The Germans and the Italians lost WW2 but the fascists won. -George Carlin
Once again, dear worst-reader, let’s review worst-writer’s worst-world view, shall we. Or. Put another worst-way, what is a fascist and, at the same time, since they are similar, what is a Nazi? I suppose, of course, the whole nazi-thing is easier to understand. Reason? There is a face and a body and a stench and an ideal that is a nazi and it seems to walk among us EVERYWHERE. Fascists and fascism, though, is a bit more packed away and stealthy. With that in worst-mind. Both these idears are usually made up of white, male, sexually repressed dudes from mothers (dedettes) that probably should have, for just a little while longer, kept that aspirin between her knees. Then again. I worst-write about all these worst-issues because I’m genuinely concerned about this worst-world as worst-words like nazi and fascist get thrown around like a crate of wiffle balls in a world where little, itty-bitty man-children have no wiffle bats. For you know the old adage, don’t you, dear worst-reader:
In a world of wiffle bats everything is a wiffle…
Wait. Scrap that. Maybe I’ve got things backwards. #Nomatter. Move on.
I spent a bit of time yesterday reading Putin’s February 21, 2022 whack-job speech, including his follow-up speech on February 24. But before I get to the speech, you know what baffles me? After reading one translation of his speech, I thought I should also try to find another version to read. You know. I was looking to see if there’s a difference in translations.
Btw. There is one thing I will never forget about those days so long ago when I tried to learn a bit of Russian. Of the few languages I’ve tried (and, of course, failed) to grasp, Russian was the most curious language to me. Reason? And I hope I’m not too far out of my league here. The Russian language felt to me as though it is wonderfully, magically nuanced. In other words, it can–if one wills it–be extravagantly nueanced or it can be lugubriously precise. Very much unlike the German language, don’t you know. With that in worst-mind, nuanced precision is a good mix–hence my love of Dostoyevsky and Gogol? I mean, these über-great writers did so much more than wax poetic about the human soul–through the mind of oppressed humanity. Indeed. Yet Putin’s speech in all its Russian glory….
Holy krapp, dear worst-reader. If I haven’t worst-said it enough already, then let me just go ahead and say it more more: we are doomed.
If there was a pinch of hope where I thought that maybe Putin could do something worthwhile with his dictatorship antics, that hope is now forever squashed. In fact, I have the squash residue lodged between my left ring finger and pinky. I’ve tried several times since yesterday, even applying mechanic’s hand cleaner, to get it off but I give up. My squashed residue is now forming a wart and I’m sure, soon enough, it’ll have to be surgically removed using a dental drill, sulphuric acid and some K-Y Jelly. But don’t lose a thought or three about my ailments, dear worst-reader. It all ends up being yet another scar that will makeup the coffin of worst-writer’s end. And so.
The thing that gets me about Putin’s speech is that it was tedious just finding a copy of it. It’s everywhere to hear and see, don’t you know. Yet to find a transcribed version of it isn’t easy. Am I wrong in worst-assuming (or conspiring) that no one outside Russian influenced spheres of the #interwebnets wants to publish it—in transcribed form? There are, of course, numerous sites that quote from it and even dissect it (see links below). Which begs the question: WTF? Perhaps I’m over doing it thinking I need to read various translations. Still. After reading it once in english and once in German, I can’t help but wonder if something is awry. Or maybe it’s just too winded and rambling. Either that or there’s a little dark patch in the back of my brain that can’t accept the reality that we’re living in a world that is so deeply stuck in late nineteenth and early twentieth century precision nuances, where knowledge ain’t power and the end is nigh and things free will be squashed and and and and…
Putin’s attempt at justifying a war with Ukraine is beyond absurd. Yet, so much absurdity cannot be dismissed. In fact, the last time I heard something as absurd that could also not be dismissed, former prez pee-pee-hair of my beloved & missed united mistakes of #Americant was flooding the zone with so much right-wing bull$hit that seventy-four or so million morons tried to re-elect him. And now many of those same morons are being told by various bat$hit newz sources that Putin is kind of OK. Indeed. Dear worst-reader. Fake newz, nuking a hurricane, grabbing them by the pu$$y, etc. is no different than Putin’s defence of defending his fear that his cuck is just too friggin small. Or is there too much friggin in the cuck of our small…
The gist of Putin’s speech is, like I’ve said, beyond absurd. But while worst-writer is also not dismissing it, what can we take away from it?￼ Well. Like all sexually repressed right wingers, authoritarians, fascist, let’s have a new worst-look at Nazis. Or. As Putin puts it: de-nazi.
Wait. Is that how he puts it?
First. Denazification is a real thing. Austria and Germany went through it. Supposedly the same basic thing was done in Iraq. Then again, the Chinese revolution, which gave way to the China we know today, also pulled off some serious de-imperialisation. And that’s the ticket, eh, dear worst-reader. When the likes of Putin uses terms like denazify or decommunise, what is he really saying? Here’s where the biggest crock-of-$hit of his speech blossoms its fruit. How is it that anyone can take what Putin says seriously when he’s obviously showing all his cards when it comes to all-things imperial, authoritarian, controlling galore? Can all this boil down to projection? You know what I mean with projection, right? You know, that whole Freudian Projection thing. While claiming that Ukraine is full of communists and nazis and he’s the only one to get rid of them, isn’t he really talking about himself, his regime, his dictatorship–the weakness and fear of who and what he really is? How is it that this man can rule over a country like Russia–especially after the failure of the experiment known as the Soviet Union? That worst-said, his speech has got to be one of the most profound speeches ever. Profound in the sense that it reveals so much of what’s wrong with being human. Ok. Am I worst-rambling-ranting yet?
Ok. One more worst-shot at the denazification thingy.
One of the things I learned about Nazis when I expatriated to my mother’s country of birth is that they’re everywhere in #Eurowasteland. Not unlike my beloved & missed #americant, of course. But in Germany there are two points-of-view when it comes to all-things Nazi. The first POV is that some Nazis were turned and by turning they’re OK now. You know. They’ve seen the ill of their ways. They’re not gonna kill anyone anymore and they’re not gonna persecute unbelievers anymore either. Heck, a whole bunch of them served in various government and even more in private sector positions after WW2–which ended up turning Germany into the economic juggernaut of #Eurowasteland. Don’t even get me started on all the former Nazis I met while briefly circling in and around certain upper German classes.
The second POV, though, is a bit more nuanced. And it stems out of the former GDR, i.e. eastern Germany that was so conveniently gobbled up after 1989. You know, that whole reunification thing. But get this. One of the pillars of the then East German school of ideology was that it had no Nazis. It not only had no Nazis–but there was no reason to even talk about them, learn about them, study them. East Germany was simply the answer to what would have become of the Germans if it weren’t for uncle Adolf. In other worst-words, if you were a Nazi then you’re a friggin communist now. Oh. And let’s not forget. The Nazis, the East Germans thought/believed, were all in The West. Ok. So there’s that.
But where does all this flinging and swirling of the Nazi stuff come from at a time when the Nazi belief system, although thoroughly defeated, has long lost its affectation? I mean. Why/how could a leader of a superpower use such archaic if not jingoistic terminology in a major speech given to the world about why he needs to kill people? Well, here’s worst-writer’s simple worst explanation. The essence of being/thinking/living the Nazi dream is not all about authoritarianism. It is, though, about the human propensity to control what is perceived to be inalienable. Hence, Putin’s need to protect what he believes is his/a inalienable right to arbitrarily wield power in the name of protecting those from the very same thing that he espouses: control. Control of everything. Especially control of money, greed, possession(s) and more control. Wait. Why did I use that word twice? #Nomatter. The thing is, Putin even eludes to all this in his speech by constantly reflecting and recalling the failure of the Soviet Union which employed the same disastrous ideology albeit painted in a different color, wearing a different frock, sporting a/the new & improved sportcoat–of all things nazi-like-authoritarianism, etc.
Remember, the difference between a fascist and Nazi is in nuance. Ok. Maybe there’s also the construct of nationalism. Hence the N in nazi. For the fascist, on the other hand, it was all about capitalists protecting capital–from the likes of communists, socialist and those who really get their kicks out of questioning the legitimacy of the Haves, the Have-Mores and the system that makes all that happen. For Putin to claim that he must denazify Ukraine really means that he wants to control those who think his brand of top-down socialism should not have to subject itself to money and money and lots more money–all because Ukrainians just want to have more fun than Russians do. And if that worst-thought is true, why doesn’t Putin just call a spade a gardening tool? Why use all these old, archaic, run-out-of-steam labels?
But before I reveal more worst-writer naïveté…
Good luck suckers.