USSRand imperialism

File: FB_IMG_1490787419068.jpg (23KB, 720x379px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 720x379px

Considering the fact that they had attempted invading Poland, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Azerbaijan, and the Ukraine I'd say yeah. Soviet foreign policy was always imperialistic.

File: 1471639843169.gif (576KB, 558x637px) Image search: [Google]

576KB, 558x637px

>>2593309
>liberating countries from capitalist exploitation
>imperialism

>>2593309
Yes. Anyone denying it is a brainwashed tankie.

To give a comparison: Back in the 70's or 80's, when the Ethiopian hunger was at it's peak, Yugoslavia - the de-facto leader of NAM and supposedly the only "powerful" country fighting against both Soviet and US imperialism, sent to Ethiopia some military ships, instead of food supplies, or other type of humanitarian aid. This blew up into a huge deal here, especially among the socialist youth, who was criticising the "doublethink" of the party leaders who claimed to fight imperialism, but were doing all the shit that other imperialist countries were doing. And that was one case, SU did this pretty much to every country they got their hands on.

>>2593309
Countering and trying to neutralize the spread of American imperialism is not imperialism in and of itself.

>>2593309
>is it accurate to qualify USSR's foreign policy as "Soviet Imperialism" ?


Sure.

> Was the Winter War an attempt to reconquer a former vassal state ? Or was it only about establishing a safety zone around Leningrad ?

This one's harder to say. The Soviets, of course claimed the latter, but they're not exactly the msot credible. On the other hand, they did stop when there was no pressing need, at the time, for them to do so, as they were finally making advances against the Finns. You also have them more or less sticking to the MR pact conditions; they didn't go out from Bessarabia to overrun all of Romania, for instance.

While I wouldn't say it's a certainty, I actually do lean towards the Soviets being honest in this one case, and that they weren't interested in a reconquest of Finland at that time.

>>2593359
>Invading nations that ceded from the Russian Empire to exert your will over them
>Lenin literally invading Mensheviks led Azerbaijan because they weren't under his Bolshevik control
>Sending arms and munitions to the Derg in Ethiopia knowing they were fucking monsters just because you'd have a little slice of Africa to fuck over the West.

>Not imperialism

Ask Poland, Ukraine, Finland, Azerbaijan, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Mongolia, and Hungary if they felt like all those Soviet invasions were imperialism or not.


Ask all those African and Latin American states if they felt like the USSR propping up dictators for the sake of waging a cold war with the US was imperilaism or not.

>>2593346
>>2593391
>>2593405

So I can pronounce the terms of "soviet imperialism" for my presentation about the winter war and not make a fool of myself ? What got me thinking about that was Keynes book about the post ww1 europe, he described USSR as the continuation of the Tsarist Empire.

>>2593359

well emperors also "liberated" countries from paganism to integrate them into their christian realm. The logics appear very similar if you replace a few words with capitalism, and socialism.

>>2593444
>So I can pronounce the terms of "soviet imperialism" for my presentation about the winter war and not make a fool of myself ?
If it is in high school, you can. If that's in some serious uni classes, then you should reconsider that, as you clearly lack the confidence. But I have an anecdote to support your theory: Before the war Russian composer Dmitrij Shostakovich was asked by some Soviet general to compose a military march that should be played while Soviet troops march through Helsinki.

>What got me thinking about that was Keynes book about the post ww1 europe, he described USSR as the continuation of the Tsarist Empire.
That would be wrong, USSR was hardly a continuation of the Empire. They had different standing in international relations, different worldview, different foreign policies, different leadership etc.

>>2593444
>So I can pronounce the terms of "soviet imperialism" for my presentation about the winter war and not make a fool of myself ?


If you can back it up with good sources and good arguments, sure. Can you?

>>2593444
Well considering the fact that the Russian Empire was essentially the Muscovites reigning over culturally and ethnically diverse peoples the USSR was baicually a continuation of it Ideology aside. Lenin literally justified invading Azerbaijan for their oil. They invaded sovereign nations that left the Russian Empire purely because they felt like it was rightful Russian territory. Which is in itself imperialistic. So yeah, given the USSR's history of imperialism before the winter war it was definitely done with imperialistic intentions. Like when they tried taking Poland and the Baltic States during the Russian Civil War.