Talk:Ruscism

Past deletion, move and merge proposals (click to expand)

Far right or far left? Or it is the same?

The point is that Putin and others are the members of soviet communist party. And if Yeltsin refused his party membership card, they didn't. Stalin also used imperial attributes when they were necessary for him: church, "Homeland", "rus...", shoulder straps in army, etc. They are proud of Stalin, they took back the soviet anthem, they totally control the Russuan economy, are they really right? Maximalist (talk) 05:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

It’s an interesting point that there seems to be a crossover between communist/Soviet elements and a far right one. Many authors state in this article there’s fascist traits to the regime. At the same time the Communist party in Russia seems mostly on board witj Putin’s project from what I see, and Putin is a nostalgic for the Soviet Union. Maybe it’s related to the horseshoe theory of politics, or the alleged red brown alliance. I have no idea, but the Putin regime and its adherents do nominally seem to constitute an eclectic array of ideologies united under the umbrella of Russian nationalism and anti-Westernism. Euor (talk) 07:50, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

I think this is neither "left" nor "right". This is a merger of the Soviet and Russian imperialisms per Nikolai Berdyaev: "The Russian people did not achieve their ancient dream of Moscow, the Third Rome. The ecclesiastical schism of the 17th century revealed that the muscovite tsardom is not the third Rome. The messianic idea of the Russian people assumed either an apocalyptic form or a revolutionary; and then there occurred an amazing event in the destiny of the Russian people. Instead of the Third Rome in Russia, the Third International was achieved, and many of the features of the Third Rome pass over to the Third International. The Third International is also a Holy Empire, and it also is founded on an Orthodox faith. The Third International is not international, but a Russian national idea."

But you need RS to make connection to this page. My very best wishes (talk) 03:10, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Academics who are experts on the matter state that extreme ideologies have a lot in common, and the left-right spectrum is more of a circle, where the very extreme far left is close to the very extreme far right, which have both more in common with each other than for example with the centre-left or centre-right.Abcmaxx (talk) 16:29, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, certainly, and I too read about it in a couple of books. That is why "communism" and fascism converge. That is why the concept of totalitarianism. And here is an illustration as relates to this page: Rashists recreate memorials to Lenin in Ukraine. My very best wishes (talk) 16:20, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Of course one of the key differences between "left" communists and "right" fascists (as claimed in many sources) is that the former are internationalists, but the latter are nationalists. That's why I cited Berdyaev above who explained that Soviet internationalism was in fact Russian nationalism, the building of New Russian Empire. That is what Putin wanted to do. My very best wishes (talk) 00:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Dangerous word...

In my humble opinion, words are important, terminology creates logical and emotional associations in human brains. So, this word is dangerous, because it uses the word "Russian", which means simply every man that was born by the Russian women and speaks Russian language. Why do we blame every Russian, even if they do not support invasion in Ukraine? We must call it " Russian militarism" or maybe "ideology of Russian supporters of invasion". Why use the word that offence russians who not support invasion, or maybe even supports Ukraine? I think this word leads to russofobia and national conflicts, not to clear understanding of the situation. May the peace be on Earth. Stop war! 79.172.89.185 (talk) 18:00, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Nearly all the sources used are Ukrainian sources. This is fully propaganda. Once the war dies down. We can delete some of this nonsense. Ahm1453 (talk) 20:14, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

— 79.172.89.185 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

@79.172.89.185 you're right 46.72.204.73 (talk) 18:44, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely correct, it’s a shame this page exists. JtLea7 (talk) 07:00, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

• I think this is completely wrong interpretation. If applied to people (i.e. to "rashists") the term is not about all ethnic Russians or Russian-speakers (many thousands of ethnic Russians are killed by rashists in Mariupol), but to citizens of Russia who support or participate in Russian military aggression, colonialism, or state-promoted totalitarianism (they are not necessarily ethnic Russians, some of them are Buryats, whoever). The term does apply to the entire Russian armed forces during wars in Chechnya, Georgia, Syria and Ukraine. My very best wishes (talk) 02:36, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

few words from inner witness

Ok reading recent debates about the topic was a messy work but seems like I got it now. Beeing a sort of a native speaker of Russian I saw a pattern that might alarm you. Liberal thinking people in Russia have a habbit of ignoring some bounds of litreature language witch mean that your understanding of word might be slightly wrong.

I know thats awfull thing to read. But as far as I can judge you got it more or less right. Its a mix of words russia(n) and fachism. But here is a kicker. Both this words have different sub meaning in all CSI countries.

You know. I Just wrote big and boring wall of text just full of water and now I want it to be clear and short. SO...

Term of "rashizm"(what a surprise) not used by russians. But its not used by Ukranians aswell(mostly). Its all due to the fact that this is not a comentary of russain actions or some form of protest. Its a half-insult comparing all kinds of partiotism to purest evil. And by all I MEAN all. Even positive one, like reformism and charity to poor(Yes its a right wing ideas here. All what is not straight hate to existing goverments is more about it below).

in few words thats cause of lack of centristic kind of politicans active active citizens. Russia is split on two camps witch opress not specificly their ideadlogical oposite but all mass of people that beyond their circle. That lead to radilacisation on both sides and forcing people to join one of two to avoid double harasment both from Vatniks(slang for pro Putin Right radical) and Liberaha (a joke-ish name for all liberals, considered as a light insult. Used mostly to show a same as Vatniks radicalism level of oponent by minor right lean people. Not by Vatniks, these just insult them)

So I think You understand where Im leading a point. Rashizm is presented as idea of Russia prospering over ones who weaker, when actually its a libertarian weaponised slang only mean of witch is to tilt all right movement followers to avoid conversation. Its a shortcut to an end of a pointless debate, identification mark and insult at once. please do not mix work of thousands people, like me, on building a propper political debate culture bit bu bit with some emotional radicalism supported mostly by teenagers doing so more of an age's specific than reflection of reality.(Basicly let US judge what our words mean)

I know you want it all to be well bordered, easy to read out info off and well sorted truth. I would like it to be same too. But world is a bit more messy place, we cant devide things on black and white because in that case some, ugly as recent, actions would be made again. Thanks for reading I needed to tell this in any form somewhere.

--Kolterpam (talk) 02:07, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

No educated individual would use this term, it’s popular among Reddit. JtLea7 (talk) 06:59, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

@JtLea7 I'm sorry, but you're either wrong, biased, or both. Do you mean "no educated Russian would used that term"? The term has come into fairly widespread use in the English language, especially since Russia's appalling and sub-human outrages in Ukraine since Feb 24 2022. The term 'rashist' is evidently used in mainstream media outlets as far afield as Al Jazeera (see here). We follow what reliable sources say, not what you think you can dismiss as a term only found in Reddit posts.

It even appears to be causing Putin's Russians quite a degree of angst. There are stories emerging that "Russia's Roskomnadzor requires Wikipedia to delete articles in English" As yet, I see no reliable source to support that Tweet, so it can't go into the article until substantiated. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:15, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes here is the official document of Roskomnadzor 78.113.169.222 (talk) 09:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that also appears in article by Novaya Gazeta - [1] and here. So can be included to the page as something relevant and reliably sourced. My very best wishes (talk) 23:54, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

"Russia's appalling and sub-human outrages". And you determined that from your room? From what investigations comes this? You're clearly biased and you have no place here. 190.134.2.173 (talk) 23:38, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

See War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, or use a search engine of your choice to find innumerable mainstream media accounts and images published across the globe of appalling atrocities and inhuman acts inflicted by Russian aggressors in Ukraine. I think 'sub-human' is a fair description for any fair-minded person to describe these rashists' actions. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:25, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

"Rashism or why russians are the new Nazi". VoxUkraine

"Rashism or why russians are the new Nazi". VoxUkraine

This article is mostly ridiculous, it uses sources such as Vox Ukraine which claims "Russians are the new Nazis", which is ridiculous. It is similar nonsense to how Russia says they are denazifying Ukraine, though they at least show photos of swastikas being used. Nonetheless, this is simple propaganda, that both sides accuse one another of nonsense. Raschism seems like a made-up thing since no one other than Ukrainians claim its existence. Russian irredentism See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_irredentism Ahm1453 (talk) 20:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

You're free to call the article ridiculous, but to claim "no one other than Ukrainians claim its existence" is showing your ignorance of Central and Eastern Europe. Its a made-up term, just as any other term in existence, so that's not a valid argument either. Timothy D. Snyder, which is one of the foremost genocide/totalitarian/fascist scholars around has gone on record to explicitly call the regime fascist numerous times after the invasion, to name just one. That's neither a Ukrainian, nor some random schmuck. Anne Applebaum is another. Niall Ferguson, what many describe as a "conservative" historian (I don't subscribe to the term, but just to contrast with supposedly "liberal" Applebaum), has called Putin's rally for Crimea "fascistic". The people who are considered reliable or to carry an authority in these subjects are calling it as they see it. That's not to say everyone agrees, however. Nor that the article is perfect (its a work in progress). If you find the article disturbing in some way, fine; if you find objectionable sources, point it out (I hadn't noticed VoxUkraine), but to argue the entire article is nonsense, and making a false equivalence with the "de-nazification" stuff is what's really ridiculous. I think its great we have users like you to make sure we aren't falling into biases, and that we stick to reliable sources, but IMO you got it a little wrong here.--Euor (talk) 22:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

talk page issues: time for a FAQ page?

I've only recently started watching this page, but I have a couple observations:

• A minor point perhaps, but I think we should do something about the forest of merge notifications at the top. To have that many notifications fully displayed seems silly and it is taking up a lot of real estate at the top of the page.

• A lot of users coming here to object to the entire concept of this page seem to be mistaking what Wikipedia is and how it works. Wikipedia isn't claiming Russia has gone fascist, it is, as always, reflecting what was already written in sources. A possible way to mitigate this is a FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) section up top. Will this stop every user who wishes to make the same objections later? No, what it does is make responding easier, with a simple "Please read the FAQ at the top of the page. If you are certain the issue you bringing up is not addressed there then feel free to repost your question." as opposed to having to start from scratch each time.

• If there's enthusiasm for that idea, how to proceed would be either to discuss the phrasing of the questions here, or for someone to simply WP:BB and go ahead and do it by creating Talk:Rashism/FAQ, and then adding {{FAQ}} in a good spot with the other front matter at the top of the page. An fairly simple example of such a page is at Talk:Elk/FAQ.

Thoughts? Beeblebrox (talk) 17:35, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Good points. I've collapsed the forest of merge proposals, as well as the daily readership chart. All are still available on a click, but now don't overwhelm the new reader as much as they once did. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:33, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

>>> Wikipedia isn't claiming Russia has gone fascist, it is, as always, reflecting what was already written in sources.

The problem is that Wikipedia here is used as a dictionary. It also uses inaccurate definitions.

The term "Rashism" was coined by Ukrainians to insult Russians. It consists of two things "Russian" + "Fascism". I have repeatedly tried to get evidence of the presence of "fascism" in Russia from the discussions here. Nobody could prove it. So this article SHOULD NOT exist on wikipedia because it describes something that doesn't exist.

Everyone who claims that the article should be here because "someone somewhere used this word" is in fact a hypocrite. Because in the "sources" this word is used to insult Russians. Accordingly, the sole purpose of this article is to insult the Russians.

If this word should remain on Wikipedia, then only with a definition - "Ukrainians use this word to insult Russians."

Unfortunately, there is little hope for this. Wikipedia has long been and systematically vandalized (not only this article, there are many, including those proposed for merging) by Ukrainians, Balts and other expats who have dedicated their lives to fighting Russia. 109.63.210.144 (talk) 15:00, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Elegantly skipping over the rant above, I support an FAQ. It probably won't hinder stuff like the rant above, but it would make it easier to answer it (by redirecting to FAQ).--Euor (talk) 18:53, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, that is basically the perfect example of why this should be a thing. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:07, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:30, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Can you cover the topic of the presence of fascism in Russia at the state level also? Specify the facts of discrimination against Ukrainians on the territory of Russia. Thank you. 109.63.231.87 (talk) 14:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

I initially added all the merge and move templates initially. The reason I did that is because when they weren't there the same proposals were being made over and over again with little merit. Thank you for adding the collapse button, good idea. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:41, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Illyin fascist adherent

Dear @Alex Bakharev. you reverted my edit on Ilyin being a fascist adherent. If you think it's too strong, how then to describe Ilyin? Here we read on his wikipedia page: Initially a liberal, Ilyin embraced fascism during his exile. So I don't see here some POV from my side. Would be happy to hear your thoughts on this matter. IgorTurzh (talk) 14:21, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: Alex Bakharev. Renat 16:43, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: IgorTurzh Would "Russian Nationalist philosopher Ivan Ilyin" be sufficiently strong and to the point? Alex Bakharev (talk) 07:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC)