It's not. The fact that you need to relentlessly assume I mean what I've not said suggests that you don't really have a relevant argument.
Then come out and say what your argument is.
It would be incredibly, incredibly easy for you to end this whole discussion immediately by just saying the thing you seem to be avoiding saying.
If Russia isn't your model of anti-imperialism in action, then what is it?
They compete on a global stage with the United States; you objected to that specifically.
No, I object to the idea that nations should seek or have the thing Russia and the USA are competing for.
So Russia's various other shortcomings that absolutely disqualify them from my admiration are not relevant to this particular discussion.
They are the entire point of this discussion.
Name those things.
That is all anyone wants from you. Name them. Say them out loud.
"Influence over their own destiny" is perhaps the most succinct.
And how does Ukraine factor in to Russia's destiny? How does Chechnya? How does Syria? How does Iran? What people within Russia itself do you think have influence over their own destiny?
The US likes to have influence over its own destiny as well. One of the ways it exerts influence over its own destiny is by ensuring a reliable supply of resources and labour, market conditions that are conducive to its prosperity, reliable markets for its goods and weapons, global security..
Anyway, there are plenty that are utterly subservient to Western capital in the ways that Western capital actually cares about.
What does
not being subservient to Western capital actually look like? Does it look like Russia?
Does Russia not have a capitalist ruling class of its own whose interests align closely with their American counterparts save for the degree of
competition inherent to capitalist economics?
If so, why would Russia's capitalist ruling class be urging their government to
compete with the USA?
That is where the United States has most recently decided to direct its efforts at creating an anti-Russian regime on Russia's doorstep.
Does Russia have some intrinsic right
not to have an "anti-Russian regime" on its doorstep?
How big are these counties' doorsteps?
But I don't find it at all useful. It's like Tolstoy's pacifism: OK, that's great, but absolutely not helpful at all in creating a better world unless and until literally everyone is doing it-- and some people doing it doesn't create conditions that could bring about everyone doing it.
A better world for whom?
The existing world is very, very good for some people. Some of those people are in the USA. Some of those people are in Russia. The problem is (in an ironically very fascist move) you're substituting a meaningful class struggle for a struggle between nations. It's a struggle that has to be waged with armies and intelligence agencies, rather than reform or revolution. It isn't going to produce a "better world" for most people because the people ordering those armies around are doing very well in the existing world.
It's not that I can't imagine compromising idealism for the sake of political expedience in building a better world, but why would I do it for Russia?