5 ms·

>To Putin, Ukrainians are Russians who have been corrupted by anti-Russian influences into believing themselves to be a different people, and the Ukrainian lang

by trhway 5y ago

>To Putin, Ukrainians are Russians who have been corrupted by anti-Russian influences into believing themselves to be a different people, and the Ukrainian language is a corrupted form of Russian (Russian with some Polish mixed in) That sounds almost benign, like just a minor difference of opinions, when taken that way out of the context. The context though is the declaration that anybody resisting that conversion back to Russian and insisting on being Ukrainian is to be killed. Another, wider context, is the deep contempt (which Russians in theie Great Russia chauvinism fail to notice as well as to acknowledge when pointed out to) Russians have for Ukrainians in general which is well illustrated by usage of "hohly" with various level of offensiveness for example, as well as pretty deep mutual anymosity between Russians and Western Ukrainians. (Note: i grew up in USSR as a Russian by mentality, and i'm half-Ukrainian by blood, so i have some idea what i'm talking about here) Anyway, Nazism isn't about why some are deemed inferior. Nazism is about deeming some inferior and acting violently upon that belief.

skissane 5y ago
People have been doing that for many centuries, even millennia. “Nazism” is a specific ideology which arose in 20th century Germany, not a generic term for violent xenophobia, which is far older than Nazism is.
- trhway 5y ago
  > not a generic term for violent xenophobia Nazism is when violent xenophobia becomes state ideology. That is invention of the 20th century.
  - skissane 5y ago
    > There, as you know, there were Macedonians and Thracians and Illyrians, all most warlike nations, here Syrians and Asiatic Greeks, the most worthless peoples among mankind and born for slavery. That’s a quote from the Roman general and consul (joint head of state) Manius Acilius Glabrio, in the early 2nd century BCE. The quote is given by the ancient Roman historian Livy - ancient historians often invented speeches for their subjects, so Manius Acilius probably never spoke those exact words, but Livy believed they were an accurate representation of his beliefs. So, rather than being a 20th century Nazi invention, violent xenophobia was the state ideology of the ancient Roman Republic.
    - trhway 5y ago
      Roman Empire has a lot of similar aspects - there is a reason why Hitler took so much from the Roman Empire - yet it had imperial ideology, not nazist. To illustrate the difference - if Russia went in Ukraine to get those good agricultural lands or to just expand because supposedly being bigger is better that would be the imperial motive. Tsarist Russia was imperial. USSR is bit more complicated - while it looks to many like imperial, it was an ideology driven totalitarian state like Nazi Germany, just instead of Nazist ideology it had class-based/socialist/communism ideology. And now we come to Putin's Russia - it is a totalitarian state driven by a nazist ideology of Russian "master nation". Unfortunately, even say just a year ago i, like many, wasn't able to recognize Russian Nazism even though it was right into our faces - it looked to me just like strong authoritarianism with imperial ideology colored by Great Russia chauvinism. Today it is pretty clear to me that all the last 22 years, right from the apartment building bombings by FSB in 1999, we had the Russian Nazism rising. It finally dawns on more and more people - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashism
      - skissane 5y ago
        > Roman Empire has a lot of similar aspects - there is a reason why Hitler took so much from the Roman Empire - yet it had imperial ideology, not nazist. I shared a quote by an ancient Roman general and politician saying the peoples of the Balkans, Asia Minor and the Levant were “the most worthless peoples among mankind and born for slavery”-how is that different from Hitler’s view that Slavs were an inferior race who ought to be enslaved? If there is a difference I don’t see it. But if the Roman Empire was practising “Nazism” 2000 years before Hitler was even born, maybe “Nazism” is somewhat of a misnomer for the generic phenomena (as opposed to the specific instantiation of it in 20th century Germany)
        trhway 5y ago
        > But if the Roman Empire was practising “Nazism” 2000 years before Hitler was even born, maybe “Nazism” is somewhat of a misnomer for the generic phenomena (as opposed to the specific instantiation of it in 20th century Germany) Nazism is fascism plus violent xenophobia of specific, ie. of "superiority", kind, like "master race" in case of Hitler or "master nation" in case of Russia. In my original comment i specifically mentioned practically the same definition given by Russian propagandists - "totalitarism plus political nationalism" (fascism is a totalitarism). For example Italy was fascist, yet it wasn't really nazist. Roman Empire wasn't a fascist state, thus it was also not a nazist state. USSR had totalitarism, yet it wasn't a fascism, and USSR also didn't had a nationalism ideology. Putin's Russia has both - fascism and "master nation" ideology, and thus Putin's Russia is a nazist state.

by trhway 5y ago

skissane 5y ago

People have been doing that for many centuries, even millennia. “Nazism” is a specific ideology which arose in 20th century Germany, not a generic term for violent xenophobia, which is far older than Nazism is.

trhway 5y ago
> not a generic term for violent xenophobia Nazism is when violent xenophobia becomes state ideology. That is invention of the 20th century.
- skissane 5y ago
  > There, as you know, there were Macedonians and Thracians and Illyrians, all most warlike nations, here Syrians and Asiatic Greeks, the most worthless peoples among mankind and born for slavery. That’s a quote from the Roman general and consul (joint head of state) Manius Acilius Glabrio, in the early 2nd century BCE. The quote is given by the ancient Roman historian Livy - ancient historians often invented speeches for their subjects, so Manius Acilius probably never spoke those exact words, but Livy believed they were an accurate representation of his beliefs. So, rather than being a 20th century Nazi invention, violent xenophobia was the state ideology of the ancient Roman Republic.
  - trhway 5y ago
    Roman Empire has a lot of similar aspects - there is a reason why Hitler took so much from the Roman Empire - yet it had imperial ideology, not nazist. To illustrate the difference - if Russia went in Ukraine to get those good agricultural lands or to just expand because supposedly being bigger is better that would be the imperial motive. Tsarist Russia was imperial. USSR is bit more complicated - while it looks to many like imperial, it was an ideology driven totalitarian state like Nazi Germany, just instead of Nazist ideology it had class-based/socialist/communism ideology. And now we come to Putin's Russia - it is a totalitarian state driven by a nazist ideology of Russian "master nation". Unfortunately, even say just a year ago i, like many, wasn't able to recognize Russian Nazism even though it was right into our faces - it looked to me just like strong authoritarianism with imperial ideology colored by Great Russia chauvinism. Today it is pretty clear to me that all the last 22 years, right from the apartment building bombings by FSB in 1999, we had the Russian Nazism rising. It finally dawns on more and more people - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashism
    - skissane 5y ago
      > Roman Empire has a lot of similar aspects - there is a reason why Hitler took so much from the Roman Empire - yet it had imperial ideology, not nazist. I shared a quote by an ancient Roman general and politician saying the peoples of the Balkans, Asia Minor and the Levant were “the most worthless peoples among mankind and born for slavery”-how is that different from Hitler’s view that Slavs were an inferior race who ought to be enslaved? If there is a difference I don’t see it. But if the Roman Empire was practising “Nazism” 2000 years before Hitler was even born, maybe “Nazism” is somewhat of a misnomer for the generic phenomena (as opposed to the specific instantiation of it in 20th century Germany)
      - trhway 5y ago
        > But if the Roman Empire was practising “Nazism” 2000 years before Hitler was even born, maybe “Nazism” is somewhat of a misnomer for the generic phenomena (as opposed to the specific instantiation of it in 20th century Germany) Nazism is fascism plus violent xenophobia of specific, ie. of "superiority", kind, like "master race" in case of Hitler or "master nation" in case of Russia. In my original comment i specifically mentioned practically the same definition given by Russian propagandists - "totalitarism plus political nationalism" (fascism is a totalitarism). For example Italy was fascist, yet it wasn't really nazist. Roman Empire wasn't a fascist state, thus it was also not a nazist state. USSR had totalitarism, yet it wasn't a fascism, and USSR also didn't had a nationalism ideology. Putin's Russia has both - fascism and "master nation" ideology, and thus Putin's Russia is a nazist state.