Nazism Without A Nation

Alexander Kushnar writes:

“The Putin Regime is substantially different from Lenin’s Bolshevism, Stalin’s totalitarianism, and Hitler’s Third Reich.”

While there are similarities, and the Regime has cherry-picked features from each, there are still stark differences. And if these differences are ignored, he continues, the tools needed to destroy the system won’t be chosen correctly.

“The fact is that the governments of Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler were based on socialist ideology, which arose as a reaction to the terrible social injustice that dominated the economic structure in those days: no one can deny that 15-hour child labor and the high mortality rate among 14-year-olds in manufacturing… required a strategic adjustment. All three systems gave the wrong answer to this challenge, and died at different times for different reasons.”

“In turn, Putinism is not an attempt to overcome a problem, but rather away from it and creating new challenges for the international community with only one purpose, to achieve the interests of only a small group of descendants of the imperial secret police…. The current Kremlin chimera is devoid of any ideology, an anarchist cesspool, the sole form of existence, which is endless mimicry.”

“The Russian special services have constructed an artificial, fake, non-existent enemy in the face of the West and beat him like a punching bag, posing a scarecrow for a real opponent.”

But the “three pillars of modern Russian political culture exist only on TV”. That is the law on the Russian Nation, import substation, and the restoration of Russia’s military are really nothing more than special effects for the masses to watch on TV every evening. And these are meant to “replace ideology, economy, a political system, culture, and the military.”

Kushnar then tries to argue that Russia cannot be a Nazi regime because, he says, “Russian society was atomized so long ago that reintegration is not possible…. which makes me skeptical of the threat of what is referred to as “fascist” Russian citizens.”

He continues:

“They are so disunited that social gravity is not able to bring them back into orbit with one another so that they gain at least a semblance of a normal society, which is the same as Scandinavian Europe. The most obvious example, in this sense, is the sharp contrast to how domestic violence is treated in Russia and Norway. Hence the confusion over drama related to the confiscation of children from Russian emigrants, considered normal assault.”

“For Russia, the typical story of when an alcoholic husband beats his wife with impunity for years with the complete indifference of the neighbors, and that much more tragic connivance of law enforcement bodies: they, like other social institutions, have migrated into the sphere of mirages. The country has become the world of the “Wild East” – similar to the “Wild West”. As in archaic times, concern about safety for Russians has become a private matter, and not the State’s.”

But, he continues,

“In the case of today’s Russia, we are dealing with fairly typical conformism, characteristic of intellectually weak and relatively randomly formed groups like students in remedial grades. No one would accuse twelve bullies [who are] humiliating their classmate of Nazism: it is clear that we are talking about the banal collectively fostered immorality, sometimes verging on administrative and even criminal violations.

“But Nazism requires more than a desire to assert itself at the expense of the humiliation of fellow citizens – namely, an ideological system in the form of major theories, far from the uncomplicated performances of Kiselyev and enshrined in numerous works, as well as – crucially – the real unity of social elements.

“However I do not see these factors in the generational environment of the 2000s. Nothing exists but infantile and absolutely separated (often disastrously ignorant) individuals, just as there is no ideology of the “Russian World”: it exists only as a set of hollow slogans that fit on the page of a newspaper.

“It is enough to compare this primitive stillborn product… with the amount of literature that is dedicated to the rule of law model, to see how far the Kremlin is from real plans for the indoctrination of social life.”

Yes, Russian adventurism is “a monstrous crime”, Kushnar concedes, “but it is not an independent existential threat to the West… If the Euro-Atlantic community has to live through another cycle of collapse-revival, it is not because of the Eastern barbarians, but for quite different – internal – reasons. The Russian threat here, if it even exists, is only a small, though integral part of the global disease of the US, the EU, and their allies.”

And meanwhile, Russia is on the verge of collapse, and likely won’t exist in 100 years. So what is there to fear?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s