I’m not sure what Putin would have to do for some on the left here – and the communist movement worldwide – to revise their even handed/both sides are to blame explanation for the invasion of Ukraine. Maybe his use of tactcal nuclear weapons on the battlefield might cause then a little rethink? Or is that too much to expect?

What is so striking and explains so much is their complete misunderstanding of the nature and dangers of Putin’s regime. They’re prisoners of old understandings and logics as well as unable to adapt to new realities.And even when they do, it is done hesitatingly, grudgingly, and only partially.

(This is a letter from me to Max Elbum in which convey some thoughts in reaction to his recent article. It was written as the immoral and imperialist Russian invasion of Ukraine was beginning. No doubt, it will (is already) shifting the terrain on which the elections and much else will fought be out.)

HI Max,

I had intended to send you a note a few days ago, but for various reasons – some good like my daughter and grandchildren were here – I never got around to it. I’m writing it quickly and will do no editing. 

In the meantime, since you wrote this, war has broken out. I have some thoughts about that for some other time.

As for your analysis on the balance of power between the two main competing blocs in U.S. politics, I thought it was insightful and instructive. I hope it is read and circulated widely. The importance of sober minded thinking is so important. And your article (and the two earlier companion articles) provide that sober analysis and strategic direction. Without both, we’re sunk. I noticed Portside posted it. At any rate, I had a few thoughts on the edges:

1. The main task is to “build out” the anti-Maga bloc. And there is no reason to think it can’t be done. 
2. The accent in the relations between the left and center in the anti-Maga bloc should be on unity; struggle is necessary and inevitable, but given the nature of the challenge this November and beyond the struggle, unity and breadth of approach is primary in my thinking. If we win then the dialectic between one and the other will change in line with new conditions and challenges.
3. The mobilization of the labor movement and the traditional organizations in the African American community, not least the churches, retain their strategic importance, even though neither has the same clout as they did decades ago.
4. Both labor and the Democratic Party have a national reach, or that potential anyway. Few other organizations can make such a claim. Thus they should be accorded more, not less attention. Independent political action that excludes the Democratic Party as a vechile in which progressive and left activists hang their hat and get out the vote is mistaken. Abstractly, It sounds right, but it fails when the concrete situation of this moment and what it will take to win in the fall is taken into account. Winning populous urban centers, as you know, won’t defeat Maga. Moreover, in many states, including here in NY, local Democratic Party organizations and local unions could be the main instruments for statewide mobilization. The teacher’s union, for example, has reach into many nooks and crannies here as well as every other state, not to mention a presence in urban and suburban centers. 
5. The coalition backing MAGA has seized the initiative since the elections, as you mention, not the coalition that elected Biden. Had the latter remained mobilized and focused on Biden’s domestic- legislative agenda – Build Back Better, for example – Biden’s legislative achievements, would likely have been greater. As I tried to point out in another piece I wrote, transformative movements are the bedrock of transformative presidents. So far though such a movement doesn’t yet exist to drive the many progressive-democratic aspects of Biden’s agenda. Potentially yes, but actually no. What it suggests to me anyway is that the expansive coalition that elected Biden doesn’t realize that its success – legislative and electoral – turns in many ways on the success of the Biden administration. If MAGA takes Biden down, in other words, the
6. It’s a mistake, and unnecessarily narrowing, to separate the “Squad” from a substantial section of other members of Congress who embrace progressive-broad left politics. Both are on the same political continuum, albeit not in the same exact spot. Moreover, many members of the Progressive Caucus posses years of experience as well as a tactical acumen and strategic depth that I would hope young progressive-left legislators would appreciate and draw from (btw I read a piece in Jacobin that questioned the left credentials of AOC. I find that ridiculous and a promissory note to its diminishing relevance – and that is regretable given the challenges that the country faces.) 
7. I agree that the MAGA coalition, or, as you correctly write, movement is more politically unified and thus able to act with greater speed and cohesion than our side. At the same time our breadth and diversity can be a strength as well as a weakness. 
8. Many left thinking people are found in left led or non-profit organizations. There are good reasons for this and the results have been impressive, But I do wonder if enough of us are participants in.broader mass organizations whose politics … When I first became active in the communist party in Portland Me, we were too small to initiate such forms of organizations; thus we join mainstream unions and labor councils, NAACP, welfare rights organizations, neighborhood councils, etc. – none of which were left led; if anything they would be center or centrist in their politics. Nevertheless, or perhaps because we did, it gave us an influence that we would never had if we had decided to camp out ii left forms. Anyway just a thought!
9. The impact of the pandemic and its many impacts didn’t receive either any or enough attention. It certainly presented a far more difficult that either Biden or many of us anticipated. What happens between now and November will have a major shaping impact on the elections and their outcome. It is certainly going to be a point of contention.
10. The outbreak of war this week I don’t have to tell you is going to have major consequences on the terrain and outcome of the elections. How it’s going to tilt the playing field isn’t obvious now, at least to me. 

I have a couple more thoughts, but I’m sure you have more important things to do than reading my meandering ruminations. Peace, sam

Too many analysts have suggested that the Ukrainian people are simply pawns, manipulated by either Russia or NATO in a global “chess game.” In this account they have no agency. It is hard to make that claim now, as Ukrainian soldiers and people courageously resist the Russian invasion.

In a fight it is usually not wise to insist that your opponent, no matter how odious and bullying, say “uncle,” when you have him firmly on the ground. And especially so when he is carrying a lethal weapon. A better strategy is to provide him some space that allows him to retreat with some dignity with his weapon deactivated.

Putin in the early days of the invasion of Ukraine said,

“… today’s Russia remains one of the most powerful nuclear states. Moreover, it has a certain advantage in several cutting-edge weapons. In this context, there should be no doubt for anyone that any potential aggressor will face defeat and ominous consequences should it directly attack our country.”

But this is an invented threat. And Putin knows that. NATO has made many wrongheaded decisions and taken many misguided actions, but an invasion of Russia isn’t on its agenda and Putin knows that. But by suggesting it, Putin was threatening – attempting to intimidate – the rest of the world.