Two interesting articles by Kavita Krishnan are below.
The author explains :
My article in The Hindu on what’s at stake for Ukraine and the world. I try to get all my material on Ukraine from the horse’s mouth: I just read Putin, Dugin, Vance, Mearsheimer really thoroughly – and they confirm all that I’m saying, without even bothering to disguise their intent. There can’t be more reliable and irrefutable sources. The article attached is based on reading Mearsheimer himself saying Putin’s top peace condition is a puppet regime in Kyiv, since liberal democracy in Ukraine is an “existential threat to Russia”.
Kavita Krishnan
The second article examines the recent electoral defeat of Viktor Orbán in Hungary
A major anti-fascist conference, which attracted nearly 7000 people from all over the world, took place in the Brazilian city of Porto Alegre From March 26 to 29, 2026.
The ENSU (European Network for Solidarity with Ukraine) and the Fourth International were present.
Two statements – issued by the Fourth International and ENSU representative Alfons Bech, are below.
1. The Anti-Fascist and Anti-Imperialist Conference in Porto Alegre: Great achievements, challenges and opportunities
The first anti-fascist conference for the sovereignty of peoples was a unique experience, nowhere else on the planet has anything like this been achieved. It represented a broad anti-fascist and anti-imperialist front, going far beyond revolutionary organizations. Nevertheless, it had limitations, stemming from the difficulties faced by internationalist resistance movements. – Manuel Rodriguez Banchs, Penelope Duggan, Israel Dutra, Antoine Larrache, João Machado, Reymund de Silva and Eric Toussaint, members of the Fourth International Bureau and International Committee.
Nearly 7,000 people took part in the opening demonstration, with a significant presence of Fourth International organizations. We witnessed the militant fervour of the World Social Forums of the heyday and of the 2003 anti-war movement, in which thousands of people from very different backgrounds come together and discuss everything. These are the kind of militant moments in which shared understandings and common objectives are forged, and in which the consciousness of the militant vanguard is shaped.
Dishonesty of Many Campists About China – Progressive International’s Adulation of “Whole-Process Democracy” Celebrates Capitalist Party-States
Ashley Smith Comments :
The dishonesty and delusion of today’s campists about China is truly astonishing. In one publication, a couple of authors deny the mass repression and internment of Uyghurs. In another, two more embarrass themselves by celebrating the capitalist police state as a socialist democracy. How can this pass as Marxist analysis? How can anyone on the left take this seriously?
Ashley Smith facebook page
Brian Hioe writes :
Progressive International’s Adulation of “Whole-Process Democracy” Celebrates Capitalist Party-States
Chinese Autocrat Xi Jinping With British Forelock-Tuggers, David Cameron (ex Prime Minister) and his Queen – Say Nothing About Human Rights
A RECENT ARTICLE by Paweł Wargan and Jason Hickel, published by the Progressive International, is adulatory about what it claims to be “whole-process democracy” in China. Nevertheless, interrogating the claims of the article finds that these claims to be in themselves contradictory.
“Whole-process democracy” is a term that apologists of the Chinese Communist Party have increasingly embraced in past years, as a term to describe what they claim to be the superiority of the Chinese party-state. Supposedly, rather than serving as a means of social control, the party-state serves to concentrate the democratic will as part of what is termed “whole-process democracy” or the “mass line.”
Of course, this claim is fanciful. Almost every single state under the sun claims that its political system is one that most perfectly embodies the democratic will of the people–and yet many of these states are, of course, authoritarian.
Wargan and Hickel gesture in grandiose fashion toward the usual claims about the wonders of Chinese modernization, while suggesting that it is because of the people’s participation in “whole-process democracy” that this resulted in a development process in which the people’s will was respected. But there is little, if anything, to suggest that this is true in China.
Globally, the Russian government has gained from this war because the price of oil has increased, and the Trump administration has lifted sanctions on Russia’s sale of oil. Russia has also gained because the anti-missile systems that Ukraine and Europe were buying from the U.S. to help defend Ukraine against Russia’s brutal imperialist invasion of that country are now going to the Middle East. Russia is also helping the Iranian government by sharing secret information about U.S. targets. The Chinese government has also gained from this war, because the U.S. government will pay less attention to the Pacific Region and might even allow China to proceed with its plans to take over Taiwan.
Frieda Afary, ESSF, March 15 2026
IV. What Can International Progressives Do Now? First: Do anything you can to stop this war. Educate, speak out, protest, put pressure on your government representatives and independent intellectuals. In the case of the United States, public opinion is currently 60% against this war. Most people don’t want to send their children to fight in the Middle East. Half the adult population is opposed to the Trump administration’s attacks on and detention/deportation of innocent immigrants. There is also a great deal of anger about the ways in which mostly wealthy men including Trump, other politicians and even academics have collaborated with and benefited from the late Jeffrey Epstein’s network for trafficking of women and girls for rape and sexual abuse. All of these questions need to be addressed in articulating an anti-war message. Second: Reach out to progressives in the Middle East or Middle Eastern progressives abroad. Do not limit yourself to talking only about one struggle or one country in the Middle East. Third: Oppose campism, take a clear stand against all global and regional capitalist-imperialist powers and defend the rights and humanity of the peoples that these powers are oppressing. Fourth: Address key issues that are holding back our struggles: racial and ethnic discrimination, patriarchy, capitalist exploitation, and capitalist alienation.
Thanks to Duncan Chapel for the post below, and to Gregor Kerr for drawing our attention to the latest reactionary political message posted by the former Irish MEP’s Mick Wallace and Clare Daly
Thanks also to Europe Solidaire Sans Frontieres for a much better assessment of the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei :
Respect to the Ayatollah: Mick Wallace and the Logic of Campism
On Sunday evening, while watching Torino v Lazio, a former left MEP posted his solidarity with the Supreme Leader of a state that had just killed seven thousand of its own citizens.
This is what campism looks like when it stops pretending. Mick Wallace, until 2024 an Irish MEP from the United European Left, posted the following to Facebook on the evening of 2 March 2026, apparently from a football stadium in Turin:
“Respect to Iran. Respect to Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Shame on the Political Class + Media who refuse to call out the lawless Terrorism of Western Imperialism + Zionism.” The hashtag was #TorinoLazio. Let us be precise about what has been said here. Not “oppose the bombing.” Not “solidarity with the Iranian people.”
I take this opportunity to recommend this excellent article from Kavita Krishnan which she published in early December. (see below).
Noam Chomsky could afford terrible statements about the systematic mass murders and genocidal wars in Cambodia, Bosnia, Rwanda and Syria. Even during the Russian mass terror against the Ukrainian people, he raised more understanding of the aggressor than the attacked population.
His support for Epstein reveals the same pattern. The Indian feminist Marxist Kavita Krishnan puts his behaviour into the broader context.
This email from Chomsky to Epstein proves that he wasn’t just giving his friend the benefit of doubt, not knowing the full nature and extent of his crimes. He was actively colluding with Epstein, strategising about how to deal with the revelations about those crimes in the press.
It’s not that Chomsky was incapable of empathy – he was, but he had empathy only for the unfortunate predator, victimised by a journalist who was nuisance enough to put faces and voices to a gaggle of female accusers generating a ‘hysteria’ of solidarity.
What Chomsky calls ‘horrible’ treatment of Epstein by the press, was the November 2018 piece in the Miami Herald, ‘Perversion of Justice’ – Julie Brown’s stellar investigative journalism exposing the secret deal struck a decade ago that betrayed scores of children trafficked and abused by him, who had found the courage to help police build a cast iron case.
This email must go on his tombstone, it must feature in every obituary when he passes, it is not just a stain on his political legacy, it IS integral to his legacy. His collusion with Epstein is a result of the same abstract geopolitical doctrine that passed for his politics, one that allowed him to deny the humanity of victims of horrific mass crimes against humanity – in Cambodia, Bosnia, Rwanda, Syria, Ukraine, China.
(Edited the post for accuracy, people pointed out he was calling his accusers hysterical, not the girls. He does use hysteria again, to refer to the public response to accusations of abuse of women.)
“Trump’s bombing attack on Venezuela must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. The apparent forced removal and kidnapping of its president Maduro is a war crime.”
The statement continued:
“Only the peoples of Latin America can decide their own fate and choose their own government and should be able to do so without interference. There can be no support for US imperialism in Latin America or for the crimes of Trump.”
I agree with every word.
Some Similar Reactions :
“all those who vociferously condemn the US actions, and who protest against it, should be equally vociferous in their condemnation of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. Unfortunately far too many on the left don’t apply that logical consistency” Gregor Kerr
“Marco Rubio (US Secretary of State) is reportedly saying Maduro will stand trial in US courts.
Which means it’s now the US administration’s position that US courts can hold foreign presidents, but not the US president, accountable for crimes.” Link :
Marco Rubio is reportedly saying Maduro will stand trial in US courts.Which means it’s now the US administration’s position that US courts can hold foreign presidents, but not the US president, accountable for crimes.
But some parts of the British left offer policies which pretend to be anti-imperialist, but they stink.
It reminds this writer of bad old days in the 1960’s and 1970’s when many left organisations – from the Labour party to Official Sinn Féin and the Communist party – refused to practice solidarity with comrades in the six-county part of Ireland because they disagreed with the policies of Sinn Féin and the Irish Republican Army (IRA), the main republican organisations which had a mass following.
We can not do anything about political mistakes made in the past – but we can learn from them and do better in the future. One big positive example from those days was the formation of the National H-Block-Armagh.
Readers interested. who like to burrow into useful political history, are invited to read this book review :
We take no joy criticising a young left-wing UK political figure who has often spoken up for workers’ rights and progressive causes. But these barely coherent comments from Zarah Sultana on Ukraine sum up much of what is wrong with her wing of the left: www.instagram.com/reel/DQT62ysjFKK
British Your Party MP’s Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana – Dodgy Ukraine policies on offer
First up – yes, Zelensky is no friend of Ukraine’s working class in the sense that his government pursues right-wing, neoliberal, anti-worker economic policies.
Unlike Zarah Sultana, we actually know something about this, since we are connected to Ukraine’s unions and have been actively involved in helping them fight these policies.
Greek politician Yanis Varoufakis is listed as a speaker at the BRICS Urban Future Forum 2025 to be held in Moscow, Russia, from September 17-18. Jeffrey Sachs was well recieved at last year’s event. Ilya Mateev wonders what Varoufakis hopes to achieve.
1. Education for Russians is good and right. I have no idea of “cancelling those living in Russia” – my approach is precisely the opposite. I do a great deal for education, discussion and bridge-building in Russia, though for obvious reasons I won’t write about this in detail. Overall, I am OBVIOUSLY in favour of any constructive activity involving those in Russia, and I consider this very important.
2. There are no problems with Varoufakis’s book being published in Russian. The book is rubbish and not worth the time spent on it, but that’s another conversation. The very fact of translation can only be welcomed.
3. Varoufakis is a public intellectual and even an activist (well, sort of). He had various options for engaging with Russians. He could have organised a closed Zoom event for Russian readers of his book and spoken with them candidly. After all, his DiEM25 [1] could have taken an interest in Russian opposition and left politics, Russian political prisoners, and so forth. Solidarity at the level of society and grassroots initiatives is both possible and valuable.
4. Varoufakis and his organisation did nothing of the sort. Instead, he went to the Moscow government’s urban planning forum. Such events are dubious in any country – they are thoroughly business establishment affairs, no place for leftists. In Russia there’s an additional factor – war, censorship, the impossibility of even asking a question without risk of criminal prosecution [2]. In such a situation, joining with bankers, developers, Chinese and Saudi surveillance companies is really beyond the pale.
5. Of course, Varoufakis does all this consciously. I think this is how he represents anti-imperialist struggle against the damned West and evil NATO (plus money, attention, first-class flights, etc.). This behaviour (whilst completely ignoring Russian grassroots initiatives) is precisely campism [3] – I’ll hang out with the Kremlin against the White House and Brussels. A dead end in political evolution.
6. The fact that I can’t even call on readers in Russia to ask Varoufakis some pointed question (because I have common sense) precisely demonstrates that he’s wrong to go and is engaging in nonsense. It’s shameful to speak at an event where the audience could get a two-year prison sentence [4] for their questions.
Ilya Mateev is one of the tens of thousands of anti-war Russians living in exile.
[1] DiEM25 (Democracy in Europe Movement 2025) is a pan-European political movement founded by Varoufakis in 2016, advocating for democratic reform of EU institutions and progressive economic policies
[2] Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the country has implemented increasingly harsh censorship laws, including criminalising “discrediting” the armed forces or spreading “fake news” about the war, with penalties of up to 15 years in prison
[3] Campism refers to the political tendency to reflexively support one geopolitical “camp” against another, often leading to uncritical backing of authoritarian regimes simply because they oppose Western powers
[4] Under current Russian law, individuals can face up to two years imprisonment for various speech-related offences, including “discrediting” the military or spreading information deemed “extremist”
Duncan Chapel, a revolutionary socialist based in Scotland, hosts a blog which explores big political and social changes in the world we live in.
The article below addresses many troubling developments on the left which have erupted in the 21st century. These trends exist everywhere – Duncan is very familiar with awful examples from the British state.
Readers on the left in in Ireland may be familiar with the example of “Counterfire” which is degenerating rapidly :
The red-brown disease can spread further without inoculation. Organizations at risk like Counterfire in Britain, while maintaining left-wing rhetoric, have consistently aligned with authoritarian positions internationally, acting as surrogates for Assad, Putin and Trump. Their opposition to supporting Ukrainian resistance and their hostility to transgender struggles reveals the logical endpoint of politics that prioritize “anti-Western” positioning over genuine solidarity with the oppressed.
Mapping the Conservative Left: Why Some Socialists Sound Like the Right
Four conservative left tendencies: each represents a different form of capitulation
The rise of the far-right across Europe and North America has prompted urgent soul-searching on the left. From Trump’s return to power to the growth of Alternative for Germany (AfD), from Giorgia Meloni’s ascendancy in Italy to the surge of Reform UK, reactionary forces are capitalizing on widespread social discontent. Yet a troubling phenomenon has emerged alongside this rightward shift: sections of the left itself have begun adopting positions that sound suspiciously similar to those of their supposed political opponents.
This “conservative left” represents a fundamental betrayal of socialist principles. Rather than offering a genuine alternative to capitalist crisis, these currents have absorbed key elements of right-wing discourse—from economic nationalism and anti-immigrant sentiment to cultural traditionalism and geopolitical authoritarianism. Understanding this phenomenon is crucial for any socialist strategy that seeks to build genuine working-class unity against our real enemies: the capitalist class and their political representatives.
Tomás Ó Flatharta 