Tuuktuuk

Naja... Ich bin selber ein Wähler von wechselsweise der finnischen Linke und den finnischen Grünen...

Aber... Seit etwa 2004/2005 fördert Putin aktiv die Rechtsradikalen. Und überalls in ex-UdSSR gibt es deswegen jetzt ein Nazi-Problem. In Rußland ist das Problem am schlimmsten, da es von dorter stammt, aber am bekanntesten ist es in der Ukraine. Dort nimmt es mit den Zahlen von Rechtsradikalismus und Antisemitismus seit 2014 ab, während die Zahlen im Rußland gestiegen sind. Je engere Beziehungen ein Land zu Rußland pflegt, desto mehr Geld haben dort die Nazis zur Verfügung.

Das bedeutet, dass obwohl die Linke in Deutchland gegen die Nazis sind, fördert ihre Rußlandbeziehung die Nazis in Deutschland so effizient, dass die Linke im Endeffekt den Nazis eher helfen.

Irgendwie hat man es in Deutschland vor 20 Jahren verpennt, dass Putin damals ein Nazi-Förderer geworden ist – obwohl das zumindest in Finnland damals in Zeitungen zu lesen war, und bestimmt auch in Deutschland! Die enge Rußlandbeziehung der Linke hat dazu gebracht, dass echt wenige deutschen es verstehen, dass Maidan im wesentlichen ein antifaschistisches Projekt war. Und dass dagegen zu sein – das ist passive Faschismus.

You probably meant this is an answer to me, so I'll reply.

What I mean is that for example France supporting undemocratic regimes in Africa in order to get cheaper minerals and cheaper cocoa and cheaper bananas is colonialism. It does not mean that it is as bad as what France used to do in the past. And it's not even as bad as France still retaining several actual colonies. But it is still bad. And it is colonialism. It would be colonialism even if France did not have any formal colonies around the world.

And when China does in 2025 what France is now, in 2025, doing with now-independent countries that used to be its formal colonies, then both of those are colonialism in the same manner. If what China is doing is okay, then that part of what France is doing is also okay. And I do not like the idea of accepting European countries' colonialism, not even a little bit.

Being bombed is worse than being economically abused, absolutely. But it does not mean that abusing a country economically is okay. I do not like it at all that cocoa and bananas are as cheap here in Europe as they are. That luxury of low prices is coming from other people's lack of well-being. And someone doing something even worse does not make this bad thing any better. At least in my opinion.

For what I understand, in reality we two think much more alike than you think we do.

You calling me dishonest is not colonialism. You stubbing your toe is not colonialism.

You, my friend, are defending colonialism and I am opposing your view that colonialism is okay as long as it's done by a country on a list of "countries allowed to behave in a colonialist manner" that you are curating. And somehow that makes me a colonialism apologist?

Haha, everyone is a fascist now?

Yeah, the French colonies, such as French Guyana, are not okay. But neither are the things France is doing to many of the countries that used to be France's formal colonies. Even though those countries are not colonies of France, what France is doing to them is colonialism all the same. Or do you disagree?

Also, calling me "dumb" was impolite of you, even though factually correct. Calling me a fascist was outright weird.

I'm sorry but you sound like the people who call DOGE "auditors" who "look for corruption and end it".

China has been trying to get into big infrastructure projects in Finland as well, with the precisely same kind of loan arrangements. And it's very good that we declined the offer. We were a colony of Sweden for 600 years. We don't need to become one of China's now.

What you're saying suggests that France's current behaviour is not colonialist. What are your thoughts on that?

Lemmyssä vähän hämmentää, ettei oikein ole selvää, kuka näitä instansseja ylläpitää, millä motiiveilla ja millä rahalla. Kun instanssia pyörittää yksityishenkilö omalla kustannuksellaan, jotenkin olettaa että se voi periaatteessa vaan ottaa ja kadota taivaan tuuliin.

Nothing's wrong with building infrastructure. Why would it be?

What's wrong is the financing scheme that makes the infrastructure effectively Chinese national property. And when China can decide how and when a country's infrastructure can be used, China gets a lot of influence in that country's domestic politics. And it does use that influence.

USA destroying Iraq doesn't make China any less colonial. China helping rebuild Iraq in a way that will make Iraq a vassal of China... That does make China more colonial.

USA should absolutely focus on itself. And it will do it much more than before, because now that it has decided to cut its international soft power, it does not really have other options, does it? :)

Wie, denn?

How do you know everyone knows its bullshit?

When I was in the Russia – my last time was as late as 2019 – the shocking thing was to notice that people there really think their country is somehow a good and exemplatory place! At least in the Russia people should by all logic understand it's all bullshit. But in practical terms they don't. They go with it.

Does he not have a way to replace the state agents with ones that will do his bidding?