Russia became Nazi: what Putin's state repeats Germany Hitler
As the President of the Atlantic Council Frederick Kempe stated: "There are many differences between these events. The 1930s and now is not the same, but one should not overlook a striking resemblance. " Indeed, you should not. Therefore, the question of whether it is justified with Nazi Germany or not deserves a more systematic consideration, especially given that Putin is constantly accusing the "Kiev regime" of being Nazi.
We know that it is better not to accept Putin's absurd standards as to what is Nazism, but since he opened this specific bank with worms, we are quite reasonably asking if the Nazi label regime deserves. And this means that it is necessary to distinguish the determining characteristics of the system constructed by Hitler, and to ask whether the Putin system is similar to the Hitler system, and if so, to what extent. Nazi Germany had such significant features.
It was authoritarian (and perhaps totalitarian), patriarchal and non -liberal; It was headed by a self -elected charismatic leader who claimed that he was an all -knowing, infallible, had a cult of the face and used the adoration of his numerous followers, who sincerely believed that he was a Messiah of Germany; He supported state interference in the capitalist economy; This mobilized the population; He used violence against his real and probable internal enemies and hid them in the network of concentration camps and prisons; This state subordinated the party army and secret police; it was revisionist; She glorified and waged an imperialist war.
In turn, Nazi ideology promoted and rooted in the messianism of the German nation and the empire; She claimed that she releases workers of men and women; She emphasized the unity and solidarity of the nation; She identified one group, Jews as a source of all evil; It was racism. As it shows even a cursory view of these features, Putin's regime has an unpleasant resemblance to Nazi Germany, while Putin himself is very similar to Hitler.
Putin's mobilization of Russians is not quite at the Hitler level; Its use of domestic violence is more limited (although the murder of Alexei Navalny suggests that violence may be about to begin); His network of punitive institutions is less than that of Hitler, and his glorification of war is somewhat more restrained.
The ideologically Putin Russia is racist, although much less obsessed than Nazi Germany, but it also identified a group - Ukrainians - as a source of all Russia's troubles and tries to systematically destroy it. Do these similarities qualify Putin's Russia as Nazi? If you do not require full comparability, the answer should be somewhat shaky, but eventually defined "yes".
Putin's Russia may not be as fierce Nazi as Nazi Germany, but it is certainly enough Nazi so that it can be called a state similar to a Nazi - or, if you want, a relieved Nazi state. In any case, Putin's Russia is somewhere between full-fledged fascism and a full-fledged Nazism, probably closer to the second than the first. In 2022, I argued that Putin's Russia was fascist because it was a "authoritarian state, driven by a charismatic leader who enjoys the cult of personality.
" Obviously, this characteristic needs to be revised, as Putin has pushed Russia from this simple definition towards a full Nazi. This conclusion is undoubtedly alarmed many in the West and outraged Putin and his supporters, but it inevitably follows from the above checklist. Thus, calling the Putin Russia Nazi is not an insult or humiliation, but a weighted assessment of its similarity with Nazi Germany.
Why did Putin's Russia go to this harmful way? The key causes are related to the shameful fall of the Soviet Empire and subsequent economic and political difficulties - events that emphasize the close similarity of post -Soviet Russia with Weimar Germany. Both imperial Germany and the Soviet Empire have experienced a humiliating systemic collapse and further economic difficulties, political polarization and widespread cultural anoma.
Weimar Germany and Russia of the late 1990s were accused of their troubles, who were then in power, and welcomed a man on a horse that promised to make them great again. Both Hitler and Putin destroyed democracy and replaced it with their own forms of personal authoritarian rule. The protection of their abandoned brothers in other post -imperial states was a large part of their foreign policy programs. Hitler came to the aid of the Germans in Czechoslovakia and Austria.
Putin had to defend the Russian Peace. As soon as their power was consolidated, they took up the resolution of their central national issues - Jews and Ukrainians. Is it important that Putin's Russia can be legally called Nazi or Protenecy? There are four reasons to think what is really worth it. First, it is important to name states with their right names.
Despite the polyanistic views that some Western politicians still adhere to Putin and his regime, they should be understood that, in fact, they apologize for Nazism and copy the pronacist positions of Charles Lindberg, Henry Ford and the German Bund. Secondly, similarity suggests why Putin categorically insists that Ukraine is a Nazi state. He not only repeats Soviet practice. He distracts attention from his deadly enemy.
Third, comparison with Hitler shows why the expectations of the end of the war with Ukraine through negotiation are inappropriate. If Putin is a relative of Hitler, we know that he will use any ceasefire as a break for re-equipment and restoration of his attack-to Ukraine, and then further west and north. Finally, there are potentially good news. Nazism has fallen, and his version proposed by Putin is likely to take Hitler's footsteps. Hitler's great mistake was the attack on the USSR.
Putin's task was to attack Ukraine and, as a consequence, west. The majestic mania forced both to bite more than they could. They lose because sooner or later the West will be forced to abandon their illusions about pacification and engage in the fight against Russia. The only question is what part of the event will be destroyed during this process. The author expresses a personal opinion that may not coincide with the editorial position.