Between Militarism and Solidarity

You never know what’s behind the mask by graffit artist Hijack. Shows a child in Ukrainian colours taking a micky mouse mask off a Russian soldier.
As global tensions intensify and militarism gains momentum, how do we maintain principled opposition to war while effectively confronting authoritarian threats? Reflecting on recent debates, I explore the urgent need for genuine internationalist solidarity.

Earlier this week, in grappling with ‘The Defence Question‘, I explored the complexity (well I struggled) of developing a coherent Marxist and internationalist response to militarism and war. My central dilemma was clear: how do we uphold an uncompromising anti-war position while simultaneously recognising the genuine threat posed to the working class by reactionary forces, typified today by Putinism and Trumpism?

Since then, my reading of statements and articles from French comrades, particularly the NPA’s critique of Macron’s neoliberal militarism and Revolution Permanente’s analysis of the deepening transatlantic crisis, has sharpened these contradictions further. These interventions illustrate clearly the dangers of militarism in all its forms, even when justified in terms of democracy, liberalism, or national defence.

Macron’s recent push to boost military spending, claiming to defend European sovereignty against Putin and Trump, is exactly the type of neoliberal militarism we must resist. Keir Starmer’s Labour Party has also committed to increasing military spending, reinforcing this troubling neoliberal trend. It’s understandable why some on the left might see these stances as lesser evils, offering protection from openly reactionary alternatives. Yet, as Revolution Permanente argues, militarisation does not truly protect the working class; instead, it fuels nationalist tensions, legitimises reactionary narratives, and ultimately strengthens the authoritarian tendencies it purports to oppose.

This presents us with a profound dilemma. On one side, a consistent anti-war stance remains crucial, imperialist wars inevitably harm working-class interests. On the other, Putinism and Trumpism pose real threats, not only ideologically but materially, to the lives and democratic rights of millions.

Addressing this contradiction requires more than slogans. It demands reaffirming independent working-class politics and genuine internationalism. Opposition to war, militarism, and nationalism must remain universal and consistent, never selectively applied. The neoliberal militarism represented by Macron’s France, Trump’s America, or Starmer’s Britain should be opposed as vigorously as authoritarian nationalism.

The pressing practical question remains: how do we concretely support and defend the Ukrainian people and left-wing comrades currently under direct attack by Putin’s imperialist aggression, facing missiles, drone strikes, and military invasion? Solidarity cannot merely be symbolic. It demands concrete internationalist efforts, political, material, and humanitarian, that assist the Ukrainian working class without endorsing NATO or capitalist military agendas. At the same time, it is essential to challenge the problematic campist perspective prevalent in parts of the left, which criticises Western imperialism and NATO without equally critiquing authoritarian powers like Moscow and Beijing. Such selective anti-imperialism undermines genuine international solidarity, inadvertently strengthening reactionary regimes by failing to confront their oppressive and militaristic practices.

French comrades emphasise that genuine defence of working-class interests cannot be achieved through alliances with capitalist states or military blocs like NATO. Instead, real defence lies in transnational solidarity, anti-imperialist mobilisation, and the independent organisation of working-class movements. Only through genuine internationalism can the working class effectively resist militarism and the authoritarian forces it inevitably empowers.

While the challenges posed by ‘The Defence Question’ remain deeply complex, the answers from revolutionary internationalists—such as those articulated by the French left—point toward a principled yet nuanced position. Rejecting all capitalist militarism, neoliberal or nationalist, and reaffirming internationalist working-class solidarity emerges not just as a matter of principle but as the only viable response to the twin dangers of Putinism and Trumpism.

It goes to say: never Washington or Moscow, and come to think of it, neither London nor Paris.


Alexander Dugin (11) Artificial Intelligence (11) Book Review (93) Books (97) Britain (85) Capitalism (10) Conservative Government (36) Creeping Fascism (13) Crime and Punishment (14) diary (11) Donald J Trump (66) Europe (12) European Union (10) Far Right Extremism (15) Fascism (12) Film (13) France (16) Gaza (22) History (12) Imperialism (23) Israel (23) Keir Starmer (15) Labour Government (57) Labour Party (10) Migrants (23) Nigel Farage (24) Palestine (18) Protest (18) Reform UK (35) Russia (23) Television (10) Ukraine (12) United States of America (107) War (26) Work (12)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share the Post:

Latest Posts

Close-up of a British two pence coin, copper-coloured, showing a heraldic lion in a crosshatched frame with fleur-de-lis corners and the words “TWO PENCE” at the top.
Labour Government

Rachel Reeves and the 2p Trap

The chancellor’s proposed income tax shuffle is clever accountancy but toxic politics — a pledge-break disguised as fiscal discipline, and proof that Labour has trapped itself in rules it cannot escape.

Read More »
An illustration of a red fish (Herring) in profile against a pale background, with the words “RED TERROR” in bold black capitals beneath it.
Charlie Kirk

Red Herring, Not Red Terror

David Frost calls it a new “Red Terror.” The truth is plainer: it’s the Right’s wars, coups and crackdowns that have spilt the deepest blood in politics.

Read More »
Donald J Trump

The Invention of the Narco-Terrorist

Trump’s latest “kinetic strike” killed three unknown Venezuelans he labelled “narco-terrorists.” The phrase is not law but incantation, a word that strips away humanity and legitimises killing. From Vietnam body counts to Obama’s “signature strikes,” America has always named its enemies into existence, and into death.

Read More »