Lenin does your organization consider important to study? What moments or aspects of Soviet history (good or bad) do you find particularly significant? Which contemporary Marxist authors in post-Soviet countries and and among international authors today does your collective consider most relevant for political practice?
We can say that particularly significant are all the moments of Soviet history. Everything is important. This is an experience that all communists must fully understand. Speaking of authors, we can highlight Ukrainian Marxist philosopher Valery Bosenko. In our opinion, his books are a very good way to understand dialectical materialism. He has also come up with a lot of valuable ideas about pedagogy. Members of our organization study respectfully his theoretical heritage. Unfortunately, his works have not been translated into English. Maybe one day we will correct the situation.
Some have argued that the age of relatively democratic capitalism is coming to its end, also because of the escalating imperialist rivalry we can expect more authoritarian and even dictatorial trends all over the world. This may challenge certain political strategies of the left that rely on integration into the bourgeois civil societies, work with mass unions and political protests, and populist electoral projects. What is RFU’s stance on this supposed global political shift? What do you think the strategy of the left should be?
We are officially illegal. Period. Speaking about the strategies of the left, we must admit that there are no universal recipes. Every case is special. But anyway, every communist organization must be ready to perform both legal and illegal types of work. When the capitalist state gives you an opportunity to work legally without abandoning your principles, you should use it. When it doesn’t, you should adapt, which means seeking out ways to work anonymously and confidentially.
How would you characterize the war? Various allusions/comparisons have been made to WWI, WWII, the 1956 crackdown on Hungary, the Iraq War, and so on. What, if any, historical parallel do you feel is useful to explain the current war? If this is, as has been alleged by much of the left, an inter-imperialist proxy war, how does that shape Ukraine’s role in the conflict, in limiting, encouraging, or demanding various actions by the government?
This war is a part of the world capitalist becoming, one chapter of the prologue to WWIII. It’s clear for every conscious communist that this war is a confrontation between, on one side, a Ukrainian comprador oligarchy regime backed by Western imperialists, and on the other side, a Russian sub-imperialistic regime along with some of its allies. There should be no illusions regarding the so-called “National-Liberation War,” on either side. Certainly, some allusions to WWI can be made since that was the first imperialist world war in the era of capitalism. There are also some similarities with the Great Patriotic War when nationalistic representatives of the Ukrainian bourgeoisie (the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, OUN) sided with the Nazis against the Red Army for a miniscule chance to revive a so-called “independent” Ukrainian government. But today, the politico-economic alignment is somewhat different. Ukraine is led by its oligarchy and still has some remnants of its own subjectivity, but prefers to be absorbed by Western capital rather than Russian. Those who are stronger in this war will “milk the cow” to the very last drop. Ukraine today serves as weapons test field, for both West and East, a kind of “buffer zone” for a coming war between NATO and China. The most appropriate historical allusion is the collapse of Yugoslavia, which disintegrated for similar reasons. The process that began during Perestroika still aches, still affects the politics and economies of post-Soviet countries. The reasons for balkanization are the same – to maintain control of natural resources, human and industrial capital, markets, and strategic positions on a world map.
In March, RFU posted this statement to its telegram: “…we are against the Russian invasion of Ukraine, against the Ukrainian invasion of Russia, and against Russian provocations that attempt to further escalate the conflict. Yes, we and our Russian internationalist comrades support the position of defeatism, we oppose our own governments in a time of war. But by no means do we support the defeat of our countries by enemy states, the capitulation before them.” Can you expand on this position?
Our stance is the only stance on war a truly internationalist organization can have. For we understand the true nature of the current war – it is an imperialist war – we cannot in any way support either of the imperialist blocks, be it Russia or NATO, whose interests are defended today by the Ukrainian government. Therefore, we oppose the invasion of Ukraine as much as we oppose Western interference in the conflict and our own government’s actions. And we also refuse to answer whether it would be better if Ukraine or Russia wins. Both sides represent the interests of certain bourgeois cliques and in no way are advocating for the interests of the working class. Moreover, the proletariat is not a subject of any of the cliques’ politics and we, as an organization that strives to be the avant-garde of the working masses, simply can’t have an opinion on things that do not depend on us. We can’t force our own government to “defend” itself more fiercely, or to capitulate, or to strive for peace – a bourgeois government rarely listens to its own people. But we can, on the other hand, do everything that is in our power to destroy the bourgeoisie, to destroy capitalism – the sole cause of all contemporary wars. And we can do that only by declaring war on our own bourgeois government, on our own oligarchy as all Marxist-Leninist organizations should do if they are truly Marxist-Leninist and internationalist. So yes, as we have said, we support the position of defeatism, but by no means do we support the defeat of our countries by enemy states – we support the defeat of our state only by its own working class, its own working people. Our position is clear: No War But Class War!
Some claim that for Ukrainians this is a true “people’s war”: a massive swelling of patriotic enthusiasm has united the whole Ukrainian people, across regions and linguistic separations, against the Russian aggression. Do you feel this is an accurate depiction? If there are divides in attitude, how do they break down by class, gender, region, language, or so on?
Although bourgeois propaganda does all it can to make it look otherwise, this war by no means serves the interests of the Ukrainian people. Everything: television, internet, radio, books, music, educational institutions and programs, even language is put into service of the capitalist war machine. Every day and every hour propagandists do all they can to reduce people to mindless animals by playing on their emotions, on their fear, their anger and desperation. It has certainly united most Ukrainians, but it has united them through creating, rather than overcoming, the divisions among them. It has united them through chauvinism and bestial hatred. And that feeling doesn’t really differ between various groups. Today even amongst the youth – traditionally the most progressive category – the thought of dropping an atomic bomb on Russia and killing every Russian to the last wouldn’t be something abnormal or amoral. But even in such circumstances propaganda is unable to kill all thoughts of discontent, as can be seen in the recent protests of soldiers’ families in Kryviy Rih, and the riots caused by the popular youth movement ChVK Redan earlier, both of which were denounced as Russian information-psychological operations. Our target is the same as it always has been: to use propaganda and agitation to enlighten our people, to teach them how to fight for their rights, how to fight against the countless injustices of capitalism and imperialism as its highest stage. And one day, as we say here in Ukraine, “the freezer will overcome the television.”
Did some members of your organization join the Ukrainian military? Could you talk about their motivation? Why did they go? What are the prospects of revolutionary agitation among Ukrainian soldiers?
Yes, there are some members in our organization who were or are currently serving in the army or organizations associated with it. Some of them served as personnel officers even before the war and continue to do so now, some of them are just draftees who were unable to demobilize, and some even served as part of the Territorial Defense Forces for the sake of investigating the situation on the front. Willingly or unwillingly being dragged to the military, we use every situation we have to spread revolutionary propaganda and agitation amongst military masses who as a vast majority are just the same proletarians forced to fight for the profits and purses of their owners who don’t give a damn about the numbers of slaves dying every day. And even if for now the situation might seem dire, we can’t afford to give up and stop doing what we do, because we know that no revolution is ever carried out without the help of at least a part of the military.
The war in Ukraine has triggered a huge and ongoing debate about the need for the “decolonization” of Russia and the former Soviet space. In Ukraine, efforts at “decolonization” have coincided with a rapid and growing purge of Russian and Soviet presence in public space, in language, and in education. Practically no schools teach Russian language anymore, even in the predominantly Russian-speaking cities, and some institutions have even banned speaking Russian in private conversations. What is RFU’s stance on “decolonization” and such decolonization policies in Ukraine and how does it relate to your definitions of imperialism, colonialism, and self-determination in regards to Ukraine?
The “Decolonization of Russia” is just a myth perpetuated by Western liberals and Russian liberals. There are no significant “decolonization” initiatives among the non-Russian nations of the Russian Federation because those nations are not “colonized” at the moment. Of course, it doesn’t mean that the national question in the Russian Federation is solved perfectly. Anyway, tales of the “colonies” in the Russian Federation are an exaggeration.
These efforts at “decolonization” in other post-Soviet countries usually just amount to the destruction of Soviet/Russian cultural assets. Legalized vandalism, that’s all it is.
On recent language policies, it is worth noting that Russian can now only be used in informal settings. In any official environment, you are allowed to speak only Ukrainian. Now it is even forbidden to publicly perform or play music in Russian, although it is worth noting that a lot of Ukrainian artists use the Russian language in their works. It is also encouraged to hand over the books in Russian to be used as waste paper.
Such a policy is actually instituted to divide society as much as possible. The public masses will be distracted from their real social and economic problems while focused on this “language debate” which will not, in fact, make anyone’s lives any better. This is simply a new battleground to pit the Russian-speaking and Ukrainian-speaking populations against each other. This is not a culture uprising, as we are told from above, but the most chauvinistic policy, one aimed at destroying the influence of other cultures in the territory of Ukraine.
In general, the policy towards national minorities is very chauvinistic in Ukraine. For example, Rusyns, who live in Transcarpathia, and Moldovans, who inhabit the Odessa region, do not even have schools that teach classes in their native language and develop their own culture. This proves to us once again that the policy of Ukraine in relation to the national question is extremely chauvinistic and assimilationist.
Our task as a Marxist-Leninist organization is to expose the chauvinistic politics of the Ukrainian authorities and convey to the entire population of Ukraine that the workers of different nationalities have nothing to fight over and instill internationalism values.
Ukraine has embarked on anti-Communist policies since 2014 and, in general, the political climate today there is hostile to the left. What prospects do you see for a Marxist-Leninist organization in Ukraine? What strains of Marxism seem the most relevant to that project?
It is worth noting that the state is far from hostile to all leftists. Different leftists have quite different positions. For example, there is us, the RFU, who are in favor of turning this imperialist war into a civil war for the establishment of a socialist system in Ukraine through revolution. The state has many reasons to be against us and it would not oppose dealing away with us if such an opportunity presented itself. However, there are also pro-government “leftists” who are not obstructed by the authorities. The state is quite loyal to such “leftists” and often it does not obstruct them, because such people are beneficial to the authorities.
For the development of a Marxist-Leninist organization, we need to further work on theory and invest more money into advertising in order to get more coverage among the population. It is also worth saying that after the war, the patriotic frenzy will begin to subside over time, and people will see how the Ukrainian authorities completely destroyed the social sphere and trampled the rights of workers into the mud. Therefore, we will get a great opportunity for organizing workers into trade unions and for their further agitation. This will be a strong backbone for building the future vanguard party of the workers.
The international left tends to perceive Ukraine through an extremely polarized lens, either denouncing it as a one-dimensional “fascist junta” or casually glossing over evidence of growing far-right groups. Indeed, accusations of “fascism” are variously lodged against Ukraine or Russia by various leftist groups depending on their attitude towards the war, though rarely against both by the same accusers. In your public statements, RFU has criticized both Ukrainian fascism and Russian fascism. On your telegram, RFU wrote: “…it’s time to take off the rose-colored glasses of supposedly weakening the influence of the ultra-right in society during the war. It is imperative to eradicate rashism, but this is the task primarily of the Russian communists. The task of the Ukrainian communists is to focus on their fascists. Whoever among the Ukrainian left thinks otherwise has taken the path of complicity with the fascists, which ends with the transformation into a fascist himself.” How would you define fascism in region? Are these opposed fascist groups different or of the same kind? How do you see this current wave of fascism in relation to women, gender, and LGBTQ+ issues? And as for the fight against fascism, what opportunities do you see for the Ukrainian and Russian left to work together in this respect?
The fight against fascism as we define it means first of all not surrendering to bourgeois ideologies. It’s impossible to fight fascism when you’re on one side with it. A communist is always internationalist, otherwise they are not a communist. Secondly, we must fight fascism in the heads of other people, id est, to engage in agitation and propaganda. All in all, the most important battlefield is the ideological battlefield.
As for the opportunities we see to work together with Russian communists, primarily, we can help and we do help each other in the media. Many Ukrainians learned about us thanks to the help of Russian comrades.
As for the different types of fascism, fascism is fascism. It doesn’t matter if it is German, Japanese, Chilean, Russian, or Ukrainian. In fact, fascism is an open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic, and most imperialist elements of financial capital. Different fascists may think differently about women, gender, and LGBTQ+, but that doesn’t change the essence of fascism. As for us, we consider all those issues as parts of the issue of the proletariat. No more no less. You cannot free women without freeing the working class. Period.
How would you compare the situation of the workers in Ukraine and in Russia since the war began? Are the current anti-labor policies in Ukraine an emergency wartime measure, a step down the path of authoritarian neoliberalism, or something else? What do you see as the future conditions of the Ukrainian working class?
If we compare the position of Ukrainian and Russian workers since the beginning of the war, then the Ukrainian working class has been dealt a clearly greater blow.
According to the ILO, Ukraine has lost 4.8 million jobs since the start of the war, according to various sources, unemployment in Ukraine now stands at about 30%, and the NBU predicts that in 2023 the unemployment rate will remain at 26%.
There are several reasons for this level of unemployment:
A) Many enterprises were simply destroyed and there may be no analogues in Ukraine. As a result: workers cannot find a job in their field.
B) A huge number of people were forced to leave their hometowns and go wherever they can. Even those who moved to other Ukrainian cities rather than abroad very often cannot find a job for various reasons. The state also promised to involve those people in various public works that would be paid with a minimum wage, but in practice this has not been implemented.
C) The government untied the hands of employers. Now, since the outbreak of war, a worker can be fired much more easily. Earlier, in order to dismiss a person, permission was required from the elected body of the trade union, but now this permission is not needed and there is practically nothing that can stop the employer from lawlessness. We will return to the amendments to the labor code later.
D) In Ukraine, the system of military draft notices is in complete chaos. Now the employer must transfer information about his employees to the military registration and enlistment office; moreover, the draft notices can now be issued through the employer. In this regard, many men are forced to change their place of work to army service. Because of this, male workers often do not want to get official contracts, in order to avoid the draft. This contributes to the fact that people are employed informally, which means that many social guarantors simply disappear, making workers more vulnerable to violations of their rights.
Also, since the beginning of the war, there have been many amendments to the labor code of Ukraine. Strikes have been banned, night shift hours have been extended, employers can fire workers without union approval, and so on. All this contributes to workers’ fear for their jobs and the inability to organize themselves normally. It also gives a huge leverage to entrepreneurs who can be gods of their workplaces without any restrictions.
In Russia, there was nothing like that. No significant restrictions were introduced, the only thing is that it has become more difficult for trade unionists and local communists to work, because they are trying to bring any non-compliant persons to criminal liability, but we have the same in our country. In the Russian Federation, there was even a recent sensational strike by employees of the Wildberry chain, so the situation there is not as sad as it is here.
If we talk about the Ukrainian working class in the future, then we can perfectly observe how the Ukrainian elite is trying to destroy the rights of workers in our country, and it will try to do it again. The situation of the workers will be terrible: they will be repressed, and everything will be done to disorganize them. However, this situation may come in handy since such lawlessness will force the workers to look at the state from a different angle, and this will help us to successfully carry out communist agitation and propaganda amongst the masses.
In recent months the war has seemed to mostly stagnate. What do you think the future holds for the war? For Ukraine after the war? What would victory for Ukraine mean?
It is challenging to say how the war will end. The war, in fact, is now protracted. In the media every now and then, both sides say that there is about to be a counter-offensive, but in fact there is none. In any case, if Ukraine wins, then at first there will be a jingoistic euphoria in society and the authorities will take advantage of this moment to finally destroy all their political opponents. However, in reality, Ukraine will not become richer from this, in fact, we will become even more dependent on the Western imperialists, which is already affecting the material well-being of people, and will have an even greater impact in the future. The authorities themselves also contribute to this by passing laws that destroy the social sphere.
Therefore, after the war Ukraine will be a poor and dependent authoritarian state, where there will be very good soil for the development of class consciousness amongst people.
For the working class, however, neither the victory of the Ukrainian, nor the victory of the Russian government will bring anything good or progressive. The bourgeoise will try to disorganize the working class even more, and in the event of some dissatisfied movements among the workers, the authorities will use terror against the workers. In principle, it is already in use. So, for example, in Zaporozhye, a strike of bus drivers who were not paid their salaries was stopped. The threat stood like this: “Either army or layoffs.” The situation was even worse with the Ukrainian sailors. Back in the summer, they held a rally in Odessa, because the sea is closed for civilians, and no one pays their salary. As a result, the rally was interrupted by the military registration and enlistment office, who tried to hand the draft notices to the male protestors, and it all ended with the fact that they detained one of the heads of the sailors’ union and denounced him as a “national traitor,” “Rashist” and so on. Of course, it is worth saying that during the war there have been occasions when the workers were able to stand up for themselves, but these two cases, as well as changes in the legislation, very well show what trend is going on in Ukraine, and what will happen if the Ukrainian authorities win. If the Russian authorities win, that will also not mean anything progressive for the working classes. We remember very well the experience of the LDNR, when they strangled the communist and workers’ movement. In the event of the victories of one of the participants, the workers and communists will receive nothing but poverty and terror, while the capitalists and their servants will bathe in gold.
The bourgeoisie will benefit from the victories. The Ukrainian bourgeoisie will keep their capital, perhaps they will even receive reparations from the Russian Federation. The Western bourgeoisie will benefit even more, because it was the West who sponsored and gave weapons to Ukraine in every possible way. The Russian competitor will be completely written out of the market in Ukraine. The European and American bourgeoisie will have even more room to expand their capital and influence. In the event of the victory of the Russian Federation, the Russian oligarchs will also destroy their competitor in the face of the EU and the United States on the territory of Ukraine, and Russian capital will dominate once again.
Recently much internal discussion on the left, particularly in the EU and North America, has centered on the issue of sending weapons vs. calling for peace. What’s your stance on that debate? How in your view can leftists in the so-called Global North and Global South support the Ukrainian left and the Ukrainian working class?
We oppose the supply of weapons from NATO. The Social Democrats criticize us for this, saying we are playing into the hands of Russian imperialism.
Not really. On the contrary, those who advocate the supply of weapons to Ukraine contribute to the establishment of the hegemony of the Western imperialists in Ukraine. They do it not as a gesture of goodwill, but because the Western bourgeoisie first of all experiences a certain economic benefit from all of it (the arms trade is a rather profitable business, and it’s a good chance to make Ukraine a dependent country and remove the Russian competitor from Eastern Europe… clearly a divine providence), and secondly, a political motive. By supporting the supply of weapons, you automatically support the strengthening of another imperialist.
Moreover, as we see it, Ukraine is completely dependent on Western countries. We do not understand what such “leftists” are counting on. Apparently, they want even more debt, decay, and impoverishment for our country, as we fail to find any other explanation.
One cannot defeat the imperialism of one bloc by using the imperialism of another bloc. In such an imperialist war, there is no room for the victory of regular citizens, except a revolution. Furthermore, those arms supplies do not help our ultimate goal, yet they continuously spill the blood of our brothers and sisters across all nations. And for us, it should not matter if we overthrow a pro-Russian or pro-Western government.
Therefore, to truly defeat imperialism, we must carry out a socialist revolution and defend our military-industrial complex, which has been destroyed by the capitalist regime in 30 years of “independence.” Precisely when private ownership of the means of production is abolished and the dictatorship of the proletariat is established, only then will we be able to truly defeat imperialism, both Russian and Western.