https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/talks-could-have-ended-war-ukraine | Archived
At the first meeting, the Russians presented a set of harsh conditions, effectively demanding Ukraine’s capitulation. This was a nonstarter. But as Moscow’s position on the battlefield continued to deteriorate, its positions at the negotiating table became less demanding. So on March 3 and March 7, the parties held a second and third round of talks […]
Regarding territorial issues, parts of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions of Donbass would remain under Russian control
Moscow ostensibly wanted Kiev to slash the size of its army to 85,000 people, while Ukraine insisted on retaining a strength of 250,000.
Edit: Replaced “reporter” with “politician” in the post title
Edit2: Changed title from “microphone cut” to “segment cut short” in the title
So you’ve now moved the goal post from supporting far right parties to “radical” parties. Interesting.
The far right isnt a radical party?
No because western Europe and Amerikkka are fascist as fuck. Radical would be outside the norm. But please accuse me of pedantry again.
Are you claiming that all “democratic” nations are inherently fascist nations at any point of their economic/political development?
Did I say all? No I was pretty specific.
And what differentiates a fascist western “democracy” from a non fascist democracy.
Dictatorship of a different class? This is fundamental Marxist theory, states are a dictatorship of one of several classes. You can’t have democracy for the proletariat (vast majority of people) in a state that is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie (small, powerful minority). Note: “dictatorship” of a class means that a state is organized to advance the interests of that class, not “dictatorship” as in “opposite to democracy” or “governed by one person”.
Therefore, even in principle liberal “democracies” cannot be democratic. It’s not a decay of democracy, it’s an impossibility for it to have ever existed in those cases.