-6

I noticed an ideological contradiction, the way the Ukrainian government tries to present itself and the way they act.

Under the Zelenskyy administration, there were a couple of policies and proposals that can be considered liberal and progressive. At the same time, under his government and party people and organizations have been receiving funding, state recognition and PR promotion. Additionally, the utter inability to make visual impact assessment, be it to check for Neo-Nazi symbols before western journalist come over, to an entire military unit using a Neo-Nazi symbols, makes one wonder about the seriousness of the Ukrainian government claims of not having a Neo-Nazi problem.

In any other western, especially liberal government, nothing even close would be tolerated in the military. In fact, most of them try to align the military to their ideology.

Why does the Ukrainian government fund and tolerate Far-Right extremist, despite being liberal?

Improve this question
22
  • 3
    Historically, a significant component of Ukrainian nationalism and rejection of Russia can be traced to Bandera, who was a fairly nasty specimen. People can hold many different beliefs and mix some good ones (wanting to be a free country) with really bad ones. Are you saying that one Azov brigade's ideological underpinnings - which may also not align as much with Bandera as you imply outside of Russophobia - negate the country's overall right to independence? Or that in the midst of an existential war, the country need to "purify" its military ideologically?
    – Italian Philosopher
    Commented Nov 30 at 19:08
  • 1
    Bear in mind that neo-Nazis in the military are an issue that goes beyond Ukraine. The USA historically has had issues, as have Russia, Germany and others.
    – Obie 2.0
    Commented Nov 30 at 22:56
  • 2
    Why does Germany fund Neo Nazi Special Forces? The level of toleration is not what you think. The seemingly random collection of links in this Q makes it hard to understand what is really asked here. The German Luftwaffe still has nearly the same symbol (modulo minor curvature changes) and exactly the same name, BTW. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Air_Force#/media/… As the Ukrainian unit you say it's "Neo Nazi".
    – 264 champagne bottles on ice
    Commented Dec 1 at 0:02
  • 3
    BTW, some other units created during this war use Warhammer 40K Chaos names and insignias. While some might find that amusing, one could equally question the sanity of praising the gods of destruction as semi-official unit ideology.
    – 264 champagne bottles on ice
    Commented Dec 1 at 0:41
  • 2
    This question is fine and should be opened. There’s a good basis for an answer on political expediency
    – max
    Commented Dec 1 at 17:26

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
-3

People are not exactly lining up to die for liberal cause. The whole trope of liberal worldview is about attaining individual goals in this world, which is not conductive with dying for a cause.

Liberal states may have a paid professional army but its morale in case of all-out war is questionable.

That is where nationalism or religious zealotry comes into the picture. Liberal states have money but one can observe they rely either on nationalists or jihadists for motivated troops. They could use communists as well but that does not seem to happen these days.

Improve this answer
6
  • "They could use communists as well but that does not seem to happen these days." - too much risk of blowback I suppose. What they ideally need is a series of warring groups, each willing to act as the instrument of destruction for the prior, then the last of which dies off in the cold every winter.
    – Steve
    Commented Nov 30 at 11:59
  • Liberals are actually quite adept at removing extremists from political positions. In Ukraine, far-right parties always had single digits of votes. Don't even need to kill them off.
    – alamar
    Commented Nov 30 at 12:05
  • You mean removing their own extreme opponents, and keeping up appearances? I accept they don't want Ukrainian Nazis running the gaff, especially if they are characteristically anti-liberal and too ideological to be corrupted. That's why they install someone like Zelensky at the top. But they were nevertheless happy to use the Ukrainian Nazis as cannon fodder, having nurtured them at the grassroots for a while.
    – Steve
    Commented Nov 30 at 13:15
  • "They could use communists as well" They do for some reason. city-journal.org/article/a-slush-fund-for-radical-protesters nypost.com/2023/03/26/who-funds-antifa-protests-we-all-do
    – Questioner
    Commented Nov 30 at 13:16
  • 1
    @Questioner I'm not sure Antifa are relevant since their values are essentially liberal. They don't plan on dying for a cause. One can make komissars out of them but poor soldiers.
    – alamar
    Commented Nov 30 at 14:05
-8

Two reasons.

First, they are trying to marshal the entire forces of the liberal-controlled West, and therefore benefit from to presenting themselves within the usual liberal norms.

Second, they need people to actually fight in this case, and an alliance with local right-wing nationalists was convenient in getting Zelensky elected in the first place, then getting the war going against Russia (once open war became the case) and amply supplying the initial manpower for the fronts.

It's a mistake to think the liberal is intolerant of Nazis. Obviously they prefer overt managerial control by ideological liberals. But when they cannot have that, the only crucial question is whether the Nazis represent the rich interests of liberals or not. If they don't, they'll be deemed "far-right" and "a threat to world peace" and all that. If they do, the liberal seeks to co-opt the leadership and provide alternative support from the grassroots - as you're seeing in the US as liberals cozy up to Trump and try to steer him away from popular policies that will harm liberal interests.

Improve this answer
9
  • "It's a mistake to think the liberal is intolerant of Nazis. " I however see this on a daily basis in the west. Be it from activly funding antifascist activist, to extensive online censorship, to government designations. Nazis at least in the liberal west are treated like a existential treat which could wipe out their institutions if left unbeaten. It's also ironic that any presence of Nazis no matter how small can lead to an entire movement being social ousted. Like the Trucker protestors, various populist parties in EU or smaller political personalities.
    – Questioner
    Commented Nov 30 at 12:48
  • "US as liberals cozy up to Trump" Thats kinda new to me. I know Zuckerberg has given a more positiv term on him, but aren't they as mad as previously?
    – Questioner
    Commented Nov 30 at 12:49
  • @Questioner, as I say, I'm not saying the liberal prefers fascism to liberalism. I'm saying when they can't have liberalism, they back fascism. Many of them have certainly treated Trump like an existential threat whilst trying to win the election - but now they are beaten, they seek accomodation with the supposed existential threat instead, the co-option to which I refer. Liberals are a political force, not a centralised organisation or a mechanical horse, and different liberals are capable of making different judgments and engaging in different behaviours at different times.
    – Steve
    Commented Nov 30 at 13:09
  • Zelensky was Russia's preferred alternative in that election, just so you know.
    – Italian Philosopher
    Commented Nov 30 at 19:08
  • @ItalianPhilosopher, interesting point, is there any more info available about that?
    – Steve
    Commented Nov 30 at 19:59

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .