Lowkey was one of those individuals who ridiculed the prospect that 100k Russian troops being put on the border meant an invasion was happening. It was all western propaganda apparently. Then he instantly changed tune after the invasion saying things like the west was weaponising Zelensky's Jewish heritage right as Putin was saying it was a denazification mission. He suddenly went from saying Russia would not be baited by the west to acting like Russia has no choice because of NATO. He blamed the UK winter fuel rises on support for Ukraine. He has turned a blind eye to all the Russian war crimes for a year and a half and in some instances questioned they even happened. He jumps on the back of Zelensky far more crudely than ever with Putin. He now (rightly) criticises Israel for doing the things Russia was doing for the last year and a half. White phosphorus gas was used in Ukraine. Bombing cities to rubble. Kidnapping children, babies, soldiers raping women and destroying crucial infrastructure.
Do I think the western leaders are not consistent in their support? Of course. Only a fool would think otherwise. Geopolitics comes into play with Ukraine. That's not a correct thing and is a moral disgrace. But people like you, me and Lowkey aren't at the geopolitical chess board. So just like I don't think a Ukrainian citizen like Zinchenko being proud in his country's fight means his pro-Israel stance is anyway coherent, I don't find a British citizen who for the last year has shown so much deference to Russia's invasion and war crimes now claiming a moral high ground when Israel does it. I think people like that are not anti-war or anti-imperialist. To be clear I don't think he wanted Putin to launch a war. But not because he didn't want Ukrainians to be killed. Rather because it meant he had to defend war crimes rather than admit the consensus about Putin was right all along and his was wrong.
