Posted by:
admin
марта 28th, 2015
Is Mr.Putin a fascist?
First of all, let’s clarify the definitions herein. Thanks to leftism representatives, fascism shall be considered now as a reactionary form of capitalism. For this reason its followers are labeled as far rightists. In fact, for fascism economical systems there is a special term, characterizing it as a “state controlled capitalism”. However it is quite clear that it cannot be constituted as capitalism, so, basically, it is just a play upon words. In this connection I want to refer to Austrian School, namely to Nobel Prize Winner Mr. Friedrich von Hayek, which describes fascism as an utmost form of socialism. Accordingly, all fascism regimes have common features, such as absolute state domination over personality, rampant collectivism, as well merging and overcentralisation of authorities and capital, however the capital can be formally considered either as private or as state capital. Such regimes can be compared with absolute monarchies in Europe, which became a thing of the past due to their inefficiency. In this connection the second common and integral feature of such regimes is a permanent reference to archaisms and traditionalism. The third feature is presence of personality cult. In this case national leader is actually equal to the whole country. And the fourth feature is total militarization of the domestic economy, and as well of its the citizens consciousness.
So what is the best way in this case to impose archaic political regime to the citizens? It’s quite simple. Off course by using rampant propaganda and solid brain wash. Finally wrap it into nice sweetie paper, calling it “spiritual bonds”, namely religion, traditional values, extreme nationalism, fighting with internal and external enemies, as well with addition of single person glory and etc. Leftists consider this as an integral part of fascism ideology, but actually such practices usually applied in order to retain the regime. Hence the different rate of bloodiness of fascist regimes. Also it is worth noting that fascism usually appears following events of economical disasters, created by left oriented governments that usually propose boost of excessive government control instead of its dilution.
As to Putin’s Russia, so we can notice here all above mentioned four traits of fascism regimes and, for instance, in contrast with USSR, where you cannot note any case of archaisms praise (eventually confrontation between modern ambitions and archaic economical system was one of the main reasons of the USSR break-up, and now such possible confrontation is nipped in the bud by means of implementation of such persons into information realm as Mr.Dugin, Mr.Gundyaev and Mr. Chaplin (not Charly) and other characters, together with total destruction of education system and at the same time start of studying religion stuff in schools and universities). In other words you can call it as “soviet fascism”…
But the most interesting thing in this story is certainly not fascism nature of that regime, but well bringing to notice the choice of anti-fascism as a main “spiritual bond”. Here it can be mentioned quotation, assigned erroneously to Churchill, that “fascists of the future will call themselves antifascists”. Everyone who stands for Putin are automatically called antifascists, and everybody who against him are off course fascists. So far general public, being in Crimea delirium, and at a high ebb of the battle against “Benderofascists” in Ukraine are still slurping this shit and doesn’t notice any evident logical contradiction. But if you try to follow the logic, everything goes vice versa. Taking into account that Yanukovich regime was a half-baked copy of Putinism, so you can call Maidan revolution as anti-fascist, in turn, Luganda citizens (Luganda=Lugansk Peoples Republic), that initially talked about antagonism of individuality (later they pushed the attempts to invent any ideology aside at all) shall be deemed rather as fascists. For now in actual fact Kremlin propaganda is trying to equal two contrary definitions: liberalism and fascism. Maksim Shevchenko recently even coined a new term of “liberal-fascism” – I think he is “asking for the moon”. However, I suppose, general public slurps this shit again as usual.
As a final flourish of this absurd cake I would like to mention an “International Russian conservative congress”, held last weekend in St.Petersburg, where arrived delegates of far left-wing parties from Europe. This congress was arranged by “Rodina” party. This party is an offspring of Dmitriy Rogozin, that is a vice-prime minister of Russian government now. Everything was very good and finally a resolution was taken, that summarized Putin to be a good fellow, and the USA are very bad (what else can you expect from Moscow financed parties?). But there is one lack here. For instance, Udo Voight was one of the guests on this congress – recently it was called by pretty much the same Kremlin news media as neo-Nazi. Also among guests you could notice Alexey Milchakov – a dog flyer (see below) who calls himself as a neo-Nazi. Indeed there are a lot of shots with participants give the Hitler salute – it contradicts with antifascism idea of the congress. Once again Maxim Shevchenko is ready to help us saying: “Russia doesn’t fight neo-Nazi’s, but it fights with liberal-fascism”. The show must go on!
