Russia’s fascist connected Putin is creating great confusion within the left, including the socialist left. He and his agents and assets (both conscious and otherwise) are drawing significant numbers of lefts, including tens of thousands of internationalist-minded youth, into what is really a vast, far right web led by Putin. A major advance in this drive to lure the left into the far right web was the confusion Putin’s assets and agents sowed around  the Syrian revolution and counter-revolution. Since then, he and his agents have sowed even more confusion around the left’s understanding of and response to Russia’s imperialist invasion of Ukraine. In order to successfully oppose this counter-revolutionary process, we must understand it and its historical precedents.

Gregor Strasser addressing some Nazi supporters

Gregor Strasser and “Strasserism”
The historical precedent started in the 1920s with the German Nazi named Gregor Strasser. He used left-sounding rhetoric to entice Germans, including workers, into the Nazi party. Strasser’s brand of fascism with anti-capitalist rhetoric came to be known as “Strasserism”, and it is not unique in history. Today we see something similar in what is called the “red-brown alliance” (red for the color of the communists and brown for the Nazi “Brown Shirts”). This implies an alliance of distinct groups, but in this case what is happening is that major layers of the left, including the socialist left, use left rhetoric to draw lefts into the far right web by Putin and his agents and assets, similar to how Strasser drew workers into the Nazi Party. No two events in history are identical, and there are differences between Strasserism and Putinism, but they also have a lot in common. If the 1920s version of  a “left cover” for fascism could be called “Strasserism”, then today’s version of a similar development can be called “Putinism.”

Syria
The first clear warning shot of the rise of Putinism was around the Syrian revolution and counter-revolution. Just as in the other Arab Spring revolutions, the Syrian revolution was a revolution from below to drive out a self-serving and repressive dictator – Assad. What was different from the other revolutions was that starting in around 2014 the Putin regime stepped in to save Assad.

Former KKK leader David Duke addressing a regime sponsored rally in Syria in 2017. 

Some on the left picture Assad as some sort of anti-imperialist fighter. Why, then, do the overwhelming majority of fascist and racist groups and individuals support Assad? These include the former KKK leader David Duke, the racist “Unite the Right” marchers in Charlottesville, and Matthew Heimbach, founder of the former racist Traditionalist Workers Party. Internationally, the Greek fascist Golden Dawn and the Italian fascist Casa Pound support Assad.

But it is not only the far right:

In September of 2019, the nationalist and right wing British National Party was hosted by Assad. The very next week, a collection of “lefts” were similarly hosted by Assad. These included: Rania Khalek, founder of the Russian propaganda site “Breakthrough News” and Max Blumenthal, both of whom are both pro Assad “independent” reporters; Yasemin Zahra of US Labor Against War, Paul Larudee, former US government representative to Saudi Arabia and presently with the International Solidarity Movement (a Palestine support group based in the U.S.); Ajamu Baraka of the Green Party and Black Agenda Report; Rick Sterling, a Putin asset who has appeared on Russia’s Sputnik News and is a regular on the conspiracist and pro-Putin Mintpress news; Anya Parampil who writes for the Putinist Grayzone and previously worked for Russia’s RT television channel; and Judith Bello, who is a member of the United National Antiwar Committee (UNAC).

They too support Assad. They are part of this Putinist web.

Ukraine
The same lineup of far right and racist figures who support Assad also support Putin and defend or apologize for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. On the right these include Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, the racist America First, David Duke, Matt Heimbach, the male supremacist QAnon Republican US senator Tommy Tuberville, Stephen Bannon and the racist Richard Spencer. It’s the same in Europe, where such far right nationalists as France’s Marine Le Pen have repeatedly expressed admiration for Putin.

Top: “left” attendees at AGMR converence
Bottom: Openly right wing attendees at same conference

Anti Globalization Movement of Russia and “globalization”
But it’s not only the racist and nationalist far right. An event that really helped crystallize the collaboration of these forces with the Putinized left was a conference of the Anti Globalization Movement of Russia (AGMR) held in December of 2014. The AGMR was founded by Putin agent Alexander Ionov, who as we will see has been quite active in US politics since then. 

A racist and nationalist agenda hides behind the left-sounding opposition to “globalization” and support for “multi-polarity”. That ultra nationalist agenda amounts to encouraging every ethnic and national group to drive out all members of other groups from their traditional “nations”. It also supports “Eurasianism”. This concept was originally proposed by European fascists and in today’s world it means a Europe that is dominated by imperialist Russia.

That 2014 AGMR conference was attended by various fascists, racists and nationalists including the racist League of the South, the Texas Nationalist Movement, and Italy’s neo fascist Millenium party. Rubbing elbows with them were members of the Putinist “left” from the United States. These included Margaret Kimberley of Black Agenda Report (BAR) and the United National Antiwar Coalition (UNAC); Joe Iosbaker of the Committee to Stop FBI Repression and UNAC; Bill Dores of the International Action Center: women’s rights activist, Mo Hannah; Marina Nova of UNAC; and Joe Lombardo, co-coordinator of UNAC. They published several reports  on the conference, such as this one from Workers World, and others which have since been scrubbed, like this one from the International Action Center. In none of those reports did they mention the participation of the far right racists and nationalists.

Today, this same Putinist “left” has joined with the racist and nationalist right to in effect defend Russia’s imperialist invasion of Ukraine. While they didn’t attend that conference, others on the Putinist “left” have joined that choir. These include Jill Stein of the Green Party, who participated in an infamous dinner in Moscow with Putin and the fascist Michael Flynn. Stein supported Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016. The Black Agenda Report is also part of this Putinized “left”.There is also Medea Benjamin and Code Pink, which also support the repressive and corrupt Iranian theocracy. Also there is the African People’s Socialist Party/Uhuru Movement. This is just a small sampling of these forces.

Roy Singham’s Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund as found by Fashbusters. They call these groups “astroturf” groups – simply Singham fronts.

In 2019, Fashbusters published an expose of the role of tech multi-millionaire Roy Singham. Singham is linked with the Chinese ruling party and represents the interests of the Chinese and Russian ruling classes. As you can see, over a three year period from 2017-19 Singham has donated well over $100 million to several different Putinist groups in the U.S., chief among them is the People’s Forum.

The co-directors of the People’s forum were Claudia de la Cruz and Manolo de los Santos. Both are leading members of the Party for Socialism and Liberation. De la Cruz recently resigned as co-director of People’s Forum to become PSL’s 2024 candidate for US president. PSL effectively defends Russia’s imperialist invasion of Ukraine. However, in their role as one of the leading groups in organizing against US support for Israel they hide that fact. The same is true regarding the presidential campaign of Claudia de la Cruz.

Aleksandr Ionov of the Anti Globalization Movement of Russia has also been shown to be helping to finance the African People’s Socialist Party/Uhuru Movement, which supports the Russian invasion. Meanwhile, Ionov apparently financed Maria Butina, who joined and became active in the racist National Rifle Association.

“Independent, left” journalists and academics
There are also the “independent” journalists like Max Blumenthal, who at one time was a strong critic of Assad. He then went to Moscow and mysteriously returned with the opposite point of view. There has been much speculation on what sort of money he may be receiving from the Putin regime. Similar journalists include Rhania Khalek and Chris Hedges, both of whom at one time worked for the fascist-connected Putin’s RT television.

PUtin takes aim at “Global South”
In March of this year, the Atlantic Council published an in depth report on Putin’s campaign to influence public opinion in the global South. The report details how Putin is using the same sorts of agents and fronts in the cyber world to gain support for Russia’s imperialist invasion of Ukraine. The report is an eye-opener.

We must accept that the Putinized “left” cannot recover
In the natural world, a species can evolve down a certain road and when the environment changes that species must become extinct because it has evolved too far down that road and cannot return. So it is with the evolution of the Putinist “left”. They have crossed a rubicon. They can never recover and an entirely new socialist movement will have to develop completely outside of and opposed to them.

Claudia de la Cruz et al at a People’s forum event. If they don’t care about these Syrian babies killed by Assad’s sarin gas attack, how can they ever recover and play any sort of  positive role?

Unfortunately, because the Putinized “left” has a lot of influence, there are some socialists and others on the left who oppose the Putinist propaganda, but refuse to accept that the Putinists have made more than an isolated “mistake”. These lefts make continual compromises and concessions to the Putinists  because the Putinist “left” is bigger and better financed. The compromisers play a dual and contradictory role: On the one hand they oppose the Putinists’ support for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. On the other hand, they refuse to expose the Putinists for who they really are. They do this because they do not recognize that the Putinist “left” has betrayed the fundamental principle of international working class solidarity and once having committed this betrayal they cannot turn back.

The 2020 Green Party presidential candidate Howie Hawkins is an example. In a debate with Margaret Kimberley, he pretended that the difference was simply a matter of a different interpretation of the facts. He refused to reveal the fact that Kimberley had actually collaborated with fascists at Aleksandr Ionov’s Anti Globalization Movement of Russia conference. This failure to explain Kimberly’s connections would inevitably have left uninformed listeners confused at the vast presentation of Kimberly’s alternative “facts”, unable to distinguish what was what. It was similar regarding Hawkins’s debate with Jill Stein. There was no explanation of Stein’s connection with Putin, no mention for example, of her infamous dinner in Moscow with Putin, Michael Flynn et al,. Nor did Hawkins mention the fact that in her 2016 campaign for US president Stein actually supported Putin’s ally, Donald Trump. In a subsequent discussion with this writer, Hawkins explained his failure as being due to not wanting to burn his bridges with these people. Bill Fletcher jr. exhibits a similar approach when he refers to the Putinized left as “our friends on the left” and he says how much he respects Medea Benjamin.

Ukraine Solidarity Network
Several of those who balance between support for Ukraine and maintaining ties with the Putinist “left” are leading members of the Ukraine Solidarity Network (USN). The USN recently released a statement on the second anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The statement opens not with a denunciation of the invasion or a call for support for Ukraine but with a denunciation of

Howie Hawkins debated Margaret Kimberley about Ukraine. He supported Ukraine but is unwilling to “burn his bridges” with the likes of Kimberley by exposing her links.

Biden’s hypocrisy in supporting Ukraine while also supporting Israel. It is true that Biden & Co. are being hypocritical in their support for Ukraine, but even there the main point is how slow and inadequate that military support has been. The USN statement doesn’t mention that. Nor do they mention that USN supports Ukraine’s right to get arms from any available source. The emphasis on Biden’s hypocrisy is exactly the position that the Putinized left takes. This is compounded with the statement’s failure to point out Biden’s refusal to provide all the arms Ukraine needs when it needs it. The statement mixes this with a denunciation of US airstrikes in Syria, while ignoring the fact that it was overwhelmingly Russia that has carried out such strikes since 2015 and until this very day. Overall, it balances between denouncing Biden and Zelensky and opposing the invasion despite them. The mistaken emphasis of the USN statement stems from its attempt to support Ukraine without cutting ties with the Putinist “left”.

That same mistaken reluctance to cut ties or come into conflict with the Putinized left can also be seen in a speech given by Blanca Missé at a “Labor for Palestine” rally in Oakland in early January, 2024. Blanca, who is another leading member of USN, had the perfect opportunity to make the connection between the war against and occupation of Gaza and Russia’s invasion and occupation of Ukraine. Making that connection, however, would have brought her into conflict with the Putinists who had organized the event. Evidently she was unwilling to have that conflict so she never mentioned that connection between Gaza and Ukraine.

The compromising approach of USN was further revealed in several forums in which leading members participated and in one case actually helped organize. The first was on January 29, 2023 in which Bill Fletcher jr. debated Medea Benjamin about Ukraine. Fletcher opposed Benjamin’s pro-Putin views, but at the same time he emphasized how much he respects this supporter of Putin and the Iranian theocracy. More recently, a “Marxist” group held a forum on the “New” labor movement. All three the speakers – two of whom are leading members of USN – were supporters of the “progressive” union bureaucrats. However, these are the same union leaders who help make sure that there is no socialist or working class alternative to the corporate-controlled, pro-Israel Democratic Party, which supports Israel. These union leaders are in the pockets of the Democratic Party, and are therefore an obstacle to principled socialist and leftist political organizing within the unions. These leaders should not be celebrated. Nor did any of the panelists at this forum mention the issue of U.S. labor and Ukraine. The third was a panel/forum:  Axis of reaction: Putin and the Global Far Right. One of the panelists, John Feffer, played down Putin’s connections to the global far right, and none of the other panelists contradicted him. Blanca Missé, another leading member of USN, was another one of the speakers. She and the entire panel completely failed to address the Putinization of the left, which supposedly was the central topic of the forum. By so doing, Missé ensured that she would not antagonize that exact Putinized “left”.

Differences within a campaign like that to defend Ukraine will inevitably exist. They must be discussed openly or else the differences will come in through the back door. 

The roots of the degeneration of the socialist movement in the US
In the past the socialist movement played an important role in the US working class movement, and it is therefore important to understand the roots of its present degeneration. Here are some general points:

• Because of the unique way that capitalism developed in the United States, class consciousness has always tended to be somewhat weaker here than elsewhere. At the same time, pragmatism (looking for easy, “practical”  shortcuts) and anti-intellectualism have tended to be stronger. This has opened the way for left wing populist movements to flow over into far right, including racist, populism.
• The perversion of the Russian Revolution and the rise of Stalinism had a disastrous impact. On the one hand, it further misled and even betrayed socialism. On the other hand, it helped further isolate not only the supporters of the Soviet bureaucracy but all socialists from the working class.
• Once isolated from the US working class, it was inevitable that those socialists would be isolated from the working class abroad. This meant that they do not see the working class in the former colonial world as anything more than the passive objects of rather than the subjects of history. It also means that they do not consider the actual lived experience of the working class masses nor do they listen to their voices.
• One effect of Stalinism was to implant into the socialist movement the focus on “opposition to US imperialism” to the exclusion of all else, including the class struggle outside the United States. The result was that socialists of all stripes tended to automatically oppose anything that the US government supported and support anything that US capitalism’s imperialist rivals like Putin stood for. That has been a strong factor in their effective support for or defense of Assad and for the invasion of Ukraine.

For a more in depth explanation, see this article on fascist ideas on the left.

Young people at San Francisco protest against Israeli genocide. They will be one of the most internationalist minded generations ever and will bring their own experiences, including their dismal economic perspectives, liberation from a lot of capitalist “morality” and a lot more into a new movement.

A future regeneration of the socialist movement
A healthy socialist movement will be created by objective developments. One such development is Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza. This is bringing a whole layer of the younger generations into political activity. This younger generation will bring new ideas and attitudes into the movement. Because of their dismal economic perspectives and because the old Soviet bureaucracy, which falsely paraded under the name of “socialism”, has gone, the younger generation is far more open to socialist ideas. Also, because of the globalization of capitalism and also the climate crisis – which is a global crisis if there ever was one – the newer generation of left political activists tend to have a strong internationalist outlook. They will also tend to bring a liberation from many of the old capitalist prejudices into the movement. That includes a deeper liberation from both male supremacy and the gender straight jacket that capitalism imposes as well as the ableist treatment of disabled people. In these ways, they will add much to the old socialist traditions.

Those old socialist traditions still live on despite the fact that many from the older generations have either gone over to Putinism or have an arrogant attitude or have abandoned the struggle altogether. But if those who still maintain those old traditions can learn from the younger generations while they bring in the best of the old traditions, that will be an enormous positive.

It is natural to bring into the Palestine solidarity movement the issue of the invasion and occupation of Ukraine. It is also equally as easy and necessary to bring in the issue of the necessity of building a mass working class party that is opposed to the Republicans and the Democrats.

The fact that objective conditions are required to create a new and more healthy socialist movement does not mean we can simply wait for that to develop on its own. On the contrary. We can play a small but vital role in helping prepare the way for those developments.

Socialists and workers the world over have much to learn from each other. So do the older generations – or at least those few who have maintained the banner of working class independence and international working class solidarity – and the younger generations born into a very different world. The best of the old socialist and working class  traditions should not be dismissed. The combination of the best of the old traditions with what the new generations offer can play a vital role in rebuilding a new, dynamic socialist movement based first and foremost on international working class solidarity. While it will be objective events that will create a new movement, that combination can and must help prepare the way. In honor of those who came before us and in concern for those who are yet to come – including all species on the planet –  we have no choice but to continue in this process and to struggle together.

The global struggle for liberation will be the basis for a healthy socialist movement.

Further reading
here is a much more detailed version of this same article.

Here is a link to an Oaklandsocialist pamphlet Putin, Assad and the Syrian disaster. It explains the political development of the Putin regime and its early supporters on the “left” in the U.S.

Here is a link to my article Opposing the Putin apologists – a personal journey. While I was never a Putin apologist, my thinking did change over time. This article explains why and how.