:Talk:Neo-Nazism

Finland had a notorious neo-Nazi leader Pekka Siitoin (1944-2003). He started as an ardent anticommunist who organized terror campaign against pro-communist media. In 1976 one of his followers burned communist printing house. Siitoin was jailed.

After his release from prison in 1982, he demanded overthrow of goverment and forming a new regime based on fascism. He did get much media coverage. Si, he ended up calling himself the Fuehrer of Finland. He used swastika flag as his symbol and promoted nazism.

He received lot of media coverage in the 1990s. However, he was out of date. He continued his neo-Nazism until his death (2003).

Source: Iiro Nordling; Long Shadow of Finland’s Fuehrer: Life and legacy of the notorious Finnish occult neo-Nazi Pekka Siitoin. Amazon 2021. ISBN ‎979-8546175634.

{{edit extended-protected|Neo-Nazism|answered=yes}}

I have a request, should I add the Aryan Freedom Network to the neo-Nazis organizations list? StrongHelpi (talk) 16:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

:Hi StrongHelpi , they are already on the List of neo-Nazi organizations. Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 15:08, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

@Mellk, you can't just delete content with high quality academic sources [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neo-Nazism&diff=1278914559&oldid=1278913866] because "this is one POV". ManyAreasExpert (talk) 11:53, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

:I do not disagree that newer sources can be used, but you stated in wikivoice that there is no longer any kind of connection to far-right and that it is completely deradicalized. This is not what is mentioned in the main article. I reverted you because you completely rewrote this part. Mellk (talk) 12:14, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

:For example, the lead states: {{tq|Some experts have been critical of the regiment's role within the larger Azov Movement, a political umbrella group made up of veterans and organizations linked to Azov, and its possible far-right political ambitions, despite claims of the regiment's depoliticization}}. I am sure this has been heavily discussed before, so why only mention the view that it has been depoliticized? Mellk (talk) 12:16, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

::We should not refer to other Wiki articles as they are authored by non-experts.{{pb}}But
{{tq|1=Some experts}} - let's see those? ManyAreasExpert (talk) 12:18, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

:::I am not saying we should cite the Wikipedia article. But the main article cites sources, for example Zajaczkowski, for the following statement: {{tq| On the other hand, others have argued that Azov has not depoliticized and remains a far-right organisation. For instance, Ivan Gomza and Johann Zajaczkowski have in their research of Azov identified them as part of Ukraine's far-right and argued that as much as 57% of its members are political actors}}. Were you not involved in such discussions about the far-right characterization? If so, I would think you would be familiar with this. Mellk (talk) 12:25, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

::::{{tq|1=as much as 57% of its members are political actors}}
That was in 2019's Gomza and Zajaczkowski. Is it still the same in 2024 Gomza's? ManyAreasExpert (talk) 12:34, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::I do not buy the argument that this is outdated if there are still fairly recent sources cited in that article which have a different view e.g. [https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/canada-failed-when-it-trained-ukrainian-troops-linked-to-the-far-right-says-nazi-hunter this] and [https://books.google.com/books?id=kiBZEAAAQBAJ this]. I don't see a problem with briefly mentioning the view that it has been depoliticized (e.g. "some researchers have argued..."), but it does not seem like a good idea to write this in wikivoice. Mellk (talk) 12:42, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::{{tq|1=briefly mentioning the view that it has been depoliticized (e.g. "some researchers have argued...")}}
You mean, representing the majority and up-to-date view as minor ("some")? in favor of 2022 daily newspaper interview with "Nazi hunter" academic, and Colborne, who later agreed with prevailing view - [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/04/26/azov-brigade-ukraine-war-recruits/ Ukraine’s Azov Brigade races to rebuild ahead of fateful fight - The Washington Post] Michael Colborne, who wrote a book about the Azov movement and leads Bellingcat’s work on the global far right, said the unit’s focus appears to have shifted over time from ideology to military effectiveness. He said that any remaining far-right elements within Azov probably would continue to be “diluted” as the unit grows and that the issue had become less important as Ukraine confronts an existential threat. “In Ukraine, the term nationalist or patriot describes a heck of a lot of people right now,” Colborne said. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 13:10, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Colborne saying it "probably would continue to be 'diluted' as the unit grows" is not the same as agreeing that it has been completely depoliticized. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/27336025 This] 2024 article has a different view on the matter:

:::::::"Some researchers have claimed that the presence of Russian speakers in the Azov regiment and other neo-Nazi-led armed formations is evidence of their relative tolerance and asserted that the Azov regiment had moderated... Such analyses have tended to uncritically rely on Ukrainian and Western government narratives, accepting their claims at face value... After its formal incorporation into the National Guard of Ukraine, the Azov regiment and its commanders maintained a close organisational and ideological relationship with the neo-Nazi National Corps... Importantly, Azov commanders never publicly renounced their neo-Nazi views, symbols, and organisations."

:::::::You say what you wrote is the up-to-date view but I am still seeing some disagreement. Mellk (talk) 13:30, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::::Let's attend the more relevant conclusion of this work however:
Neo-Nazis constituted only about one percent of the Ukrainian forces before the Russian invasion
in 2022, and there is weak electoral support for neo-Nazi parties throughout the country.
Similarly, the policy of glorification of the OUN-UPA, their leaders, such as Stepan Bandera, and
the adoption and use of their “Glory to Ukraine! Glory to the Heroes!” greeting by the state and
the military, including Zelensky, do not make Ukraine a Nazi state. While the OUN and the UPA
were far-right terrorist organisations, which collaborated with Nazi Germany and perpetrated
the mass murders of Jews, Poles, and Ukrainians, they were not Nazis. Ukrainians could not join
the Nazi party because Hitler and other Nazi leaders regarded Ukrainians as racially inferior
and opposed independence of Ukraine while also dismissing the attempt to create even a
puppet state by the Bandera faction of the OUN in Lviv shortly after the Nazi invasion of the
Soviet Union. Thus, Putin cannot credibly justify the illegal invasion in February 2022 as a war
to “de-Nazify” the “Nazi regime.”136 The power of the far-right and the glorification of the OUN
and the UPA in Ukraine under Poroshenko and Zelensky were exaggerated and exploited by the
Russian leaders to justify the invasion. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 13:41, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::Yes, there is basically no support in RS that Ukraine is a neo-Nazi state. But I do not see what point you are trying to make. As the abstract notes, "Although the percentage of far-right supporters and fighters in Ukraine was relatively small, they exercised disproportionate influence in the country due to their greater reliance on violence and armed formations." Mellk (talk) 13:46, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::{{tq|1=As the abstract notes, "Although the percentage of far-right supporters and fighters in Ukraine was relatively small, they exercised disproportionate influence in the country due to their greater reliance on violence and armed formations."}}
But this was an offtopic just a few days before - Talk:Neo-Nazism#c-Mellk-20250303110900-Manyareasexpert-20250301173700 . ManyAreasExpert (talk) 14:01, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::As I have just said, I don't know what point you are trying to make. You provided a quote that mentions Russian leaders exaggerating/exploiting the power of the far-right. The article still calls the Azov brigade as neo Nazi-led or having ties to neo-Nazism. Mellk (talk) 14:04, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::The point is - {{tq|1=there is basically no support in RS that Ukraine is a neo-Nazi state.}} And the article should correctly represent this. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 14:08, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::You do realize there are no neo-Nazi states, right? This article is about a fringe ideology. Like I have said before, the argument that we cannot talk about specific neo-Nazi groups on this article because they are fringe groups is a silly argument. Mellk (talk) 14:11, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

"In 2025, businessman Elon Musk's comments and remarks linked his relations with antisemitism conspiracy theories were criticized by international governments and several media outlets over the years."

This sentence is so ungrammatical as to be nearly incomprehensible. I'd make an edit request if I could figure out what it was even trying to say.

My best shot is "Elon Musk made comments linked to antisemitic conspiracy theories that have been criticized by international governments and media outlets." The "over the years" makes no sense, though. It can't refer to comments he made this year because he just made them and if it refers to the conspiracies, they've probably been criticized for decades, right? However it gets rephrased someone's got to take care of it, though, because that's not English. Ryonne (talk) 20:10, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Ryonne. In cases where a grammar disaster makes it hard to figure out what the sentence was even trying to say, one option is to ignore the sentence, read the source, and create a new sentence, which I have done in this case. And thank you for seeing this! Lova Falk (talk) 14:50, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

The poll that Wikipedia portrays as saying 9% of Americans support Neo Nazism is really just a poll of 1000 (a pretty small sample size to make claims for the entire country) people, of which 9% said holding Neo nazi views is acceptable. This should be changed to give a more accurate depiction of what that poll actually means.

https://www.axios.com/2017/12/15/9-of-americans-think-its-ok-to-hold-white-supremacist-or-neo-nazi-views-poll-1513304986 Polkol777 (talk) 02:58, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Polkol777. A sample size of 1000 is not considered quite standard for national public opinion polls. The pdf says "Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points" that is, it could be up to 3.5% less or more. As this is a standard size for a poll, I won't change the text. Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 16:37, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

::"Is not considered quite standard" did you mean to say it is considered standard? I don't think putting this 1,000 person study as being representative of the entire country is fair. The text should more accurately reflect the sample size Polkol777 (talk) 17:57, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

:::You are correct about the mistake in my text, thank you for seeing that. However, 1000 is common for US polls. Others have been upset about this too: https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1b8uc5p/eli5_how_is_it_that_in_the_ussurveys_of_1000_are/ Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 18:22, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

::::I will have to become a more seasoned editor to make this change then Polkol777 (talk) 05:44, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

:I thought Neo-Nazism had higher levels of support in the Southern United States, since the American Nazi Party is headquartered in Virginia, the openly Neo-Nazi White Patriot Party used to be active in Arkansas, and fellow Neo-Nazi organization Imperial Klans of America is headquartered in Kentucky. Dimadick (talk) 22:32, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

{{Edit extended-protected|Neo-Nazism|answered=yes}}

It would be better to change "In 2017, following the Charlottesville car attack, an ABC News/Washington Post poll found out that 9% of all Americans supported the neo-Nazi ideology, which back then amounted to some 22 million Americans" to "In 2017, following the Charlottesville car attack, an ABC News/Washington Post poll found out that 9% of all Americans respected people's right to hold neo-Nazi ideology, which back then amounted to some 22 million Americans" - the source is about right to respect neo-Nazi views, not holding neo-Nazi ideology. Soldierneverdie1 (talk) 22:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{done}} – macaddct1984 ^{(talk | contribs)} 14:28, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Hawpa Kurdistan.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:21, 24 May 2025 (UTC)