Richard Barbrook retweeted
🇫🇷 FLASH - LFI a dévoilé le programme de Jean-Luc Mélenchon pour la présidentielle de 2027. Parmi les propositions :
- Autoriser jusqu’à 3 jours d’arrêt maladie autodéclaré, sans consulter de médecin.
- Accorder 7 jours de congé après le décès d’un ami.
- Porter le SMIC à 1.700€ net par mois, soit une hausse de 220€.
- Ramener l’âge de départ à la retraite de 64 à 60 ans, avec une retraite à taux plein après 40 années de cotisation.
- Réduire progressivement la durée du travail à 32 heures par semaine.
- Instaurer un service écologique obligatoire de 9 mois pour les moins de 25 ans, rémunéré au SMIC.
- Faire rembourser les soins à 100% par la Sécurité sociale.
- Prendre en charge les séances de psychothérapie des moins de 26 ans.
- Fixer un plafond de 12 millions d’euros pour les héritages.
- Augmenter les APL de 10% pour aider à payer les loyers.
- Bloquer les prix de certains produits essentiels afin de limiter les hausses excessives.
- Revaloriser les salaires des fonctionnaires.
- Garantir un revenu minimum aux jeunes grâce à une allocation.
- Proposer aux étudiants des repas à 1€.
- Limiter à 1 pour 20 l’écart entre les rémunérations au sein d’une même entreprise.
- Soumettre les aides publiques aux entreprises à des engagements sociaux et écologiques.
- Rétablir l’ISF afin d’accroître l’imposition des grandes fortunes.
- Mettre en place la taxe Zucman pour taxer davantage les milliardaires.
- Répartir l’impôt sur le revenu en 14 tranches pour augmenter la contribution des plus riches.
- Engager une sortie progressive du nucléaire.
- Atteindre une production d’électricité issue à 100% des énergies renouvelables d’ici 2060.
- Interdire les vols entre 23h et 6h.
- Suspendre les zones à faibles émissions (ZFE), qui restreignent la circulation des véhicules les plus polluants dans certaines villes.
- Passer de la Ve à la VIe République en donnant davantage de pouvoir aux citoyens.
- Supprimer le 49.3, qui permet au gouvernement de faire adopter un texte sans vote.
- Intensifier la lutte contre les discriminations, notamment au sein de la police.
- Reconnaître comme crime d’État le massacre des Algériens du 17 octobre 1961.
- Renégocier les traités européens et refuser l’application de certaines règles européennes jugées incompatibles avec le programme.
- Quitter progressivement le commandement militaire intégré de l’OTAN.
- Soutenir la création d’un État palestinien aux côtés d’Israël.
Richard Barbrook retweeted
Happy to share a new journal and my new long essay, “The Broken Mirror of the World in Crisis.”
The renowned Ukrainian-Canadian historian John-Paul Himka @HimkaJohn, who wrote, among other works, an exhaustive study of Ukrainian nationalists’ involvement in the Holocaust, is launching a new journal, The Ukrainian Forum. It will debate Ukraine’s “taboo” topics, which have become simply impossible to discuss properly in mainstream academic and intellectual venues because of nationalism and propaganda, in search of a possible “middle ground” between the forces that have been tearing Ukraine apart. I am very honored that my class analysis of post-Soviet Ukrainian politics was one of the inspirations for the journal. The journal is bilingual, in English and Ukrainian. You can read it in open access here: ukrainianforum.org/ufj/issue…
The first issue includes a big symposium, “Has Anything Gone Wrong in Ukraine?”, with contributions by John-Paul Himka, Mykhailo Minakov, Lucan Ahmad Way, William Risch, Anna Ivanova, Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe, and myself, as well as stand-alone essays by David R. Marples and Marco Carynnyk.
In my article, I bring together the concepts I have been working on over the last decade - political capitalism, post-Soviet class conflict, deficient revolutions, Caesarism - in an attempt to outline a coherent comprehensive narrative of (post-)Soviet Ukrainian dynamics leading to sociopolitical disintegration, the war, and the national catastrophe, understood as an integral part and a driver of global fragmentation. In doing so, I further advance the theoretical framework of the dual crisis of hegemony and social revolution.
Richard Barbrook retweeted
The Broken Mirror of the World in Crisis
Volodymyr Ishchenko
ukrainianforum.org/ufj/artic…
“The dominant narrative about post-Soviet transformation, which judges it against the benchmark of Western liberal democracy, is intellectually, politically, and morally bankrupt, a bankruptcy ever more evident as the international order that claims to embody that ideal enters a profound crisis. This essay aims to outline an alternative comprehensive narrative about Ukraine and the post-Soviet countries in general, not as an anomaly, but as the current norm – and even more so as the vanguard of the world in crisis. The starting point is not the unfulfilled promise of unity and integration but the factual reality of prolonged national, regional, and global disintegration. The argument advanced here is that Ukraine’s catastrophe is fundamentally a product and a factor of a dual crisis: the crisis of revolution and the crisis of hegemony. On one side, the degeneration of the Soviet revolution, which built modern Ukraine, and its centrifugal disintegration, which defined the main lines of the post-Soviet class conflict that tore Ukraine apart. On the other, the parallel and also interconnected decay of the US-centered international order that the prevailing part of Ukraine’s elites fatally staked the nation’s future upon. Its appeal rested on the hegemonic project of “democratic capitalism” – one that promised, and partially delivered (foremost in the post-WWII West), social and political integration for the majority and upward mobility for the “deserving,” and whose waning credibility has defined the dominant narrative of the post-Cold War era. Through the interconnection of these two crises – of bourgeois hegemony and of the social revolution that was supposed to overcome it but instead made it possible – Ukrainians were among the crucial agents in both the creation and the destruction of that order. Ironically and tragically, the more urgently they tried to enter it – dismantling the legacy of the very revolution that had profoundly shaped the “civilization” they sought to join – the faster that order itself was disintegrating. Ukraine’s catastrophe both reflected the world crisis and accelerated it.”
Richard Barbrook retweeted
The SBU is responding to the anti-conscription riots in Kiev, and earlier in Lviv, with something approaching a counterinsurgency operation: about 130 people have been identified and forced to apologize on video, and the women who tried to rescue tortured men and deserters held for ransom in an illegal Azov prison have been arrested without bail.
Meanwhile, the anti-corruption bodies are going after top SBU officials for involvement in a large-scale drug cartel and scam call-center business. When NABU detectives came to search an SBU general, he threatened them with a firearm.
Meanwhile, the SBU is searching a military intelligence (HUR) officer in the investigation into the high-profile attempted assassination of a Ukrainian businessman in Monaco.
For over a decade, the Western public sphere, including a big part of specialized academia, presented post-Euromaidan Ukraine as nation-building, democratizing, and progressively reforming and strengthening the state and civil society on the path to European “civilization.”
The reality after this decade looks more like Latin America in the 1970s: states deeply penetrated by the mafia, a comprador bourgeoisie, fascist paramilitaries, and extreme anticommunism, only without any communist guerrillas.
In my new article “The Broken Mirror of the World in Crisis,” just out in the brand-new journal The Ukrainian Forum, I offer a theoretical and longue-durée perspective on the disintegration of Ukraine’s state and society, which both reflects and advances the crisis of the order on which a big part of the Ukrainian elites fatally staked the nation’s future. I discuss the role of political capitalism, post-Soviet class conflict, and the deficient Maidan revolutions, and how all of these lead, in particular, to a dramatically weaker Ukrainian capacity for mobilization (in contrast to Russia), which underlies the escalating domestic mess and may define the outcome of the war.
Read it here: ukrainianforum.org/ufj/artic…
Richard Barbrook retweeted
French students and workers sing the Internationale, communist and socialist anthem.
Richard Barbrook retweeted
German liberals: "We must take to the streets to stop the Nazis from the AfD!"
Also German liberals: "What Nazis in Ukraine? Let's send them more money and weapons!"
Richard Barbrook retweeted
The indomitable girl who captured him was waiting for him thirty years later
On September 21, 1965, a 17-year-old Vietnamese girl named Nguyễn Thị Kim Lai was photographed escorting an enormous American airman through the countryside. His hands were tied behind his back. His head was bowed. She was carrying a rifle.
His name was William Andrew Robinson. He was 22, a helicopter mechanic and flight engineer in the US Air Force. The previous day his helicopter had been shot down during a mission to rescue another American airman.
Kim Lai was tiny. She weighed 37 kilograms. She had only finished seventh grade before joining the local militia. Her home province, Hà Tĩnh, was being bombed relentlessly by American aircraft.
According to her recollection, she discovered Robinson hiding among the rocks in a forest. Frightened by his enormous size, she fired three warning shots. He surrendered. Other militia members arrived and tied his hands.
A photographer named Phan Thoan captured the extraordinary contrast between the two.
The photograph became famous throughout Vietnam. It appeared on postage stamps. A celebrated Vietnamese poet wrote a poem about it. The image travelled around the world, becoming a symbol of a small country resisting a superpower.
Robinson was taken to prison.
He spent 2,703 days in captivity. Seven years, four months and twenty-three days. Much of it in isolation, enduring brutal conditions and torture. He was finally released on February 12, 1973.
Kim Lai became a nurse. She married, had three children and eventually became a grandmother.
Thirty years after their first encounter, in September 1995, she was playing with her grandchildren at a neighbour's house when someone came to tell her that foreigners were looking for her.
She returned home.
Standing there was William Andrew Robinson.
He had come back to Vietnam with a Japanese documentary crew. He had apparently wanted to find her for years but had never been able to afford the journey.
She recognised him immediately.
According to her recollection, he approached and embraced her before she could greet him.
They talked about their lives. Their families. Everything that had happened since those few minutes in a Vietnamese forest.
They even returned to the place where he had been captured.
Robinson reportedly expressed the hope that there would never be another photograph like theirs.
There is another photograph of them, taken during that reunion.
She is looking up at him. Smiling. He is standing beside her, still towering over her. No handcuffs. No rifle.
With no US government throwing away the youth of its own citizens to forcefully decide the future of Vietnam both can stand tall side by side.
Richard Barbrook retweeted
ACTE III DU 31 OCTOBRE : LE RECAP' EN IMAGES D'UNE JOURNÉE DE FOLIE
C'est le meilleur Halloween de l'histoire, et une journée de détermination hors du commun.
Notre article à lire ici : contre-attaque.net/2026/11/0…
Richard Barbrook retweeted
« On fait caca sur Bardella
On fait pipi sur les nazi
On fait popo sur les fachos »
Vous connaissez déjà cette mélodie entêtante dont tout le monde parle (voir article @20Minutes) depuis quelques jours, et bien je viens d’apprendre qu’il en existait une version « opéra » depuis aujourd’hui
Via @EmmaRobinsonss
Richard Barbrook retweeted
Replying to @LulaOficial @JLMelenchon
Richard Barbrook retweeted
Happy Afrofuturism Day! Cybersalon Afrofuturism chat on “Reclaiming Cyberspace”, with Douglas @rushkoff David Bering-Porter, Paul Miller aka @djspooky Derek Richards @rizomorph , @richardbarbrook and @OramStephen hosted by Eva Pascoe youtu.be/5eBJEx7fDnA?si=1Bal… via @YouTube
Richard Barbrook retweeted
Our intro video from our appearance at Macklemore's "Free Palestine" gig last night in Dublin. 💚🤍🧡🤝🇵🇸
🎵 Cormac Begley 🔥
Richard Barbrook retweeted
Les images de Mélenchon que vous ne verrez jamais à la télé.. ❤️
#Melenchon2027
Richard Barbrook retweeted
The history of the conflict did not start in 2021-2022. Influential groups in the Western elite saw Ukraine (in fact, all the Eastern Partnership countries, but Ukraine above all) as essential to preventing the consolidation of a sovereign center of capital accumulation in the post-Soviet region under an untamed Russian elite in possession of vast strategic resources and nuclear arsenal. The “democracy promotion” and regime-change agenda has been there for a long time. It is wrong to read the path to the war, and the inability to get out of it, as just the result of a series of miscalculations.
I've been making that point for years now and I don't think I've convinced anyone, but as much as I'm critical of US policy toward Russia/Ukraine in the post-Cold War era, I don't buy the theory that the US is cynically using Ukraine to weaken Russia and that the West's military commitment to Ukraine is the result of such a cynical calculation.
I think what happened is that the US and the West in general expected Ukraine to be defeated pretty quickly if there was a war, which would have led to extensive sanctions but not the full decoupling that happened (Europe would have continued to buy Russian gas in particular), but then Ukraine didn't cooperate by not getting its ass kicked immediately.
Once that didn't happen and the Istanbul talks collapsed, it became politically impossible for the West to let the Ukrainians, who up until then had been resisting with minimal Western military support, to refuse to help them and let them be defeated, not because they were no longer willing to fight, but for a lack of ammunition.
So we sent them ammunition and gradually we developed a commitment to Ukraine's defense that didn't exist initially and was never anticipated. In other words, I don't think Western officials made a commitment to Ukraine's defense because of those arguments, but rather I think they made those arguments because they had made a commitment to Ukraine's defense for other reasons.
I'm not saying that some people in the US foreign policy establishment don't genuinely buy this argument, plenty of them do at this point and some Russia hawks did even before the war (indeed you can see people making this kind of arguments going back to the 1990s), but I think it's mostly geopolitics-pilled rationalizations and I don't think those arguments played the causal role people ascribe to them.


























