I've seen absolutely wild and faulty analysis on the nature of US imperialism, analysis that ultimately serves to exculpate the US from its own imperial bloodlust while placing the blame squarely on US vassals 'gone rogue' and convoluted Great (Bad) Men Theories. The grand strategy posited by some anti-imperialists is to separate US imperialism from Zionism, get the US public to decry that (by absolving the US of all blame and agency, claiming that the world's sole hegemon is just a victim, a narrative that suits the faux renegades like Carlson, Owens, and so-called dissidents like that fucking guy who resigned from the Trump administration recently, that are trying to protect America First) and then, hopefully, at some point in the future get that same public they've appealed to through pure opportunism and naked nationalism, to oppose US imperialism at large. This is a level of abstraction unbecoming of serious Marxists, in my opinion, especially when what is happening in Latin America – Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Haiti, the Caribbean region generally – is not separate from what is happening in Palestine, Lebanon, Iran, Yemen, is not separate from the Ukraine-Russia proxy war. You cannot separate these things, especially not when we're on the precipice of a World War (we have, de facto, been in one for a long time, especially for those countries victim of US-led imperialism). Is it not your duty to lead, to raise the political consciousness of the working class, and to actually build something that will stop putting the onus of fighting empire entirely on the resisting forces of the Global South/Periphery? In the past we'd have simply called this tailism and opportunism. Faulty analysis leads to faulty praxis, and it's clear the Western Left (I know, obnoxious phrase at this point) needs to start from first principles – that is, reground itself in theory and actual material analysis instead of flailing about or resorting to subjectivism – if it wants to be effective.