This is just ridiculous - prosecuting Yaroslavl Hunka makes sense, as he himself was a part of a nazzi military outpost.
Prosecuting or using it as a political tool against Chrystia Freeland makes absolutely no sense as it was her grandfather (!) who was at involved in the nazzi business.
Blame granddaughter for grandfather's sins…
I don't know what's going on politically in Canada, but this is just pathetic in my opinion.
Edit:
Michael Chomiak, Freeland’s maternal grandfather whom she’s repeatedly cited as a political inspiration
The link to her essay mentions her grandfather a couple of times, but never "cites as a political inspiration". Just to give a historical context.
Terrible piece of journalism
What's with the nazzi?!
All nazi apologists and revisionists should read
Are you trying to imply I'm a nazi apologist for simply refusing to punish anyone for the crime they did not commit?
What if you grandfather was a rapist - would you find it necessary for yourself to go around, admit that your grandfather was a rapist, apologies for this and suffer consequences?
Anyone who worked for or supported Nazis should suffer the consequences. She did not.
If you say a Nazi is one of your biggest inspirations you are not fit for political office anywhere in the world. Full stop.
100% agree - but when did she say that?
Haven't you heard? Everyone on Lemmy who goes challenges the narrative, or asks open minded questions is branded a fascist and a Nazi.
Don't expect civil discussion here my friend.
No, Jacobin. This is why I canceled my subscription.
Rota honored a former Nazi and resigned in disgrace as well he should have. But Freeland is not her grandfather and a familial relationship does not make her a Nazi.
Also, Ukraine is not Nazi. Russia is. That's projection. And Russian propaganda.
The Ukrainian army has a ton of Nazis fighting for it, and pictures of Nazi symbols keep popping up on uniforms. I understand that the Ukrainians know they're in an existential war and need every man they can get, but it's not a good look, and honouring actual Nazis in parliament is not going to help with keeping political support for continuing to fund this war.
Same is true for Russia, btw. The Wagner group used a lot of Nazi iconography as well, and Russia was equally ok with it.
There's just a huge Nazi problem in both countries, and it's definitely something we need to worry about. Having a bunch of Nazi's with combat experience and potentially modern western weapons running around Europe is not something you want after this war. Operation Gladio showed what that can lead to.
There's a huge Nazi crisis the world over tbh. It's pretty frightening.
Agreed
Calling either Russia or Ukraine Nazi is just historically incorrect. Neither are run by national socialist workers parties, which is what Nazi used to mean.
Of both only one is the aggressor in a bloody war against their neighbor, seeking territorial gain. The to and fro accusations of being Nazi really don't help. There's racist people in both sides some who actually think Nazi insignia are bad ass.
What really matters is actions, and from my limited understanding, that needs research after this had finished, is that the Russian side is more involved in cruelty, and that the Ukrainians show restraint and try to step up to try and uphold war conventions.
Actions are more important than words. None of them are Nazis, some of them may act like them.
On the one hand, the Nazis traditionally fought communists in Germany during Weimar. But let's not forget the Soviet pact with Nazi Germany, which only ended with Germany's betrayal of Soviet Russia. Further, both were horrific dictatorships which used blatant lies and propaganda and widespread terror against its own citizens.
See the books: "Ministry of Illusion", by Eric Rentschler. And, "Projections of War", by Thomas Doherty.
As for the rise of the Third Reich, see: "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", by William Shirer, and "The Politics of Cultural Despair", by Fritz Stern.
The leadership of Ukraine is not Nazi and is not totalitarian. The leadership of Russia is.
I consider your position to be deluded.
EDIT: A thorough rading of Hannah Arendt, such as, "The Origins of Totalitarianism" is in order too.
I consider your position to be deluded.
I'll return the favor. I agree that Russian goverment is totalitarian and autocratic, with a touch of cult of personality. I'd consider it fascist and blatantly racist. But not Nazi, there's no need for that term.
Fascist but not Nazi. Curious hair to split.
Yup, fascism is a way better term. Doesn't get confused with other political blends.
For instance Stalin and Putin have very different political ideologies (and Hitler for that matter) however the term fascism fits them all.
Gets rid of the historical discussion of both Russia and Ukraine being on which side as well.
Can you describe these "different political ideologies" between Stalin and Purin, and how that matters to the absurd claim Ukraine is "Nazi" because some people wear insignia you don't like, verses widespread murder of civilians and the kidnapping of children - which you call merely, "fascist," as perpetrated by Russia under Putin's rule?
Stalin believed he was a communist. Some people even but into that today. He actually wrote a lot to have communism fit his particular brand of authoritarianism.
Putin is more nihilistic. He believes that he can recreate tsar Peters' Russia. Or so I think, he doesn't really publicize his ideas.
Of course calling each other Nazi is absurd. Why not Putinist? Why did evil today need bear the name of what evil was ninety years ago? Call them murderers racists, kidnappers. Why do we feel we need the term Nazi?
Look if they all start wearing SS uniforms, singing the Horst Wessel song, start obscure groups of Germanic mythology and read mein Kampf, then you can call them Nazi. This is an evil that needs a new name.
Because otherwise the other side will always point at the Ukrainians that did help the Nazis and say 'you did that too!' And that's a useless discussion.
