Putin and European far right

[Papay]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/21/op...ends.html?_r=0

Interesting article. It seems that Mr Putin has very good relations with far right and populist leaders across Europe. I find it funny that during cold war Moscow had good relations with leftist parties but now Moscow tries to build good relations with far right parties

[King Gambrinus]

I don't find it funny when he is funding them to beat up immigrants on the street.

[Flavius Julius Nepos Augustus]

I don't find it funny when he is funding them to beat up immigrants on the street.

When I read what you write about me he is funding me for doing that? And some days ago someone said I was funded by Putin for spreading pro Russian propaganda (I was not even doing that)

As long as China is not funding far left parties in Europe

[King Gambrinus]

When I read what you write about me he is funding me for doing that? And some days ago someone said I was funded by Putin for spreading pro Russian propaganda (I was not even doing that)

As long as China is not funding far left parties in Europe

China haven't funded far left parties in Europe since the 70s.

Try again.

[Flavius Julius Nepos Augustus]

China haven't funded far left parties in Europe since the 70s.

Try again.

I know that comunicating over the internet is hard but

[Mayer]

the far-left is also fond of Putin
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/20...ean-democracy/
http://www.worldcrunch.com/opinion-a.../#.U33Ps3ZAeKU

It is therefore more accurate to call it a broad support by populists

[Condottiere 40K]

Conservatives like Putin because of his stance on homosexuals, the far right because they like his take charge approach to solving social ills and enemies of the state, and the far left because they need to be told what to think.

[Wholly_Rufus]

Conservatives like Putin because of his stance on homosexuals, the far right because they like his take charge approach to solving social ills and enemies of the state, and the far left because they need to be told what to think.

There are 3 kinds of Leftists:

Social Leftists: Pro Gay marriage, pro choice, secularist etc... These ones despise Putin for the same reasons conservatives love him. It drives them to take a more hawkish view towards Russia where they once were mostly ambivalent, afraid that the social conservatism in Russia might find it's way back to the west.

Economic Leftists: Ambivalent towards Putin on the whole, generally have a "focus on our own problems" attitude. Don't believe it's fair to judge Russia until we get our own problems sorted out.

Antiwar Leftists: The Oliver Stones, Noam Chomskys and George Galloways of this world. They see American hegemony as the foremost threat to world peace. If Putin is challenging that hegemony that makes him fine in their book, regardless of how he conducts affairs within his own borders.

[Mayer]

the fun thing is that germany's Left is all of these things but nonetheless supports Putin

[Wholly_Rufus]

the fun thing is that germany's Left is all of these things but nonetheless supports Putin

It really depends on what issues are more important to them. American lefties generally focus on social issues (lord knows, they can't get anything done on the fiscal side) thus they hate Putin because they fear a resurgent Russia will start exporting socially conservatives ideas back into the west, ideas which they've tried so hard for the past decade to push out of the mainstream.

[Mayer]

In germany the new phenomenon called mondaysdemo brings together people from both sides of the political spectrum, the new slogan is not left against right but bottom vs top

[Aawulf]

In germany the new phenomenon called mondaysdemo brings together people from both sides of the political spectrum, the new slogan is not left against right but bottom vs top

Is the "bottom vs top" similar to the class warfare we see stoked before elections in America? Or is it more genuine like the proletariat's beef with the bourgeois like was seen in the early 20th century?

An article that puts Wilders and his socialist policies with the Tea Party automatically disqualifies itself. Utter nonsense.

Which Tea Party? One of the ones from my neighborhood, across town or one of the hundreds in any given state? When the thousands of tea parties were organized across America to protest the lawlessness of the Obama administration and especially the dirty bribes of Obamacare despite a plurality of opposition to it, the lefty news media went to war against a so called Tea Party. There is no one Tea Party because it was a grass roots movement that scared the crap out of Obama's allies. As the news media encouraged, there have been some attempts to hijack the movement under their banners. But even those political opportunists are numerous and none own the mantle of the thousands of tea parties that so frightened the news media and the rest of the Democratic Party.

So which tea party, what does it mean for a European political party to be "with the Tea Party" and why would that disqualify them?

Tass news agency used to say similar stuff during the Cold War i.e. that the West is just as bad or worse as 'we' are. All the respected freedom indicies e.g. Reporters without Borders Press Freedom Index, Freedom House etc. say that Russia is one of the world's least democratic countries.

As for banning political parties in some Western countries I don't agree with that. But it arose from De-Nazification policies imposed by the Allies after WW2. The Far Right had a good election by their standards. In Russia instead of banning parties they more often stop them registering, by questioning signatures or hired thugs and Nashi intimidating their meetings.

Obama used to say similar things too.

[pajomife]

Putin have charisma contrary to the grey EU politicians,beside Marine of course.

[Winston Smith]

Putin have charisma contrary to the grey EU politicians,beside Marine of course.

Man-tits Putin charismatic? Lol no.

[Vítor Gaspar]

Putin have charisma contrary to the grey EU politicians,beside Marine of course.

Why, why does a political leader have to be charismatic? "So he gets votes?" But is that an end or is it merely a mean? Being charismatic is absolutely worthless, it means nothing, and "praise" for a charismatic leader separates sense-full, literate people, from the average sheep. Being charismatic is a mean, not an end. People like Marine and Putin are only smart insofar as they managed to convince the sheep that being charismatic is a good enough reason to win at the polls. You can say and mean crap, but if you're a "charismatic guy" you're good for politics.

It's because of people like you we're short of any good politicians. Everything is about showing-off now, the content barely matters. People just want to be told what to do like the good sheep they are, regardless of how terrible that is for the economy and for the population as a whole - minorities and the MAJORITY of the population combined.

This was also the state of mind that brought us retards like Hitler, Mussolini, Franco or Salazar. But at least back then people were ignorant without a choice. You're not.

[fkizz]

So it was not just me noticing this. Leftists and Rightists are getting more and more pro Putin all over europe.

It can't be just propaganda. He needs to also be skilled at leading otherwise this wouldn't happen.

Also, Putin train from child, former KGB agent, dealt with USSR problems, and has to deal with the country that is Russia, much more hostile than the average western country for both the citizens and rulers for USSR collapse caused them some troubles.

Meanwhile our leaders such as in European parliament, most of us never heard about them, they lack charisma, or any sort of worries for their subjects in most distress, they developed oratory and acting skills and pose nice for the camera, lived a privileged and materially comfortable life, and never had to deal with issues that Putin had.

Of course Putin against actors who were raised in spoiled child environment will know more about harsh conditions than them (fall of USSR; dealing with post Yeltsin russia, etc)

[Heathen Hammer]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/21/op...ends.html?_r=0

Interesting article. It seems that Mr Putin has very good relations with far right and populist leaders across Europe. I find it funny that during cold war Moscow had good relations with leftist parties but now Moscow tries to build good relations with far right parties

West is actively backing opposition all over the world. It is only fair that opposition within the West itself should receive support from abroad as well.

[Adar]

West is actively backing opposition all over the world. It is only fair that opposition within the West itself should receive support from abroad as well.

Yeah, because the actual beliefs doesn't matter when it comes to childish sandbox games.

[justicar5]

Yeah, because the actual beliefs doesn't matter when it comes to childish sandbox games.

yes because brining democracy with MOABs and massacre, then subjecting dissedents..sorry the newspeak term is 'terrorist' isn't it, to torture..sorry again the newspeak term is 'enhanced interrogation', then banning parties from standing in the 'democratic elections' is such a great ideology to export. Not saying Putin is any better, but be honest about how bad both sides are.

[trance]

yes because brining democracy with MOABs and massacre, then subjecting dissedents..sorry the newspeak term is 'terrorist' isn't it, to torture..sorry again the newspeak term is 'enhanced interrogation', then banning parties from standing in the 'democratic elections' is such a great ideology to export. Not saying Putin is any better, but be honest about how bad both sides are.

Oh yes, because arguing with religious genocidal extremists is a great idea. relativism.