3 ms·

Let's see the definition of "far right" > [...] far-right politics now include neo-fascism, neo-Nazism, the Third Position, the alt-right, racial supremacism,

Let's see the definition of "far right" > [...] far-right politics now include neo-fascism, neo-Nazism, the Third Position, the alt-right, racial supremacism, National Bolshevism (culturally only) and other ideologies or organizations that feature aspects of authoritarian, ultra-nationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, theocratic, racist, homophobic, transphobic, and/or reactionary views." Look like Russian regime meets that point too.

parineum 4y ago
I think it makes a lot more sense to just categorize them as authoritarian. The rest of those qualifications certainly exist in Russia but I don't think it's to the extent where it's a characteristic of the regime. Fascism seems to be a "I know it when I see it" thing and I just don't see Putin as any more than a strong man ala Saddam Hussein. Somehow I feel like somewhat of a cult of personality is a key aspect of fascism and an much more oppressive suppression of subversive ideas, more like North Korea. In Russia, we hear about Pussy Riot rather than them dissapearing before we do.
- yetihehe 4y ago
  > feel like somewhat of a cult of personality is a key aspect of fascism Hmm, there is definitely a cult of personality in Russia, but maybe not directly started by Putin, I think it's organic. Otherwise I fully agree with you, it's not really fascism because there is no "belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy." All those examples of "far-right politics" look very similar from my point of view, so I think it's normal for people to get confused to the detriment of discussion.
floor2 4y ago
On the internet, it's impossible to know who is knowingly spreading propaganda and who actually believes what they're saying, but... does anyone actually believe that's a reasonable definition of "far right"? Like, this just reads like a "far left" person wrote a long list of negative slander to throw at their opponents. I don't think anyone on the right would agree with essentially any of it. The "ultra-nationalist" I guess maybe sort of works, if hyperbolic, in that I think you would get right-wing people to agree that they would prioritize their nation over others, but I think if you asked a random right-wing person on the street "do you support ____" for anything else on your list, they'd say no. I'm solidly on the left by contemporary American standards, but I just wish we'd actually have honest discussions about what people believe and want, rather than slinging insults that our opponents are evil, vile people who intentionally want bad things because they're bad.

parineum 4y ago

I think it makes a lot more sense to just categorize them as authoritarian. The rest of those qualifications certainly exist in Russia but I don't think it's to the extent where it's a characteristic of the regime. Fascism seems to be a "I know it when I see it" thing and I just don't see Putin as any more than a strong man ala Saddam Hussein. Somehow I feel like somewhat of a cult of personality is a key aspect of fascism and an much more oppressive suppression of subversive ideas, more like North Korea. In Russia, we hear about Pussy Riot rather than them dissapearing before we do.

yetihehe 4y ago
> feel like somewhat of a cult of personality is a key aspect of fascism Hmm, there is definitely a cult of personality in Russia, but maybe not directly started by Putin, I think it's organic. Otherwise I fully agree with you, it's not really fascism because there is no "belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy." All those examples of "far-right politics" look very similar from my point of view, so I think it's normal for people to get confused to the detriment of discussion.

floor2 4y ago

On the internet, it's impossible to know who is knowingly spreading propaganda and who actually believes what they're saying, but... does anyone actually believe that's a reasonable definition of "far right"? Like, this just reads like a "far left" person wrote a long list of negative slander to throw at their opponents. I don't think anyone on the right would agree with essentially any of it. The "ultra-nationalist" I guess maybe sort of works, if hyperbolic, in that I think you would get right-wing people to agree that they would prioritize their nation over others, but I think if you asked a random right-wing person on the street "do you support ____" for anything else on your list, they'd say no. I'm solidly on the left by contemporary American standards, but I just wish we'd actually have honest discussions about what people believe and want, rather than slinging insults that our opponents are evil, vile people who intentionally want bad things because they're bad.