It can only work at the local level. At the national level it's always been a waste of energy to do entryism, the party is too good at propping up corporate dems to primary effective leftists with AIPAC money. The ones who remain become Pelosis, such as AOC. It's a strategy with a bad track record, it seems like the easiest path toward power but it's not a coherent solution; activists work outside of the Demoocratic party then people like AOC suck the energy out of any movement and take credit. We can still use the Democratic Party as a springboard since most of the people who are already sympathetic to us are currently Democrats, flip the script on them, but to try to build the left inside the Democratic Party is just asking to be undermined by opportunists.
FunkyStuff
I'm going to keep it real with you,
We're not going to bring any of the left into the democratic party.
No disrespect but that's very myopic. What was the plan otherwise? Go to Biden and show him a copy of Minsk and do the 
face? Ukraine becoming a NATO proxy is much more of a threat for Russia than what they've lost in a war that turned into a quagmire for both sides.
Because one side is going to win, and if NATO wins there is no counter to American hegemony. If Russia wins, AES states have someone to trade with beside China, and the world is multipolar. I get what you mean though, it's not morally uncomplicated and it's not like Russia is motivated by anti-imperialism either. If it troubles you a lot, I guess I just have to ask: why does it matter that we believe Russia is in the right? We don't have any ICBMs to sell them. I mean, hell, if I did I'd give them to Hamas. But ultimately our beliefs don't matter, and we don't have any revolutionary praxis we can do to affect the situation one way or the other except agitation and (if the moment is right) sabotage, which socialists should always be doing regardless. Should we suddenly not agitate or sabotage because Russia is harming working class Ukrainians? Does the course of action of building the left change in any way based on the conclusion of this discussion? Or is it just wrecker style behavior to decide to quit or split a movement because they disagree on the moral character of a military conflict they have no influence over?
In a vacuum, yes, but what was the alternative? What was the best case scenario for the Ukrainian working class Jews and ethnic Russians if Russia hadn't stepped in? What's the best case scenario for a country that isn't allowed to have self determination because of its position between NATO and Russia? And NATO ultimately bears the blame for expanding eastward for decades, knowingly provoking a Russia retaliation.
I don't entirely disgree with you because the invasion obviously didn't go the way Putin wanted, but it's also a question of what Russia was supposed to do about every treaty and every agreement to limit NATO's expansion being ignored. Ukraine had been couped and had a puppet government in place, and was massacring ethnic Russians near the Russian border. Should Russia have held on for longer to find a better moment to attack, get allies on board, whatever? Maybe, but I don't think anyone knows more than Russian intelligence what factors went into launching the SMO in the moment they did. They got NATO to more or less permanently close the doors to Ukraine, and destroyed confidence in Western military might. They also lost their gas line, made Europe side with America much more than before, lost thousands of people, and attracted a domestic anti-war movement that hates Putin. Is that such a dumb decision? What would the situation be for Russia if they hadn't invaded? It's a question that I don't think you could confidently give a positive answer to, it wasn't an undeniably stupid move to take a shot when faced with the situation as it was in 2022.
I also wouldn't go as far as to say it was a fluke that Ukraine survived the initial stage of the operation, but it wasn't guaranteed either; there definitely was a world where this whole thing would've been wrapped up in 2022. And even as things shook out, judging by the mass of artillery each side has fired Russia is still coming out miles ahead. I'd call it a stupid decision if NATO had actually "weakened Russia" like they wanted, but Russia being able to produce far more ammunition than all of NATO combined means that it's been the opposite, NATO has been the one getting relatively weaker as the ammunition and material reserves dry up. All that's left is overengineered military hardware, openly corrupt MIC contracts for the Space Force or whatever, and aircraft carriers that would turn into billion dollar Titanic replicas around hypersonic missiles. So, in any case, maybe the stupid move was when NATO poked the bear?
They're not like that, they're like the Zionists that jerk off to IDF e-girls who think it makes you morally superior to also enlist women in your neo-SS.
I've been in this site since the Chapo days, all I've seen is people support the SMO. Never seen someone praise Putin's political positions as a whole, closest thing is some people in this thread coming close to defending homophobia in Russia, but there's a pretty big difference between pragmatic and critical support to Russia for geopolitical reasons (which are pretty reasonable from an anti-imperialist perspective) and support of the reactionary policies Putin also has enacted.
Sorry, don't mean to come across as hostile, but I don't get why you'd think there's unironic Putin supporters in a website that bans transphobes, homophobes, etc. If you meant to ask if there's people who critically support Russia because they oppose NATO imperialism then yes, it's still a communist website. Not that it matters too much, I don't think anyone here can materially affect the situation in any substantial way, but in principle the vast majority of the site prefers multipolarity to Western hegemony, even when Western hegemony uses pinkwashing to pretend it's morally superior to Russia and China.
Should still ditch them. If they're storing plaintext passwords that means they have a whole host of a billion security issues for all the other things a virtual server provider needs to do. No way they don't know how to hash and salt passwords but know how to do everything else.
Your gut is correct. The international left needs something to offer all workers, it's idealist nonsense to expect that a Western left would ever be able to attract enough people to have leverage and use it to advance the position of the international working class without improving the situation for Western workers. That comment is grossly overgeneralizing the notion that imperialism incentivizes class collaborationism and false consciousness, which is true, but does not imply that anyone is better off by having a leftist movement that has nothing to offer to the people it's trying to attract.