7

Putin's regime is authoritarian and unfair, in my humble opinion. But he is being called a fascist, and of course, he can be as evil as anyone and not be fascist. But is his regime far right? In other words, is he deserving of the term fascist? Of course, he can be as evil as they come, and be far left for example. All I'm asking is if fascist is a politically and scientifically correct term of what Putin's regime is.

Rodrigo de Azevedo
  • 1
  • 7
  • 24
Nikolai Frolov
  • 205
  • 1
  • 3

5 Answers5

18

In politics, labels like this change over time and from place to place. That can lead to misunderstandings.

  • Fascism is often associated with authoritarian rule, but it is not the only authoritarian model, so that is not very helpful.
  • Fascism is often associated with strong state intervention in the economy, often at the expense of workers but also at the expense of capitalists/investors, who are not allowed to seek profits where they see fit. The relationship between Russian oligarchs, industries, and the government is complex, but there are probably elements of fascist practice.
  • Fascism is often associated with Irredentism, and Russia shows clear signs of that. But again, not only fascism is associated with Irredentism.
  • Fascism is often associated with Imperialism, and Russia shows clear signs of that. But again, not only fascism is associated with Imperialism.

So I find the label Fascist possibly correct, considering how many characteristics match. But not helpful for analysis or policy debate. It might be helpful for propaganda.

o.m.
  • 108,520
  • 19
  • 265
  • 393
  • 10
    I'd also note that in colloquial terms, "fascist" is basically a disparaging insult against the country/politician, not an attempt to draw an accurate historical parallel. Same with "nazi". – JonathanReez Jul 10 '22 at 01:59
  • 1
    @JonathanReez You mean there aren't any real Nazis existing currently in the sense of an accurate historical parallel? – NoDataDumpNoContribution Jul 10 '22 at 09:25
  • 4
    @Trilarion, in a very narrow sense a Nazi is a member of the NSDAP. This institution was dissolved at the end of WWII and there is no legal successor organization. So one can find former Nazis, unrepentant ex-Nazis, and so on. In a broader sense a nazi is a supporter of the ideology of the NSDAP or one of their unofficial successor organizations. Plenty of those around. In an even broader sense, it is a supporter of an ideology similar to that of the NSDAP. Even more of those. But when you wrote "accurate historical parallel," does that include the belief in the superiority of an "Aryan" race? – o.m. Jul 10 '22 at 09:46
  • 1
    @o.m. Such people are more usually called "neo-Nazis." – Obie 2.0 Jul 10 '22 at 12:11
  • @Obie2.0, which people? Those in Germany? White supremacists in the US? That makes sense. Using the label for Russian supremacists is more iffy. – o.m. Jul 10 '22 at 13:08
  • 1
    It might be worth noting that, in analogy to this answer, the US may arguably be considered just as fascist. – csstudent1418 Jul 10 '22 at 14:03
  • 3
    @csstudent1418, I disagree with that. The difference in opinion between the executive, legislative, and judiciary violates one of they key characteristics of fascism. – o.m. Jul 10 '22 at 14:49
  • Fascism is an ideology or national movement, not a form of government or personal views. In this sense Putin cannot be a fascist or not - rather it is a claim that one makes about Russians as a nation... and it is a far-reaching claim. – Roger V. Jul 10 '22 at 16:18
  • One characteristic of Fascism is that is a party and mass movement with public mass displays, as in Nazi Germany and Italy where masses are gathered in organized spectacles to celebrate the leader and rouse feelings of power and unity. This element is mostly missing in Russia, afaics. – Peter - Reinstate Monica Jul 10 '22 at 18:49
2

Is Putin Fascist? Yes.

Let's take a quick look at the definition of fascism. Below is an example, others have very similar definitions of fascism.

The definition according to Merriam-Webster: A political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

Putin complies with all criteria.

Joey Joystick
  • 1,306
  • 10
  • 20
  • This is the argument used by "lumpists", who use a simple def of fascism such as that quoted. OTOH, others argue that there's more to fascism than that. If one easily glosses over race in that def, it's basically defining any nationalist-autocratic regime, even something like an authoritarian monarchy or the states of the Soviet bloc. – the gods from engineering Jul 11 '22 at 04:08
  • "severe economic and social regimentation," Yet Russia has quite a bit of individual financial freedoms compared to known fascist governments. Including property rights as well as very low taxation. Lower than even the US... Communism does not equal fascism. Authoritarian does not equal fascism. Nobody considers Singapore a fascist government. Yet they are one of the most authoritarian governments in the world. – DataMinion Jul 12 '22 at 12:11
  • @DataMinion, without disputing the core of the argument, it's a common misconception that taxation is low in Russia. The income tax is low (but almost flat, which means low-paid workers are taxed more than in most countries), but there is a much higher (about 2.5x) set of taxes paid by the employer (pension, social security, medical, etc.) Plus a high VAT of 20%. – Zeus Oct 24 '23 at 00:37
2

Depends on the definition of fascism used.

These days, a narrow definition is used in Russia:

Fascist = someone the Russian government doesn't like.

Obviously, the head of the state doesn't qualify.

On the other hand, when we go to the origins of the word (the dominant political ideology in Italy in 1920s, 1930s, 1940s) we can find a great deal of similarities to modern Russia.

There are differences as well. E.g.

  • there is no repression against a particular ethnic or religious group in Russia (as of now, as far as I know). Jews are safe, at least as much as everyone else in Russia. There are some ethnic and religious tensions in Russia, but the state doesn't take side in them.
  • religious leaders are in somewhat distanced, but warm relationships with the government.

On the third hand, once something like fascism is established in a country, the concepts of the political left and right become meaningless.

There is no political debate in Russia, so there is no established spectrum of political views.

Compared to European or American political spectra, the dominant Russian state ideology and policy can be viewed as either far left or far right, depending on what part is considered important.

fraxinus
  • 6,100
  • 11
  • 31
0

No, Putin isn't Far Right.

Coz,

  1. religious minorities in Russia enjoy widespread freedom
  2. Putil has taken some measures to eradicate Neo-Nazis inside Russia
  3. Putin has a tolerant policy toward migrant workers
user366312
  • 1
  • 7
  • 54
  • 117
  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. – Philipp Jul 10 '22 at 20:11
  • 1
    Eh, he dissolved the RNE in 2000. Ages ago. Back then he even wanted to join NATO and what not. I mean this answer has somewhat valid points but not exactly well supported. As I recall, Mussolini was also a bonafide socialist in his youth, before started to emphasize nationalism more and more. – the gods from engineering Jul 11 '22 at 03:47
-1

What if I told you N. Korea is way more left than Singapore? Left and right should only be used to describe economic policies, not social policies. There is left, right, authoritarian and libertarian at each quadrant extreme. Using only left and right, N. Korea would be, as The Political Compass points out, a "shining model of human rights and social freedoms." Authoritarian does not equal right. Libertarian does not equal left.

Asking if someone is left or right and then asking if someone's facist or not is contradictory. One can be a facist and left and one can be facist and right. Of course, people on the left in the US won't like hearing that. But fact is, whether fiscally conservative or fiscally liberal, one can not tolerate opposing viewpoints and want a strong central government, thus making them a facist.

Is Singapore facist? Well, they are one of the most authoritarian countries in the world. The country is also highly fiscally conservative. Opposit of them in fiscal matters is N. Korea. But N. Korea is [slightly] more authoritarian.

If defining facism as economic freedom (or the lack therof), Ukraine is on par with Russia according to the Index of Economic Freedom. Is Ukraine fascist? Far right?

I guess the answer depends on where you define center and how you define freedom and whether or not you like the answer you came up with. Which means, labels such as this will always be subjective and defined by popular opinion.

It's kind of like "which sports team is the best." Well, that depends on what metrics one uses to calculate their power rankings. If they even use a scoring system.

DataMinion
  • 173
  • 5
  • Well, but is Putin far right or not? I enjoy the explanations of this answer but I'm not sure it answers the question. – NoDataDumpNoContribution Jul 10 '22 at 09:28
  • 1
    @Trilarion, Putin, thus Russia, is no further right than Ukraine is. This based on the proper use of left and right (fiscal). I pretty much answered that in the reply. And was the question whether or not he is far right, or a facist? Because they are not synonymous (for the reasons stated).As others touched on it, there are several definitions of facist. I used one of them. The one found in dictionaries. – DataMinion Jul 10 '22 at 09:31
  • 1
    "Left and right should only be used to describe economic policies, not social policies." - says who? That seems like a very non-standard assumption to me? – Eike P. Jul 10 '22 at 12:52
  • 2
    One can be authoritarian, totalitarian and repressive while being on the left, but fascist? Left-wing extremism is absolutely as awful and totalitarian as right-wing extremism, but I would argue only the right-wing ones can be referred to as fascist (although I personally avoid using the term at all for anything but the Fascist parties of circa WWII since the term has almost lost its meaning in modern use). – terdon Jul 10 '22 at 13:39
  • 1
    On the contrary, the primary distinction between left and right is emphasis on equality vs emphasis on hierarchy, a primarily social distinction which only approximately aligns with economics. Fascism is an ideology based around hierarchy. Maybe you can imagine a "left fascism" but this answer doesn't really explain how such a thing could exist. – Reasonably Against Genocide Jul 10 '22 at 15:33
  • @user253751, so you are suggesting that Political Compass is wrong? – DataMinion Jul 11 '22 at 09:04
  • 1
    @BrandonStivers Googling 'Political Compass is wrong' brings up a variety of answers which I won't repeat here. – Reasonably Against Genocide Jul 11 '22 at 09:05
  • @EikeP., references are in my answer. And the reason why that is is also in the answer. N. Korea is left when it comes to economics/finances. But they aren't exactly a good example of left social policies, now are they? – DataMinion Jul 11 '22 at 09:08
  • @user253751 there's more to left and right than just social matters and you only addressed social matters while totally ignoring the authoritarian and libertarian portions of politics. And Left and Right is wrongly used as a Synonym of Dem and Rep. Left, right, authoritarian, libertarian. And every country can be a mix of all. Left and Libertarian, left and authoritarian, right and libertarian etc. Political Compass gives examples of that. Like I said, those on the left won't like the answer. But it is what it is. – DataMinion Jul 11 '22 at 09:14
  • user253751 keep thinking left and right is about social justice. North Korea is LEFT. Why? Because the entire country is dependent on other country's money. JUST LIKE THE DEMOCRAT GHETTOS. Social issues are an authoritarian and libertarian thing. Not a left and right thing. DO NOT confuse Democrat and Republican with left and right. They ARE NOT one in the same. One can be a Dem and fiscally conservative. And one can be a Rep and be fiscally liberal. One can be a Dem and very authoritarian. Etc. – DataMinion Jul 12 '22 at 05:20
  • @user253751 Example of an authoritarian Democrat? One in which who likes to cesnsor the heck out of people Singapore style. You know. Like Dems and social media. Banning people because they don't tolerate opposing viewpoints. You know, like a fascist. But Dems just sit back and flat out ignore opposing viewpoints. BET you didn't even click on anything in my reply to actually learn anything. THIS is why left and right is reserved for fiscal matters and authoritarian and libertarian are reserved for social matters. – DataMinion Jul 12 '22 at 05:28