BiographyBooksArticlesVKTelegramYouTubeÐóññêàÿ âåðñèÿ

Unfinished Nazism. Chapter 5. The Shared Ideological Realm of Nazism, Racism, and Liberalism: A Unity of Axiology and Anthropology

Aleksandr Shchipkov

The regime of the 1930s in Germany was the legitimate offspring of European liberal capitalism. This obvious fact has always caused cognitive dissonance in the self-consciousness of the average European, hence, since the 1940s, this topic has been displaced from public consciousness.

Unfortunately, this displacement took place not only in Western Europe and the USA, but also in the USSR. In Soviet Russia, the narrative of the victory over Hitler by the «anti-fascist coalition», comprising the USSR and «democratic countries» such as the USA, Great Britain, and France, was regularly emphasized. Simultaneously, in the West (remarkably synchronous with the Soviet narrative), a distinctly different narrative persisted, emphasizing the «confrontation of the democratic West with two forms of totalitarianism».

Today, amid the profound crisis of Protestant capitalism, there's a growing acknowledgment that liberalism isn't merely susceptible to fascization but also represents a respectable form of racist-Nazi and social-Darwinian ideologies.

In the 2010s, certain critical intellectuals cautiously and gradually started to broach this subject. It took a considerable amount of time before the definition of resurgent Nazism as a negative legitimization of neoliberal hegemony became established in independent or, as they sometimes say, «unsaddled» new left thought. The topic of uncovering the Nazi-racist foundations of liberalism has yet to permeate the middle and lower echelons of public consciousness, becoming accessible to the layperson and transitioning into the realm of mass beliefs and collective memes. Its legitimization in the academic sphere still faces obstacles, with ideological technologists and influential figures in Western social science pushing it beyond the bounds of acceptable discourse.

Nonetheless, the objective socio-political reality consistently underscores that humanity is experiencing a phase of self-destruction within Protestant liberal capitalism. During this period, liberalism openly aligns itself with new manifestations of Nazism. This is the moment of revealing all facades.

A few years ago, the Russian publicist Dmitry Babich wrote: «Today, Nazism often eschews swastikas and Hitler salutes. Modern Ukrainian Nazism can be sophisticated and well-educated. It likes to showcase quotes from Churchill, Havel, and even Varlam Shalamov. In their pocket, they often carry a diploma from a European university, along with invitations to numerous conferences in Warsaw, London, and Berlin. This Nazism can be... intelligent and liberal. ... modern Ukrainian Nazis were empowered by Western and their own domestic liberals»1.

In 2022 – 2023, swastikas and the glorification of Hitler and the Nazis resurged under the banner of liberal Nazism. The objective ideological and political alignment between liberal and Nazi ideologies has become unmistakably clear. Liberal groups extended complete support to Kiev in its war against Russia and the Russians, effectively siding with open Nazism. Thus, by the force of historical circumstance, what could be termed a «decisive experiment» occurred. It has become a new focal point of division in modern ideology. The long-standing illusion has finally been shattered.

This fact is still perceived by some parts of Russian society as a sort of revelation. But there is no revelation here. The complex of ideas blending liberalism with racism spans several centuries of European history. It can be confidently asserted that there exists a fundamental commonality among Nazism, racism, and liberal democracy, which, as the beginning of this century has shown, form a unified value-anthropological cluster.

The fundamental axiology (value system) of Nazism, racism, and liberalism encompasses the concept of a divided world and the stratification of «human material». Hence, in its evolution, liberalism may elevate an individual at the expense of others (classical liberalism), elevate one nation at the expense of others (manifesting as Nazism in this context), contrast «civilized societies» with «subhumans possessing a totalitarian mindset» (cultural racism), as seen in the case of the Serbs and residents of Donbass, and contrast «civil society» with «non-citizens» (social racism). All these represent various forms and iterations of the same ideological discourse.

In fact, as already noted, in real, not fictional historical practice, liberal racism is essentially characterized by the Roman notion of the clash between «civilization» and «barbarism», perpetuating the mythology of superiority. While the subjectivity of the barbarians remained constant among the ancient Romans – everyone understood who the barbarians were, where they lived, and where they could come from – within modern liberal doctrines (such as the Atlantean political doctrine of the United States and its allies), candidates for the role of barbarians are designated by an arbitrary gesture, depending on the fleeting political interests of the ruling elite. For instance, in 1997, it was the Serbs; after September 11, 2001, it was Iraq, Libya, and Syria; in 2014, it was Russia and ethnic Russians.

«Barbarians» have a dual status from the viewpoint of liberal Nazism. These are individuals considered inferior from an ideological standpoint and deemed superfluous from a pragmatic and goal-oriented perspective. Consequently, they are to be marginalized, their values devalued, and ultimately eradicated. An important aspect is that Nazism and liberalism, unlike communism, do not require a human personality with its views and characteristics even as an object of subjugation; rather, they necessitate its non-existence, so that terra nullius – no one's land – remains in its wake. An «expendable» individual occupies a valuable territory and simultaneously serves as a link in the food chain, a material resource.

Here's a vivid example: In 2014, the de-occupation of Crimea had not yet happened2, and the peninsula remained under the control of the Kiev regime. Oleg Kryuchkov, a television observer for the Crimean «New Channel», reminisces: «We're covering a rally near the Supreme Council, and as I'm jotting down notes, I write: ”The Crimean Tatars outmaneuvered the Russians tactically, arriving two hours ahead”. Then I'm sending it to Kiev. The edit comes back: ”The Crimean Tatars outmaneuvered the pro-Russian Ukrainians.” Then I say, ”Wait a minute, people went to the rally with posters in Russian – they clearly positioned themselves as Russians”. The editor-in-chief, Maxim Dybenko, replies to me that there are no Russians in Ukraine – Russians live in Russia. And in Ukraine, there are only pro-Russian Ukrainians. I tell him there are more than 200 nationalities living in Russia, and all of them are citizens of Russia. Once again, I was told that there can be no Russians in Ukraine. So I asked, ”If I am Russian by nationality, and not a pro-Russian Ukrainian living in Crimea, then I have no nationality?” They told me: ”That's correct”. I wonder, I say, ”Why then, unlike Russians, can Crimean Tatars be in Ukraine?” In response, it was said that the Crimean Tatars are an idiomatic expression. I wonder if the Crimean Tatars know that they are considered an idiomatic expression in Ukraine?»3.

Russians in Crimea, as well as in Ukraine as a whole, were deemed «superfluous» individuals. At some point, this was stated explicitly and confirmed through repression.

The «superfluous» person in Nazism and liberal racism is always viewed as inferior, an infernal subject, a subhuman (der Untermensch) – for example, an enemy of the German nation, an enemy of democracy and progress, an enemy of European values. In this regard, the criteria of good and evil do not apply to this enemy, because he is seen as allegedly threatening these very criteria and their bearers. Therefore, the usual moral norms do not apply to «superfluous people», facilitating their elimination. Moreover, this act is presented as an exception to the rule, which supposedly should not be abolished but rather serves to reinforce public morality as a whole.

 However, in order to locally and situationally abolish moral norms as an exception, one's opponent must be dehumanized in the eyes of society. Therefore, liberal Nazism consistently resorts to this method. For example, in Ukraine, the role of «Untermenschen» is assigned to ethnic Russians, who are likened to insects («Colorado beetles») and even referred to as «livestock to be reduced» on live broadcasts.

In 2014, on the Ukrainian Internet channel hromadske.tv, Ukrainian journalist Bogdan Butkevich4 proposed the idea of exterminating 1.5 million «wrong» residents of Donbass. «Wrong» in this context means superfluous. Later, Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk openly referred to the residents of Donetsk and Luhansk as «subhumans», while less public figures went even further, describing an anti-Maidan supporter who perished in the Odessa Trade Unions House fire as a «fried female Colorado beetle».

Ivan Stoiko, a member of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, a member of parliament, and a statesman, stated during a parliamentary meeting that his country was waging war against the «Mongoloid race». That's what he said.  That's how the race war started. In June 2014, a video filmed by one of the residents of Luhansk after an air raid was posted online. The footage shows the death of an elderly woman – clearly not at an age to be considered an active member of the militia (territorial army). She's still moving for a few moments, still trying to speak. But as the camera pans to the side, it becomes clear that there is nothing left of her below the waist. The comments of Ukrainian users under this video are shocking: «Shish kebab from Colorado beetle, great»; «The female Colorado beetle died, the day was not in vain!»; «It's nice to fall asleep with such news! Good night to all, glory to Ukraine!»5

The Kiev «Reich» adopted the idea of cleansing the eastern territories of «subhumans» from the German «Reich» during the Second World War, and now it has been resurrected.

In the German version of Nazism, we can easily find the idea of changing the ethnic composition of the «eastern territories», which, according to Goebbels' propagandists, were inhabited mainly by people with an «Asian consciousness». This idea led to the genocide of Jews and Eastern Slavs, particularly Russians (see the chapter on the Eastern Question in «Mein Kampf» and the pamphlet «Der Untermensch» («Subhuman»)6.

Similar processes occurred in Yugoslavia. In the second issue of the Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate in 1949, a review was published of the book «Half a Century of Catholicism in Croatia» by Viktor Novak, a professor at the University of Belgrade. Excerpts from it provide insight into the essence of the problem: «...After the occupation of Yugoslavia and the founding of the ”Independent Croatian State”, the clerical fascists, supported by the Pope, Hitler, and Mussolini, decided that their time had come and began to turn Croatia into a ”Civitas Dei” – but in reality, it became the kingdom of the grand inquisitor, a papal patrimony in which there was no place for the Orthodox... The clerical fascists, united with the Ustashe and Crusaders organizations and led by Catholic Metropolitans Stepinac of Zagreb and Sharic of Sarajevo, began the most barbaric eradication of Orthodox Serbs. About half a million Orthodox Serbs were incredibly brutally slaughtered, up to 300,000 were forcibly converted to Catholicism through violence and threats, hundreds of thousands were robbed and exiled to Serbia, and the remaining ones had to wear a blue armband with the letter ”P”, signifying ”Orthodox”, or place a sign reading ”Greek–Eastern” on the windows of their homes. They were reduced to the status of disenfranchised slaves, whom anyone could kill or rob with impunity. The clerical fascists attacked Orthodox churches and clergy with particular fury. A special institution was established to destroy Orthodox churches: the ”Authority for the Destruction of Orthodox Churches”. Almost all Orthodox churches were destroyed, burned down, or converted into Catholic churches. For example, in the territory of the Uniate Eparchy of Križevci, all Orthodox churches and chapels were converted to Catholic ones. The remaining Orthodox bishops and hundreds of priests in Croatia were either killed or exiled to Serbia...»

Everyone in Europe knows the story of the yellow six-pointed stars that the Nazis used to mark Jews. According to legend, the King of Denmark once wore such a star as a sign of solidarity with the victims. However, few people know about the blue ribbon with the letter «P» worn on the sleeve, as it is extremely undesirable for the promoters of the liberal world order to publicize this.

These examples illustrate the key principle of Nazism and racism, which is based on the logic of grading «human material»: some are considered people, while others are deemed subhuman7 Moreover, Nazism presupposes the continuity of its ideas within the framework of the general cultural matrix of the Western world in the modern era. Currently, the concept of «inferiority» is often framed as a civilizational one, as the «totalitarian subject» opposes himself to the «values of universal civilization» and «the course of history». This sentiment was echoed in Barack Obama's statements that Russia is on the «wrong side of history». Knowing exactly where the «right side of history» lies is considered the honorable prerogative of Das Herrenvolk – the «master race».

Another principle of liberal-racist ideology, stripped of pseudo-democratic decorations, is social Darwinism, which advocates for the laws of natural selection observed in the animal world to apply in human society. This Malthusian and Nietzschean perspective gave rise to the principle of total competition, which takes on an inter-individual format in liberal doctrines, but which the Nazis expanded to the interethnic level, altering the focus of consideration while retaining the essence of the worldview.

This encapsulates the liberal-racist axiology. Alongside a unified axiology, the unified anthropology of liberalism, Nazism, and racism can be easily reconstructed. Despite the declarative importance of the «private personality», a technogenic view of man and culture is cultivated. This view leads to the devaluation of genuine human personality at individual, micro, and macro-social levels. This reduction of real personality to a conditionally abstract «individual» has become especially pronounced in the digital age.

However, racist attitudes require legitimization and a plausible, outwardly decent theoretical justification. Therefore, the Nazi-racist core of Libertarian concepts is enveloped in a conceptual «protective belt» in the form of liberal and left-liberal ideas and attitudes. The developed «philosophy of freedom», the concept of «natural law», etc. – all serve as theoretical camouflage, rationalizing the fundamental myth of liberal Nazism: the myth of the natural origin of inequality, whether social, cultural, civilizational, or ethnic – all these forms easily convert into one another in both active propaganda and real politics.

An important element of this conceptual protective belt of racism is the secular Protestant interpretation of the category of freedom, particularly the concept of «fundamental rights and freedoms» central to liberalism. Upon careful examination, without quasi-religious piety, the theoretical foundations of these concepts are found to be weak.

From the perspective of the French philosopher Alain de Benoist, the discourse on human rights is as pervasive as it is opaque in its foundations. In fact, it replaces both moral norms and written laws, and has even become a kind of academic discipline taught in universities, despite being absolutely devoid of universally valid scientific grounds. Thus, the liberal concept of rights and freedoms, without any solid basis, «begins to claim the status of a scientific theory»8. Although scientific verification of the idea of «innate» rights and freedoms is simply impossible, its supporters refuse to relinquish their privileged, hegemonic position. As a result, this idea takes on a quasi-religious character, which is quite natural. By default, liberalism reserves the right to internal contradictions, immunity from criticism, and the privilege not to «stoop» to discussions – on the grounds that it supposedly encompasses «the full range of achievements of human thought» and «norms of human civilization». This liberal neognosis, during the era of classical liberalism, was somewhat limited by the influence of Christian morality. However, in the 20th and 21st centuries, against the backdrop of the radical dechristianization of the West, it has finally transformed into a phenomenon of secular religiosity.

Voices against the religious interpretation of liberal philosophy of law were, of course, heard, including at fairly high levels, but they were drowned out by the liberal establishment. The historical and legal prerequisites for revising the concept of fundamental freedoms were conspicuously ignored by the officialdom.

Indeed, during the adoption of the «Universal Declaration of Human Rights» by the UN General Assembly in 1948, a split occurred during the discussion of the document. A group of scientists from the American Anthropological Association, led by Melville Herskovitz, issued a special Memorandum rejecting the globalist interpretation of the concept of human rights. They emphasized the cultural specificity of freedom and law across different cultures and called for the introduction of the principle of plurality into the Declaration instead of advocating for nonexistent unified «global standards». However, the Herskovitz group's efforts were forgotten.

The liberal-racist project is rooted in the pursuit of «global world», with its expansionism driven by the very nature of capital, which sees halting expansion as tantamount to ceasing to exist. However, expansionist goals require external legitimization. The need to justify violence leads to the construction of an auxiliary doctrine of absolute evil. This results in concepts such as the «axis of evil», «empire of evil», alongside internally contradictory formulations like «humanitarian bombing», «coercion to peace», «positive discrimination», and the like.

The desire to «dissociate 'benign' liberalism from its malignant consequences encounters not only historical but also moral and ethical counterarguments. After all, any critically thinking person inevitably asks: why is 'free competition' (i.e., the struggle for survival) permissible within the liberal consensus, but the same free competition between nations, classes, or social systems is deemed bad and unacceptable? What is the fundamental difference?»9

Due to the profound contradiction inherent in the liberal-racist doctrine, the topic of denazification in a liberal society is as superficial as many other «external» and demonstrative institutions and ideologies, lacking genuine social content. Similarly, the idea of a «free market» exposes its theoretical insignificance in the face of sanctions policies following the commencement of a special military operation and the explosion of the Nord Stream gas pipelines in 2023.

A popular question: «Is it possible to write poetry after Auschwitz» (Theodor Adorno) – or the so-called concept of «Theology after Auschwitz» (Dietrich Bonhoeffer) and similar figures of left-liberal thought were utilized, and are still utilized, as demonstrated in the early 2020s, not for the purpose of genuine denazification. Their true aim is linked to the promotion of social constructivist ideas that assert the illusory («imaginary»10) nature of the state, tradition, and nation.

In attempt to present traditional historical communities as constructed «imagined communities», social constructivism often employs Nazi ideology as a starting point  while simultaneously replacing the thesis: the entire spectrum of ideas concerning national self-determination and independence is deliberately merged with the concept of national and racial superiority11. Under the guise of rejecting Nazism, the concepts of nation and people are devalued in an effort to portray them as mere mechanical components in a globalist framework.

Additionally, in new neo-colonialist endeavors, liberal racism harnesses the most extreme fundamentalist forces to overthrow the so-called «secular dictators» in the Middle East – leaders who are typically moderately authoritarian in this region. For example, Al-Qaeda fought for American interests against Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and the genocide of ethnic Russians in Ukraine is carried out by followers of Banderovites and Ukrainian National Assembly – Ukrainian People's Self-Defence (UNA-UNSO). This suggests a deep ideological kinship between Islamic fundamentalism and liberal racism, which can be seen as a social product of Western Protestant fundamentalism.

The question of the manifestations of pagan consciousness is also crucial for characterizing the ideology of liberal racism. Classical paganism, like pagan ethnofuturism, is an element of culture preserved and embedded in the system of technogenic modernity and postmodernity. The technogenic culture of late liberalism generates its own forms of neo-paganism, primarily commodity fetishism, technocults, digital consciousness, and, in general, heterodoxy – a fragmentary, «multiple» consciousness of postmodernism, which is a modern cognitive-psychological analogue of ancient polytheism. A vivid manifestation of modern neo-paganism is the adaptation of Christian consciousness to the needs of the global market and secular heterodoxy.

In other words, the racist complex of ideas represents a radical and overt form of liberalism, no longer hiding behind legal institutions and bringing its «principle of total competition», common with liberalism, to its logical conclusion. This becomes especially clear when considering liberal discourse as a whole, rather than isolating issues of human rights from it. Such a holistic, systematic approach is currently the most productive for analyzing the Nazi-racist foundations of both classical and modern liberalism.

2024 ãîä