[Reichstraten]

Today Geert Wilders announced in an interview that he's going to speak in Russia's Duma where he's going to tell the Russians that we in the west can 'learn from their patriotism'.
Donald Trump and Marine le Pen have also expressed their admiration for Putin.
Why do right-wing populists in the west love Putin?
Is he some kind of example to follow or what?

[Reichstraten]

The love is mutual:
Russia and the Western Far Right

Initial contacts between Russian political actors and Western far right activists were established in the early 1990s, but these contacts were low profile. As Moscow has become more anti-Western, these contacts have become more intense and have operated at a higher level. The book shows that the Russian establishment was first interested in using the Western far right to legitimise Moscow’s politics and actions both domestically and internationally, but more recently Moscow has begun to support particular far right political forces to gain leverage on European politics and undermine the liberal-democratic consensus in the West.

Putin senses rightly that the right-wing populists are basically anti-western, just like himself.

[Negotiator]

Wtf ... "anti-western" ?

Given all this "we are the people" and "we are patriots" talk you get from guys like this, I cant see the point of this term. Its highly misleading and simply wrong.

If at all you would have to say "anti-USA" or "anti-EU". Which is a whole different thing than opposing western civilization. They want western civilization, they just dont think the US domination or the EU are working.

And Putin, surprise surprise, has no control over who praises him and who doesnt. Just like everybody else.

Besides, Putin tried, from the very start, very hard and very long to join the EU and NATO. But since USA and Europe still see Russia as the enemy, he has changed strategy now.

And for the record, the one thing you do NOT want is getting Putin replaced. Theres a lot of politicians in Russia who ARE actually and truely anti-west and who will be a lot worse than Putin if they manage to get in power.

[Hong Wu]

Love for Putin is half meme and have trolling I think. Truthfully I know next to nothing about him besides that he triggers soy boys and rides bears.

[Atlantis]

Why do right-wing populists in the west love Putin?
Is he some kind of example to follow or what?

No, it's more a case of: "your enemy is my friend." Putin is trying to undermine the West by supporting anti-democratic populist forces in the West. The Russians are far too clumsy at this game to match the West in the propaganda department. Trump was a catastrophe waiting to happen that could have happened with or without Putin's support. European democracies are far too solid for Putin's trolls to be successful. On the contrary, as seen in Macron's election victory, their efforts are mostly counterproductive (for Putin).

The authoritarian streak in both is mere coincidence. Ideologically, there is more that divides Western populists from Putin than what unites them.

Edit: you might want to read this article: What does Russia want?

Here is one quote:

A socially conservative world revolution?
To start with Russia’s perceived challenge to Europe’s domestic order: Moscow is often accused of promoting social conservatism both at home and abroad (in the form of the assistance that Moscow gives to Western nationalist politicians). But this social conservatism is in essence only a means: something that Moscow makes use of, not something it considers important as an end in itself. Social conservatism is not to Putin’s Russia in 2017 what Communism was to Lenin’s Russia in 1917. “World revolution” is not the ultimate goal.

Russia itself is not particularly conservative, and neither is Vladimir Putin. But nor is he a liberal: Putin’s views on the matter can probably best be described as “Soviet”, implying here a specific set of views that is not easily placed on the Western liberal-conservative scale. A certain conservative consensus does exist in Russia at the moment, but it is largely for domestic consumption, hardly exportable, probably temporary, and to a great extent rooted in craving for a great-power status and offence that the West has not granted it to Russia – in other words, in issues that have to do with Russia’s place in the world, as opposed to conservative thinking as such.

It is true that Russia has a longstanding and authentic conservative-Orthodox-Slavophile-Eurasianist tradition, with real personal links to the Western far right, but the real exponents of this tradition have never been close to policy-making. At most, they have tried to serve the policy-makers in some freelance capacity. This is the case for the Eurasianist philosopher Alexander Dugin and his financier, Orthodox oligarch Konstantin Malofeev, two contemporary examples – and their success in befriending the policy-makers in the Kremlin is debatable.

As for the Kremlin, it opportunistically used the social conservative agenda in 2012 as a way of marginalising and stigmatising the urban creative class that had protested against the return of President Putin in the winter of 2011-12. It was only afterwards, and probably with some surprise, that the Kremlin noticed the agenda might also be used to win some hearts and minds in the West.

Still, it would not be true to say that Russia is now making an all-out effort to domestically destabilise the West. Some in Moscow do believe that destabilising the West can bring Russia closer to its real aims (and on those, see below). But others think that a confused and paranoid West would make the world more dangerous, and thus cause problems for Russia, too. So Russia’s “meddling” in European domestic politics is probably not a well-coordinated, conscious design to bring down the European Union or change its key governments. Rather, it is an improvised collection of activities by different actors, linked together by an ideological background in which the West is considered an adversary. In Moscow, experts often characterise “meddling” in European elections as just trying one’s luck: “You walk into a casino, play at one table, lose, walk to the next one and try again…”

Still, the fact that Russia’s social conservative agenda is accidental and opportunistic does not make it any less serious a problem for the West. Just as the reality of life in the Soviet Union never shook the belief of Communist adherents in the Third World, the insincerity of Russia’s social conservatism will not necessarily affect those who vote for Marine Le Pen.

[Reichstraten]

Patriotic economy? What does that even mean?

[Potemkin]

Patriotic economy? What does that even mean?

Probably some form of autarky. Protective tariffs at the very least. Basically, a rejection of neo-liberalism.

[skinster]

Word on the street is that everyone loves Putin because he is a hardman (like PI) who rides around ON wild and scary animals, without wearing a godamn shirt even!

[Decky]

Probably some form of autarky. Protective tariffs at the very least. Basically, a rejection of neo-liberalism.

In other words socialism. It is funny that all the things that right wing imbeciles think they like are made impossible by having a right wing government.

[Potemkin]

In other words socialism. It is funny that all the things that right wing imbeciles think they like are made impossible by having a right wing government.

Indeed. The most pitiful of all people are the social conservatives who seem to think that they can preserve traditional social and moral values by doubling down on unrestrained international finance-capitalism.

[annatar1914]

Indeed. The most pitiful of all people are the social conservatives who seem to think that they can preserve traditional social and moral values by doubling down on unrestrained international finance-capitalism.

Been a long time Potemkin my friend. I am back, after my long hiatus.


Yes, very pitiful the ''conservative'' support for international finance capitalism, the main destroyer of families and lives in this world, bar none.

[foxdemon]

Been a long time Potemkin my friend. I am back, after my long hiatus.


Yes, very pitiful the ''conservative'' support for international finance capitalism, the main destroyer of families and lives in this world, bar none.

But, you contradict what Potemkin wrote. If international finance capitalism is the destroyer of families and lives, then it’s reduction would aid social conservative values.

[Decky]

That is exactly what Pote implied.

[foxdemon]

So tell me @Decky , which do you regard as the greater: communism or Catholicism?

[Reichstraten]

About twenty years ago, the neoliberals seemed to be a majority.
Today, people realise neoliberalism mainly benefits the rich minority.
It´s time to finally obliterate this ideology and send it to the dustbin of history.

[Decky]

The position of the modern Russian Communist party is that Christ was the first Communist. I would tend to agree with this and would thus say that the one and indivisible holy socialist world republic and the Catholic church are one and the same. Jesus beat the bankers with a whip remember, if guns had been invented he would have put them against the wall too.

[Potemkin]

Been a long time Potemkin my friend. I am back, after my long hiatus.

Welcome back, my friend! How has this vale of tears been treating you...?

Yes, very pitiful the ''conservative'' support for international finance capitalism, the main destroyer of families and lives in this world, bar none.

I suppose the basic problem they face is that, following the collapse of fascism as a credible ideology in 1945, they were left with a stark choice between economic liberalism or statist socialism. Their natural ideological home should have been some form of clerical fascism, such as the regime of General Franco, but that option was off the table. They chose to back neo-liberalism instead, since that was at least in their material interests as a class. But by doing so, they were effectively putting their material interests above their social and spiritual values, since international finance-capitalism is utterly corrosive of all stable or traditional social values. Basically, they sold out. This, it seems to me, is ultimately why social conservatism is so pitiful in the modern West - it has been reduced to fighting a few pathetic, doomed rearguard actions against the rising tide of social and moral liberalism. And it is not "cultural Marxism" which is their true enemy, but the internationalist and revolutionary nature of late-stage capitalism itself.

[foxdemon]

The position of the modern Russian Communist party is that Christ was the first Communist. I would tend to agree with this and would thus say that the one and indivisible holy socialist world republic and the Catholic church are one and the same. Jesus beat the bankers with a whip remember, if guns had been invented he would have put them against the wall too.

A curious position for communism. I’ve noticed a certain nostalgia for Catholicism among other hard left advocates.

@Potemkin has been querying conservatives as to their views on revisiting the principles of the Enlightenment. Perhaps the hard left is reviewing the whole renaissance thing? Should we go back to the days when Western European society existed entirely within the embrace of the church?

[Decky]

A curious position for communism. I’ve noticed a certain nostalgia for Catholicism among other hard left advocates.

@Potemkin has been querying conservatives as to their views on revisiting the principles of the Enlightenment. Perhaps the hard left is reviewing the whole renaissance thing? Should we go back to the days when Western European society existed entirely within the embrace of the church?

Obviously we should reunite the faith under the leadership of the Bishop of Rome, Protestantism is a satanic heresy. Mark my words, if hell does exists then each and every Prod, practicing or just those Prod by blood will go there.

[foxdemon]

Obviously we should reunite the faith under the leadership of the Bishop of Rome, Protestantism is a satanic heresy. Mark my words, if hell does exists then each and every Prod, practicing or just those Prod by blood will go there.

Ah, so the reformation was a mistake. Then would you say we need to abandon the Westphalia doctrine?