Yes, Putin and Russia are fascist- a political scientist shows how they meet the textbook definition

[Alben Barkley]

https://theconversation.com/yes-putin-and-russia-are-fascist-a-political-scientist-shows-how-they-meet-the-textbook-definition-179063

Don't think it's been posted yet but fantastic article. Putin is fascist and people have been in denial about it and what the implications of that are for far too long. My guess is because we all know how deeply evil fascism is and how it makes intervening against such nations almost a moral imperative, which many in the West, even among "liberals," are reluctant to admit.

[jojoju1998]

But Since Putin's against the " West " who are the real fascists, that makes Putin good.

[President Johnson]

Yeah, that's actually a good point. Just recently a German political scientist wrote an essay and said that Putin's regime has "strong fascist tendencies", which is kind of ironic given the fact he accuses the Ukrainian government of that.

Over recent years, it definitely has become worse. Especially since he returned to the presidency in 2012.

[TheReckoning]

Nah, fascism is revolutionary- it tries to create a nation anew. Putin isn’t trying to do that with Russia.

[Cassius]

Anyone who describes Stalinist Russia as 'fascist' is not to be taken seriously.

[PSOL]

Nah, fascism is revolutionary- it tries to create a nation anew. Putin isn’t trying to do that with Russia.

Fascism isn’t making anything anew, but to destroy the undesirables and save the class structure itself from collapse while getting the select few middle class rubes to become the new elite. Russia is both past that stage of new entrants into the ruling class, and they are not genocidal in the Ukrainian war because the people themselves is what Putin is after to avoid the underconsumption and oversupply currently facing the Russian economy, especially after Covid basically killed a million or two Russians in these two years.

United Russia are, without doubt, just a party of Russian-style liberals that understand the importance of maintaining some defense of industry from outside competition. It’s main base of useful idiots are the Russian upper middle class in the defense and manufacturing industry and it is completely oligarch-controlled and used to facilitate disputes between the elite.

Anyone who describes Stalinist Russia as 'fascist' is not to be taken seriously.

The Soviet Union from 1921–1953 was so frictional policy-wise because of the immense diversity of the party and the numerous different poles of power. Peasants, workers, farmers, the plurinational businessmen, and self-employed artisans—from different regions, occupations, and income levels even between groups—competed for influence in a state of terminal siege. There actually were fascist sellouts in the party, but they individually were eliminated but not before doing everything they can in derailing the project as much as they can—Yezhov, Bukharin in his late career, the whole god-making movement.

[Beet]

Fascism pretty much means far-right. We already have other words to describe evil left-wing states like authoritarian, totalitarian, communist, etc.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Fascism pretty much means far-right. We already have other words to describe evil left-wing states like authoritarian, totalitarian, communist, etc.

But Putin's Russia isn't left-wing.

[GoTfan]

Anyone who describes Stalinist Russia as 'fascist' is not to be taken seriously.

It's an interesting point because several socialists-SPA bigwig Norman Thomas among them-referred to the Soviet Union under the term of 'red fascism'.

[Velasco]

Anyone who describes Stalinist Russia as 'fascist' is not to be taken seriously.

It's an interesting point because several socialists-SPA bigwig Norman Thomas among them-referred to the Soviet Union under the term of 'red fascism'.

Labeling Stalinism as "Red Fascism" is absolutely void and meaningless. Stalin was a criminal and sent people to the Gulag in the name of communist ideals. His ideological pretexts were unrelated to those of Hitler or Mussolini. I think it's legitimate from a communist / radical leftist perspective to claim Stalin betrayed such ideals , but trying to label him as a "fascist" sounds disingeneous. Besides, that label gives further backing to the simplistic and equally disingeneous notion that fascism and communism are the same thing. They are not and "Red Fascism" is a dumb label.

As for Putin, he is neither fascist nor communist. The dominant ideology in Putin's Russia is a complex mix that incorporates the conservative values of Tsarist Russia and the symbology of the Soviet Union. Recently I watched a documentary called "Russia: Conservative Revolution ". One of the most striking images in that documentary was a Victory Day parade taking place within a cadet academy in Rostov.  There were red flags in that parade, but the young cossack cadets saluted to a portrait of Tsar Nicholas II (not Stalin). This historical inconsistency speaks volumes about the conflictive relationship between present day Russia and its turbulent past. Putin's Russia vindicates the Great Patriotic War against Nazi Germany (1941-1945), but not Stalin's crimes. On the other hand, the Orthodox Church has sanctified the last of the Tsars (killed by the Bolsheviks in 1918). Russia today is an extremely conservative society that displays communist symbols on Victory Day, but it's also a country where a revolutionary leftist like Lenin would have been incarcerated.

In my opinion the article linked in the OP gives a very simplistic definition of a fascist state, while it does not provide notion of fascism as an ideology. It claims a fascist state is "an authoritarian state ruled by a charismatic leader enjoying a personality cult". By this definition, the charismatic communist Fidel Castro would have been a fascist. Actually the author claims Stalin's USSR and Xi Jinping's China are fascist states, while Franco and Pinochet were just "average authoritarians". Sorry, but this is not serious

[Amanda Huggenkiss]

Nah, fascism is revolutionary- it tries to create a nation anew. Putin isn’t trying to do that with Russia.

Alexander Motyl: Hey I'm a political science professor at a very respectable university who has specialized in Russia and Ukraine and I really think that after reviewing the long academic debate on what fascism is that some of its core characteristics are empirically detectable in Putin's Russia.

Some guy on some internet forum: Nah.

[CumbrianLefty]

Yes, but not everybody shares his assessment - even some who also know Russia a great deal.

I would readily agree that Putin's Russia certainly has fascist characteristics even on a fairly rigorous definition - but I do think that one of the arguments against is the fundamental atomised passivity of society there. Which makes it more comparable with somewhere like Salazar's Portugal.

(which used to be widely described as fascist, but not so much these days)

[Velasco]

[
Alexander Motyl: Hey I'm a political science professor at a very respectable university who has specialized in Russia and Ukraine and I really think that after reviewing the long academic debate on what fascism is that some of its core characteristics are empirically detectable in Putin's Russia.

I hope there are better political scientists in the academia, because this Alexander Motyl is not very brilliant. According to this guy, fascism is simply  a matter of charismatic authoritarianism. As a Spaniard,  I am accustomed to read reactionary morons claiming that Franco or Pinochet were just "average authoritarians". Let alone the fallacy that claims "national socialism" had anything to do with actual "socialism" (or "fascist states can be found on the right and on the left"). I would dispute a grayish former KGB agent has "genuine charisma", on the other hand. Granted, Putin enjoys a personality cult in Russia (just like our uncharismatic Franco during his long dictatorial rule in Spain). It's also remarkable that a self-proclaimed expert in Russia does not say anything about Russia's imperial tradition, from Ivan the Terrible to Stalin. My eyes bleed reading the paragraph below

The bare-bones definition of a fascist state is thus this: It is an authoritarian state ruled by a charismatic leader enjoying a personality cult.

Seen in this light, Franco’s Spain, Pinochet’s Chile and the Greece of the colonels were really just your average authoritarian states. In contrast, Mussolini’s Italy and Xi Jinping’s China are clearly fascist, as were Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s USSR. Fascist states can thus be on the right and on the left.  

[Property Representative of the Harold Holt Swimming Centre]

[
Alexander Motyl: Hey I'm a political science professor at a very respectable university who has specialized in Russia and Ukraine and I really think that after reviewing the long academic debate on what fascism is that some of its core characteristics are empirically detectable in Putin's Russia.

I hope there are better political scientists in the academia, because this Alexander Motyl is not very brilliant. According to this guy, fascism is simply  a matter of charismatic authoritarianism. As a Spaniard,  I am accustomed to read reactionary morons claiming that Franco or Pinochet were just "average authoritarians". Let alone the fallacy that claims "national socialism" had anything to do with actual "socialism" (or "fascist states can be found on the right and on the left"). I would dispute a grayish former KGB agent has "genuine charisma", on the other hand. Granted, Putin enjoys a personality cult in Russia (just like our uncharismatic Franco during his long dictatorial rule in Spain). It's also remarkable that a self-proclaimed expert in Russia does not say anything about Russia's imperial tradition, from Ivan the Terrible to Stalin. My eyes bleed reading the paragraph below

The bare-bones definition of a fascist state is thus this: It is an authoritarian state ruled by a charismatic leader enjoying a personality cult.

Seen in this light, Franco’s Spain, Pinochet’s Chile and the Greece of the colonels were really just your average authoritarian states. In contrast, Mussolini’s Italy and Xi Jinping’s China are clearly fascist, as were Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s USSR. Fascist states can thus be on the right and on the left.   

It's quite convenient that perhaps the two most unpleasant regimes in all of history fall under this person's definition, despite being at the opposite ends of the political spectrum. It's almost like fascism might not have much meaning beyond 'deep unpleasantness'.

[Lord Halifax]

[
Alexander Motyl: Hey I'm a political science professor at a very respectable university who has specialized in Russia and Ukraine and I really think that after reviewing the long academic debate on what fascism is that some of its core characteristics are empirically detectable in Putin's Russia.

I hope there are better political scientists in the academia, because this Alexander Motyl is not very brilliant. According to this guy, fascism is simply  a matter of charismatic authoritarianism. As a Spaniard,  I am accustomed to read reactionary morons claiming that Franco or Pinochet were just "average authoritarians". Let alone the fallacy that claims "national socialism" had anything to do with actual "socialism" (or "fascist states can be found on the right and on the left"). I would dispute a grayish former KGB agent has "genuine charisma", on the other hand. Granted, Putin enjoys a personality cult in Russia (just like our uncharismatic Franco during his long dictatorial rule in Spain). It's also remarkable that a self-proclaimed expert in Russia does not say anything about Russia's imperial tradition, from Ivan the Terrible to Stalin. My eyes bleed reading the paragraph below

The bare-bones definition of a fascist state is thus this: It is an authoritarian state ruled by a charismatic leader enjoying a personality cult.

Seen in this light, Franco’s Spain, Pinochet’s Chile and the Greece of the colonels were really just your average authoritarian states. In contrast, Mussolini’s Italy and Xi Jinping’s China are clearly fascist, as were Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s USSR. Fascist states can thus be on the right and on the left.   

It's quite convenient that perhaps the two most unpleasant regimes in all of history fall under this person's definition, despite being at the opposite ends of the political spectrum. It's almost like fascism might not have much meaning beyond 'deep unpleasantness'.

Or that "the political spectrum" is not a useful way to distinguish between different regimes. Stalin's Soviet Union and Nazi-Germany clearly had a lot in common, more than what distinguished them, and if you compare each of them to the American or British governments at the same time it's clear that the distance between "Western capitalist democracy" and either of the two totalitarian regimes was a lot bigger than the distance between the two.

[PSOL]

Literally there’s no similarities between the Soviets and Nazis in governance, what the hell are you on about, licking the fungus off a horseshoe?

[TheReckoning]

Literally there’s no similarities between the Soviets and Nazis in governance, what the hell are you on about, licking the fungus off a horseshoe?

“Support us, OR ELSE” was a pretty big similarity.

But the fact that anyone is calling the USSR fascist… just LOL.

[PSOL]

Literally there’s no similarities between the Soviets and Nazis in governance, what the hell are you on about, licking the fungus off a horseshoe?

“Support us, OR ELSE” was a pretty big similarity.

But the fact that anyone is calling the USSR fascist… just LOL.

Even with Yezhov at the helm, the extent of which surveillance and crushing of dissent was capable was not done during Stalin’s reign to the extent capable and done in Nazi Germany. These are not comparable at all.

[Velasco]

It's quite convenient that perhaps the two most unpleasant regimes in all of history fall under this person's definition, despite being at the opposite ends of the political spectrum. It's almost like fascism might not have much meaning beyond 'deep unpleasantness'.

Well, this guy considers that Franco and Pinochet were not as "deeply unpleasant" as Putin and Xi Jinping. Basically he's providing a vague ad hoc definition of a "fascist state", in order to fut ut to a preconcieved idea and his personal sympathies. Besides, he's banalizing fascism. As you say, "fascism" is transformed into a meaningless word. That's a common practice, sadly. I'd say his definition is more about "authoritarian charisma" (I fail to see "genuine charisma" in Putin and Xi Jinping, but anyway). Obviously all authoritarian regimes have common features (unpleasantness, lack of freedom), but come on...

[Lord Halifax]

Literally there’s no similarities between the Soviets and Nazis in governance, what the hell are you on about, licking the fungus off a horseshoe?

“Support us, OR ELSE” was a pretty big similarity.

But the fact that anyone is calling the USSR fascist… just LOL.

Even with Yezhov at the helm, the extent of which surveillance and crushing of dissent was capable was not done during Stalin’s reign to the extent capable and done in Nazi Germany. These are not comparable at all.

Not true. The Soviets were more effective at crushing dissent than the Nazis and penetrated civil society more thoroughly.

[CumbrianLefty]

Literally there’s no similarities between the Soviets and Nazis in governance, what the hell are you on about, licking the fungus off a horseshoe?

“Support us, OR ELSE” was a pretty big similarity.

But the fact that anyone is calling the USSR fascist… just LOL.

Even with Yezhov at the helm, the extent of which surveillance and crushing of dissent was capable was not done during Stalin’s reign to the extent capable and done in Nazi Germany. These are not comparable at all.

Well, its a take I suppose.

[Badger]

Nah, fascism is revolutionary- it tries to create a nation anew.

Yes, such glowing terms are what totally normal people use to describe facism.

This is why people worry about you.

[Meclazine for Israel]

The answer is clearly no.

https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-repressive-aggressive-not-fascist/31794918.html

"Russia under Putin "is clearly a closed and repressive dictatorship," said Sheri Berman, a professor of political science at Columbia University's Barnard College who studies populism and fascism. "But there are lots of different kinds of dictatorships, of which fascist...is just one.""

'Fascism' or 'fascist' are terms only used by Atlas left wing posters to describe people they don't like on an internet forum.

[CumbrianLefty]

'Fascism' or 'fascist' are terms only used by Atlas left wing posters to describe people they don't like on an internet forum.

No, they aren't "only" that at all.

Though yes, the terms are over-used.

[Aurelius]

I don't consider Putin a fascist, but he's clearly a right-wing authoritarian and I don't see why it matters which specific type of right-wing authoritarian he is. This feels like navel gazing to me.