Umberto Eco - Ur Fascism

[Thomas Eckhardt]

Thank you for a thoughtful and informed response.

Let me start with a few lengthy quotes from today's Newsweek article on
the issue. It should be an interesting read - especially for those among
us who rail against white supremacists in their own country but insult
everybody who dares to mention neo-Nazis in Ukraine. You know who you are.

"A year after the deadly riot that ensued when mostly far-right
protestors descended on the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to overturn the
presidential election, white supremacists and other like-minded radicals
see fertile ground to recruit and train abroad in war-torn Ukraine."

"'Since the 2014 Maidan revolution, the government, military and
security forces have institutionalized in its ranks former militias and
volunteer battalions linked to neo-Nazi ideology,' Kuzmenko told
Newsweek. 'Without screening for extremist ties or views, their
integration has not led to depoliticization and/or dissolution once
incorporated within the larger body of the government military and
security forces.'

He cites as a prominent example the Azov Special Operations Detachment,
also known as the Azov Battalion or Azov Regiment. It was established by
the Ukrainian Ministry of the Interior after the conflict broke out in
2014, and was later transferred to the National Guard. Kuzmenko calls
the regiment 'a highly-capable and heavily armed unit reportedly
numbering 1100 or more fighters that is also the military wing of the
internationally active Azov movement.'

'Via Azov's political wing – the National Corps party; described by
researchers as neo-Nazi,' Kuzmenko added, "the movement has gone
international on multiple fronts with known contacts in Germany's
neo-Nazi Third Path (Der Dritte Weg) party, America's Rise Above
Movement, Italy's Casa Pound, etc.; but also with less-scrutinized
international contacts via other branches of the movement that draw less
attention but may carry equally dangerous implications."

Note in particular:

"'Apparently deradicalizing the Ukrainian military and security forces
of far-right elements is simply not on Washington's wish-list. The same
applies to other Western governments supporting Ukraine.'"

And Amen to this:

"Kuzmenko called on the U.S. and Western allies 'to treat neo-Nazis and
the far-right in Ukraine's military and elsewhere in the same fashion
they treat them in other Western militaries.'"

https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-war-draws-us-far-right-fight-russia-violence-home-1665027

Kuzmenko has worked for Bellingcat and the Atlantic Council and is
therefore under no suspicion whatsoever of being a Russian
desinformation agent. Usually I would trust a person working for those
outfits only as far as I can throw them.

> For me, as well as
> for some of his his followers, however, Bandera represents the Ukrainian
> Nazi collaborators who took part in the Holocaust (whether Bandera
> himself took part is beside the point).
>
> The term “collaborator” is wrong. “Collaboration” is usually understood as
> voluntary cooperation with an occupying force in order to gain personal
> profits from it. The OUN however considered themselves as “allies” of the
> axis powers pursuing their own political interest and having cooperated
> with them from the mid 1930s, bringing in their own organisational
> structures and even fighters. One may argue, whether being “allies” is
> morally better, but definitely this term is more correct than
> “collaborators”. The OUN-B (Bandera’s branch) left this alliance shortly
> after the German invasion.

"Collaborators" is a term commonly used in official reports and
academia. Compared to "allies" it has the advantage of not only
referring to the OUN and how they saw their role with regard to the
Germans but also to the locals who committed the massacres (e.g. Lvov,
Babi Yar) together with the German forces. One *collaborates* in
massacres of Jews. Morally, it makes no difference.

> Regarding "some of his followers", I have explained in length how most of
> them see him like a Ukrainian Che Guevara (with as little historic
> accuracy), primarily associating him with Western Ukrainian anti Soviet
> resistance from 1943/1944 - approx. 1949. Like in any other country there
> are of course hard core ned nazis who may well see him for what he was, but
> this group is very small, far smaller than comparable forces in Western
> European countries like Germany (almost worst), France, …

It is not "like in any other country". In Germany, for example, no
neo-Nazi has assumed a position comparable to the position of the
Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council or President of
Parliament like Andriy Parubiy did. No member of the right wing of the
AfD has become a minister yet (let us hope it stays that way) like some
members of Svoboda did after the coup/revolution. Since the days of the
original National Socialists who assumed high office after the war, e.g.
Theodor Oberländer, members of whose unit "Bataillon Nachtigall"
together with local forces committed the massacre of Lemberg or Lvov
(https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/irn1000431) or Hans
Globke, no Nazi has been a member of the German government. Hans
Filbinger in Baden-Württemberg presumably was the last example.

Germany certainly has neo-Nazis in their armed forces but they have to
hide their convictions. Otherwise they are expelled from the army. No
neo-Nazi militia has ever been incorporated into the German Bundeswehr
(NATO stay-behind-armies are a different matter).

> Random points off the top of my head: The US
> Army trained and armed the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion.

> First: Azov is not a “neo Nazi Battalion”. It is a volunteer unit formed by
> neo nazis, however their political views was not the reason for quite a
> number of people to join them. In 2014 they were one of the few units
> opposing the Russian invasion that were properly armed and had proper
> military commanders, so that one had a chance to make an impact and not end
> up as cannon fodder as it would have been in the Ukrainian army at that
> time (which was so poorly equipped that it could not even provide boots to
> everyone, people went to the front in sneakers).
>
> The sad truth is that the Ukrainian government depended on all the
> different volunteer units. Without them the Russian forces would have taken
> Mariupol and most likely cut Ukraine off from the Azov sea creating a land
> connection to annexed Crimea. Hence US support for them at that time was
> necessary and logical.
>
> In the mean time the volunteer units have lost their independence as they
> were integrated into the army’s structures and put under army command. I
> know that this fact has been vastly exploited using it as “proof” for neo
> nazis in Ukraine’s army. From Ukraine’s perspective this step aimed at
> sustaining the volunteer units’ military value while getting them under
> control, avoiding “state in state” structures.

But it IS "proof for neo-Nazis in Ukraine's army"! How could it not be?

I read the three paragraphs from your comment I quote above and wonder
what you possibly might think is wrong with calling Azov a "neo-Nazi
Battalion"? I may be forgiven for not relating the history of the unit
in detail, don't you think?

The symbols they use, or used to use, the SS-Wolfsangel and the Black
Sun are forbidden in Germany. They are Nazi symbols.

"Public exhibition of the symbol is illegal in Germany if a connection
with one of these groups is apparent. After World War II, the symbol was
used by some Neo-Nazi organizations. In the United States the Aryan
Nations organization uses a white Wolfsangel symbol with a sword
replacing the cross-bar in its logo.

A similar sign was used in Ukraine by the Social-National Party of
Ukraine, Social-National Assembly and Azov Battalion. Group members
claim that the symbol is an abbreviation for the slogan Ідея Нації
(Ukrainian for "National Idea") and deny connection with National
Socialism."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfsangel

"National Idea" - at least they have a sense of humour.

You say "US support for them at that time was necessary and logical". I
say, if you find it necessary and logical to train and arm neo-Nazis,
you ought to have a long and hard look at your priorities. Especially,
if you are German (I usually don't make an issue of the nationalities of
people involved in a discussion but I make an exception for events
related to Nazism or the Holocaust).

> It is forbidden by
> law to condemn Nazi collaborators like Stepan Bandera or Roman
> Shukhevych, who have had streets and memorials named for them across
> Ukraine.
>
> Really? Please show me that law. Spoiler: this is a fake.

-- Lawmakers recently passed a controversial law that honors dozens of
nationalist organizations — including far-left socialists, monarchists,
and neo-fascists — as “fighters for Ukrainian statehood.” The law states
that those who “publicly exhibit a disrespectful attitude” toward these
groups, or “deny the legitimacy” of Ukraine’s twentieth century struggle
for independence, will be prosecuted (currently no punishment is
specified). While most of the groups on the list are harmless enough,
among them are two — the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN)
and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) — that were involved in the
Holocaust and the ethnic cleansing of Poles in western Ukraine during
and after World War II. The inclusion of these organizations among those
that are exempt from criticism is deeply disturbing. --

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/27/dear-ukraine-please-dont-shoot-yourself-in-the-foot-nationalists-russia-bandera-rada/

This is fake?

> Katchanovski’s paper has been often cited by people following a “pro
> Russian” narrative. However it has been widely contradicted, and his
> theories are not generally accepted. However I’ll not dive into a
> discussion on conspiracy theories around the Maidan snipers, even though
> this could be appreciated as “Pynchonesque” by some 😎

My take on the issue has nothing to do with a "'pro-Russian' narrative"
whatsoever. Facts are facts. And one man's conspiracy theory is another
man's hypothesis about a covert political operation.

You may claim that I am a victim of Russian desinformation, which you
actually do between the lines, but I am afraid that you will have to
prove that.

> Idefix? The neo-Nazi and "Commander of the Maidan" Andriy Parubiy is not
> an important figure?
>
> Not of relevance. The fact that people from various political camps played
> some roles in that context does not prove your point, mentioning them looks
> anecdotic to me.

Parubiy certainly seems to be of relevance to me - Ukraine's liaison to
NATO in Brussels, a person with access to Nuland and Pyatt during the
Maidan, the "Commandant of the Euromaidan", Secretary of the National
Security and Defence Council and President of the Verkhovna Rada. And a
neo-Nazi, of course. A former leader of neo-Nazi paramilitary outfits
under the Wolfsangel and the Schwarze Sonne ("Patriot of Ukraine").

> Absurdly, parts of the European left have started solidarising with the proxy
> “republics” created by Russia in the East claiming this to be an act of
> “anti fascism” which is particularly ridiculous as in those entities Russia
> has assembled a full collection of Russian neo nazis, orthodox religious
> nationalists etc. (like e.g. Prizrak, Vostok, Rusich, Legion St Istvan, RNU
> “Russian National Unity", Russian Orthodox Army) representing a proportion
> of right-wing extremists in both their “armed forces” and “governments”
> that Ukraine does not get anywhere near.

Apart from the bit about Ukraine at the end, I agree. But Russian
neo-Nazis etc. are not supported by the West. This, as you may remember,
was my point from the beginning.

> And the worst: a vast group of “Ukrainian fascism critics” have never been
> to that country, do not know anything about its history, culture and
> present society, building their “knowledge” entirely on the media (a good
> part of which originating from the “alternative” spectrum with unclear
> origins, very successfully positioning itself as the better option than the
> allegedly “controlled” “mainstream”).

I am definitely guilty as charged and I don't doubt for a second that
you know a lot more about Ukrainian "history, culture and present
society" than I do. I doubt, however, that you know more about it than
Volodymyr Ishchenko:

"Recently the massive rallies of the far right parties, the powerful
public presentation of the National Militia affiliated to Azov’s
'National Corps' party, escalating attacks by extreme right groups
against leftist, feminist, LGBT, human rights events brought Ukrainian
radical nationalists back into the center of the public discussion.

The dominant narrative since Maidan in Ukrainian and much of the Western
public spheres have been systematically downplaying the problem – either
arguing that Ukrainian far right are not really 'fascists' in the strict
definition of the term, or that they are simply puppets of Ukrainian
oligarchs or even Russian intelligence, or that they are small and
marginal. The latter, liberal version of the denialist narrative
originated during Maidan protests in politically motivated attempts to
counter Russian propaganda exaggerating the far right role and to
legitimate the events for the Western liberal-progressive public. Later,
the poor performance of Svoboda and the Right Sector in 2014 elections
gave a kind of the ultimate argument for irrelevance of the far right in
Ukraine. The denialist narrative not only obfuscated the causal dynamics
of toppling Viktor Yanukovych but is preventing an adequate analysis of
the radical nationalists’ danger now downplaying their
extraparliamentary power, violent resources, street mobilization
potential, interpenetration with law enforcement and overall impact on
Ukrainian politics."

https://voxukraine.org/en/denial-of-the-obvious-far-right-in-maidan-protests-and-their-danger-today/

As far as I can tell, Volodymyr Ishchenko, who initially supported the
Maidan, was the first to report on the growing influence of the far
right in the Western mainstream media (The Guardian).

It seems that I believe that you downplay the role of the far-right in
Ukraine, and that you believe that I exaggerate it. So be it.

> Anti fascism is common sense, not a religion. Unfortunately in Europe good
> parts of the political left (which I generally consider myself a part of)
> have never understood this and continue staging witch hunts believing
> themselves not to be “controlled by THEM” - hey, that’s Pynchonesque again
> - but actually following scenarios carefully created and staged by other …
> governments). Anyone interested in the technologies involved in this may
> take a look at Timothy Snyder’s excellent talk on propaganda from November
> 2014 [3], all the stuff he mentions we can still observe on a daily basis.

Both sides can carefully create and stage scenarios...

I will let this rest now. Thank you for a civil argument. Perhaps you
agree that everybody interested in the matter should be familiar with this:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957