Talk:Russian allegations of fascism against Ukraine

What is this article about?

This article is a bit schizophrenic, and can’t decide whether it belongs in categories about Russian propaganda and anti-Ukrainian sentiment, or Ukrainian nationalism. It looks like it might be WP:SYNTH as a subject, and perhaps its content should be merged into some of those articles.

I particularly don’t like propaganda articles being cited, presumably as “examples”, and I will remove these. They should be replaced with reliable secondary sources. —Michael Z. 19:31, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

I’ve cleaned up some of those problems. One thing blatantly absent is the intended use of the demonizing and dehumanizing propaganda, to help facilitate the war, motivate anti-Ukrainian ambivalence and hate, encourage the invaders and discourage foreign aid. I believe something about this can be found in Timothy Snyder, for example.

The article needs a better title: not the name of a slur, but something like Russian demonization of Ukraine. —Michael Z. 22:35, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

In any case, it probably should be renamed to "Kyiv regime", that's how I've seen it most commonly. Super Ψ Dro 18:47, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Kyiv Junta was a bad title

Kyiv junta was a bad title because a military junta is a noun referring to a specific thing. There is no council of generals running Ukraine like the Greek junta so the title is just misleading, the allegation as I understand it is that Ukraine is a civilian dictatorship Immanuelle 💗 (please tag me) 08:02, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Complain to the Russian propagandists. It’s all distortions and fakes. But obviously, readers are not getting the point, so indeed, the title should be changed to a descriptive. —Michael Z. 23:24, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

The ""Fascism" and "junta" in Soviet propaganda" section is irrelevant

There is no reason why there is an entire section on this page that is just about what Anton Shekhovtsov thinks. This article isn't about him. An he has a bias and anti-Russian. If this has to be on this page, it deserves to be in the "criticisms" section instead of part of the main article K1ausMouse (talk) 15:30, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Please explain how he is biased and anti-Russian. Criticism of Russia ≠ anti-Russian.Abcmaxx (talk) 20:01, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Please cite WP:reliable sources that say this source is “anti-Russian.” —Michael Z. 23:25, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

He consistently calls Russia a fascist state. The exact opposite of what this article is supposed to be about. The entire article reads like a Ukrainian talking about how the term is wrong, then how the term is right. Almost the entire article belongs in the criticism section. (A section that "Rashism" doesn't have, only a tiny segment called "regime response.") K1ausMouse (talk) 20:45, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Is that a response to me? When a scholar of fascism identifies the Russian state as fascist, that is not “anti-Russian” and doesn’t discredit the scholar. He’s far from the only one. —Michael Z. 03:41, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

He may be a scholar, but him being a scholar does make him automatically correct. Herman Wirth was a nazi scholar who co-founded the Ahnenerbe. So does that mean his opinions are automatically correct and he should have all the things he says on Nazism? Obviously not. Also Russia does not have a corporatist economy nor palingenetic. K1ausMouse (talk) 15:51, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

I didn’t assert the things you’re now arguing against. I disputed your initial opinion that Shekhovtsov is “anti-Russian” and you still haven’t supported it with evidence. —Michael Z. 17:49, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

He consistently calls Russia a fascist state, all you have to do is actually read the article to figure that out. K1ausMouse (talk) 22:35, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

And by the way, this article is about Ukraine being a fascist state, not Russia. (By the way, if you're curious, I don't think either is a fascist state, I just want Rashism and Russian allegations of fascism against Ukraine to be equal.) K1ausMouse (talk) 22:40, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Neutrality

This should be worded as a political myth and conspiracy theory. There is no valued academic that would even come close describing Ukraine as a regime and we should not be pandering to the quite frankly outrageously inaccurate non-scientific propaganda claims from Russian media and politicians. This is not the same as Rashism because there is numerous proof and expert academic opinion on that; although the term may be derogatory in itself it is a credible theory backed by political science. This is not, and if we look at how e.g. white genocide conspiracy theory, Holocaust denial or Christ myth theory is worded, then this article is very far off what it should be saying. Abcmaxx (talk) 19:59, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

• Yeah. The article is a collection of Russian propaganda, it remains to add about the eating of Russian Orthodox children by Ukrainians.Uliana245 (talk) 21:42, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I moved it again, because at least one editor in discussion above was discussing the accuracy of the term “junta.” It is not clear to all the nature of these slurs. A descriptive title is needed. Perhaps it can still be improved. —Michael Z. 23:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I see user:Immanuelle moved it again. “Allegations of fascism” is too narrow. “Junta,” “regime,” “foreign control,” etcetera, are words used to challenge the government’s legal and democratic legitimacy. The attacks against Zelenskyy and recent statements by Lavrov have also been called antisemitic. Putin’s theme of “fake country” and “brotherly nation” are anti-Ukrainian and has been related to Russian genocidal intent, while and his “anti-Russia” is an accusation of Russophobia. —Michael Z. 13:35, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 14 May 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

---

Result:
Not moved. See below consensus to keep the current title. Thanks and kudos to editors for your input; good health to all! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 17:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

---

Russian allegations of fascism against Ukraine → Anti-Ukrainian sentiment in the Russo-Ukrainian War – The subject is anti-Ukrainian sentiment (“animosity towards Ukrainians, Ukrainian culture, Ukrainian language, Ukraine as a nation”) during the Russo-Ukrainian War, ongoing since 2014.

This subject is a specific aspect of these two topics, and WP:reliable sources have given us significant coverage of the first as connected directly to the second. It is not only about one or several specific slurs or tropes, for example “nazis,” a “junta,” a conspiratorial centuries-old “anti-Russia project,” or the purported illegitimacy of an independent Ukrainian nation separate from the “triune nation.”

The name reflects a WP:neutral point of view and indicates the scope.  —Michael Z. 18:38, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

I moved it as per Bold Consensus Immanuelle 💗 (please tag me) 19:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

@Immanuelle: I've moved it back. Please don't move a page while an RM discussion is already open. In rare circumstances, if there's overwhelming consensus for a certain outcome, someone might snow-close a discussion early, but normally they should remain open for at least 7 days and be formally closed before any move is performed. Colin M (talk) 21:09, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Oops, maybe I should have just bold-moved it instead, since everyone seems to be okay with seeking a better title up to now. Oh well. Let’s see if there are any objections. —Michael Z. 21:26, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose The article refers to specifically Russian allegations directed narrowly at the current Ukrainian government and/or political establishment, not Ukrainians generally speaking. Unless the scope of this article becomes wider, to encompass, say, ethnic hostility, or disdain for people, culture, cuisine, etc. by anybody (not merely Russians) during this war against Ukrainians generally, the current title reflects the content better. Walrasiad (talk) 01:02, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

  That’s absolutely false. How can someone who’s read the article and doesn’t accept the hateful slurs at face value even think that? Certainly the slur “Ukro-Nazi” is intended to equate the entire nationality with Nazism, and these slurs are meant to justify war that’s indiscriminately killing Ukrainians and levelling cities in Russian and Russian-speaking regions.

  The “fascism” and “Nazism” accusations described in the article are broad, meant to be applied to Ukrainians indiscriminately or generally, and specifically to the Ukrainian military, Ukrainian National Guard and volunteer battalions, Euromaidan supporters, Bandera supporters, Poroshenko supporters, Zelenskyy supporters, Ukrainian-language speakers, Ukrainian patriots, pro-West Ukrainians, and anyone who calls themselves Ukrainian and not Russian, “Little Russian,” or a member of the “triune nation.”

  The current title is “against Ukraine.” Previous titles referred to Ukraine. It’s a new article and still needs to be developed. This title doesn’t represent a change in scope, only identifies what this language is aimed at. —Michael Z. 01:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

  Sounds like you're proposing an interpretation, not a description, of the topic in the article. While certainly interpretations and conjectures about "intent", "meant to" and "purpose" can be covered and discussed in the article text, the article title itself should be more plainly descriptive and NPOV. It is not helpful to readers to substitute a clear and informative title with moralizing vagueness. Walrasiad (talk) 07:43, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nomination. The proposed title's use of the form "Anti-Ukrainian sentiment" is indeed more descriptive of the accusatory claims than the excessively narrow one-topic "Russian allegations of fascism". —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 07:37, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
• Question for Mzajac: do you think the proposed title would be a better fit for the article as it currently exists? Or are you proposing to enlarge the scope of the article (i.e. changing the name and also expanding/reorganizing the content to include other forms of anti-Ukrainian sentiment beyond allegations of fascism)? Colin M (talk) 15:04, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

  The scope is already wider than “accusations of fascism,” as attested by the lead sentence and its three references. I’ve written some about it above. Even this narrow accusation overtly says that all Ukrainians are either evil Nazis, or powerless “Russians” without agency “held hostage” by them, and is closely tied to false accusations of “persecution of Russian-speakers,” “genocide of Russians” and being an “anti-Russia project” and “puppet” under “external control.” Inherent in the subject of the accusation, of course, is its motivation and goals: the dehumanization of all Ukrainians to justify “demilitarization and denazification”: the destruction of the Ukrainian state and nation.

  The article is not lacking in scope, but needs improvement to fully explain this background and ramifications to the reader. —Michael Z. 15:51, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

  And recall that the article was started as “Kyiv junta,” attesting to its intended scope being other than “accusations of fascism.” —Michael Z. 16:01, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

  A junta is a kind of authoritarian governing body, so I don't see that being inconsistent with accusations of fascism. My impression from the article's content (including the first sentence) is that it does currently focus on allegations of fascism/nazism, which is why I was wondering whether you were intending to rework the article's content in lockstep with the proposed name change. Colin M (talk) 18:12, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

  Vegetarian isn’t inconsistent with accusations of fascism either, but it is also not the same. The article’s content and previous titles show that its subject wasn’t narrowly restricted, and I don’t think anyone wants to impose that narrow restriction now. —Michael Z. 21:19, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. I basically agree with Walrasiad's assessment here. The current title is a more accurate reflection of the article's present content. The proposed title could be more appropriate if this article were expanded in scope as described by Walrasiad, though at that point it might make more sense to just create a separate article (with a summary style link to this one), since the specific topic being covered here is the subject of SIGCOV as a standalone topic. Colin M (talk) 18:28, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
• Comment as per my neutrality section above shouldn't this be titled something along the lines of Ukrainian fascism conspiracy theory? Abcmaxx (talk) 15:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

  That’s not bad, but I still don’t think this article is or should try to be only about that one aspect of the tangled network of conspiracy theories mentioned in it. “Junta,” “régime,” “band of junkies,” “genocide of Russians,” are not about fascism, nor is the implicit and explicit assertions that non-Nazi Ukrainians are “one people” with Russians or “little Russians”; and as well the “Russian genocide” and Zelenskyy “Nazism” accusations have been labelled antisemitic. —Michael Z. 18:00, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

How about Anti-Ukrainian conspiracy theories then, that would be much broader. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Anti-Ukrainian conspiracy theories in the Russo-Ukrainian War? —Michael Z. 12:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Is it just in the war though? These theories seem widespread throughout areas which are very far from conflict and have their beginnings in the USSR dissolution, Russian mir ideology, Chcechen war etc.Abcmaxx (talk) 14:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Perennial anti-Ukrainian conspiracy theory is for the “Background” section and should also be covered in anti-Ukrainian sentiment, all-Russian nation, Little Russia, Banderites, Russification of Ukraine, etcetera. The open mobilization of anti-Ukrainian slurs by the Russian government during its war against Ukraine is definitely the notable subject of this article, and the title reflects that. —Michael Z. 14:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. The current title seems to be a more precise descriptive title. My very best wishes (talk) 02:50, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. The proposed new title would be a different topic. The current topic is a key aspect of Putin's attempt to justify the full-scale 2022 invasion of Ukraine and the content more or less reasonably matches that topic, based on WP:RS. Whether Putin's claim of "Ukraine is a fascist/nazi state" has led to or strengthened anti-Ukrainian sentiment in Russia in the sense of widespread prejudice is not so clear, and the causal link is very weak according to one sociologist; according to Alexei Titkov on 8 June 2002 interviewed by Meduza, "Another important variable that paradoxically remains at the same level as it had been before the war is Russians' generally positive attitude toward Ukraine as a country. This support has declined, but nevertheless, a significant portion of people still have positive attitudes toward [Ukraine]. If we add all this up, we see two stable indices. In polls, a very significant percentage of people say that they support the war that is taking place on the territory of a country whose citizens they are overall positively inclined toward. Seeing them as a close, and even fraternal nation.".
  So not only are the two topics not equivalent, but it seems that a big fraction of the Russian Federation population still see "Ukrainians" positively but see the invasion as justified, presumably to "get rid of the Nazi government". Boud (talk) 23:01, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

  Dubious. Russian attitude to Ukraine has been negative since a severe drop in February 2014, and is now at its lowest recorded point since 1998.[1] —Michael Z. 23:31, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A systematic summary of significant allegations

The New Lines/Wallenberg genocide report[2] provides a very good organized summary of the Russian state’s allegations under the umbrella of “incitement to genocide.” They include a) denial of Ukrainian identity, b) accusation in a mirror, c) “denazification” and dehumanization, d) construction of Ukrainians as an existential threat, and e) conditioning the Russian audience to commit or condone atrocities (see pp 1–2 for details). Four of the five include accusations of “Nazism” and the remaining one accusations of “genocide.”

I’ve added a paragraph to the article, and it should probably be expanded and help develop other parts of the article. —Michael Z. 01:48, 1 June 2022 (UTC)