The SBU accused them of being propagandists holding pro-Russian and pro-Belarusian views with the goal of destabilizing the internal situation in Ukraine and creating a “necessary information picture” for Russian and Belarusian channels.

During their trial, the brothers stated that “our case is completely fabricated from start to finish. What are we charged with? Pro-Belarussian views are being charged. We are being tried for our views. What kind of democracy can we talk about?”

Regarding the ban on KPU, Mykhail Kononovich had told Peoples Dispatch in an interview in February 2021, “I emphasize that the communist ideology, the idea, cannot be banned by any laws. So it is impossible to ban common sense and science. It is simply impossible to ban the Communist Party of Ukraine (KPU) because we are a party with more than a hundred years of history, a party that has an experience of subterranean struggles. We, communists, have fought and will continue to fight for the benefit of our people!”

In case you have misread. They never said what you claim, being communists and oppossing NATO is not some oxymoron that denies the other. In fact the position held by most communist parties in the Global South at the moment is this one, it is certainly the reality I've seen in Latinoamerica.

[–] harcesz@szmer.info 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pretty sure there's no communism in Belarus or Russia, so they are supporting invading states and not communism.

[–] gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Both communist parties in Belarus and Russia are the second party with most members and are highly active in comparison to for example here in Latinamerica after the instalment of fascists regime by the US, where most were massacred in secret torture houses. So I'm not sure what you mean by there's no communism in Belarus or Russia.

[–] harcesz@szmer.info 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

From what I'm seeing support was voiced for the state, not for it's communist party. In Russia they have 57 out of 450 in the lower chamber and 4 out of 178 in the higher chamber, in Belarus it's 11 out of 110 and 17 out of 64 (thanks to over-representation of state sanctioned trade unions, independent ones were destroyed after last elections). So what exact power over state politics do you expect they have and how representative is these states policy for communism?

I get the NATO bashing, but thinking either Russia or Belarus have anything in common with the concept of communism, other than history, is hilarious and strongly encourage you to discuss this with Russia-based communists. Wont go into discussing the nature of post-soviet communist parties as I have no time to educate westeners on the complex realities of this region, please do find someone from the region who you will trust enough to actually consider what they tell you.

[–] gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My point was that you said there wasn't any communism in those countries, not about the statement of the Ukrainian brothers, which seemed wrong since they have pretty big parties considering the state of affairs in other places. I'm not a Westerner and I have a Belorussian friend with whom I talk about the political situation of the region. I never claimed those countries are still communists.

[–] harcesz@szmer.info 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Then ask them about the average age of these party members and their actual influence on social life and state policy. Like what actual policies they got through. In reality these parties are walking corpses of state sanctioned mostly ruled by yesteryear's apparatchiks.
I've been living under one roof with Belarusians and Russians for over 10 years in a country bordering both, but love hearing explanations of what I'm seeing from such very well informed sources like your comments.

Also love your play with semantics, but could just as well claim there's anarchism in this countries, since there are active anarchist groups. Or they are antifascist states, since there's armed antifa militants in them, as that was the only way not to get killed by kremlin-aligned neonazi groups.

I'm not a statist (neither an anarchist), but these people you are trying to defend are traitors of their people, their communities, and their class. Russian mafia oligarchy is not better than the one thats being fought against in Ukraine by it's social movements. Its worse, for it's imperialism even if you imagine it has Soviet rather than it's true Tzarist sources.

[–] boredtortoise@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Do we know if these guys are for toppling Belarus' and Russia's regime some day? Because the article and their own quote seems to say they support them instead of the opposition parties

[–] harcesz@szmer.info 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

[comment moved one level up as it was a response to an earlier comment]

[–] boredtortoise@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Thank you for the investigation. Good summary!

[–] boredtortoise@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No no, opposing NATO is good and chill. Pro-Belarus/Russia is the anti-communist take

[–] NuPNuA@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why wouldn't you want your nation tjnbe militarily defended?

[–] boredtortoise@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Nothing wrong with that. Many geopolitical locations definitely need defenses

NATO has it's issues with US & Turkey for starters but still it's the only viable option for some places

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nah, the issue with NATO is that it keeps invading countries and destroying them.

[–] boredtortoise@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In many cases yes. Currently it's also a needed defense for it's members from other invaders and destroyers. Ideally NATO wouldn't be needed. Dismantling it would be great, simultaneously or after the other rogue powers.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

NATO is needed to deal with problems that NATO created. It's a self perpetuating horror show.

[–] boredtortoise@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah Yugoslavia...

On the other hand, today, Europeans have no other options to try to stay safe which sucks

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No, it's not just Yugoslavia. NATO has been involved in plenty of wars of aggression aside from Yugoslavia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wars_involving_NATO

edit: absolutely love how rediquette is getting normalized here now, post a factual comment with a source and a bunch of chuds run in to downvote because they have trouble engaging with reality