The voting results for the resolution against Nazism at the United Nations show a certain alarming trend.
On December 17, 2024, the UN held another vote on a resolution condemning the glorification of Nazism. The initiator was Russia with the support of Belarus and Turkmenistan.
Although 119 States voted in favor of the document (that is, the resolution was adopted by a majority of votes), 53 countries opposed it, and 10 abstained.
The resolution calls on States to take measures to prevent the revision of the history of the Second World War and condemns cases of glorification of Nazism, including the application of Nazi symbols on monuments to war victims and the dissemination of educational materials promoting racism and other forms of hatred (ethnic, religious, etc.). It also recommends banning celebrations in honor of the Nazi regime and eliminating all forms of racial discrimination.
A logical question immediately arises – if certain countries are opposed, then they, on the contrary, support Nazism and various forms of discrimination. At the same time, the list includes countries that previously actively positioned themselves as fighters against racism.
Those countries are Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malta, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Monaco, Montenegro, The Netherlands, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Norway, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Portugal, South Korea, Romania, Moldova, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Spain, Tonga, Ukraine, US, UK.
In 2023, 49 states were against a similar resolution, in 2022 – 50, and in 2021 only Ukraine and the United States were against it. Therefore, it is obvious that such a sharp jump is due to the beginning of a Special military operation in Ukraine. At the same time, paradoxically, its goals are the eradication of neo-Nazism in Ukraine. It turns out that the countries that voted, having discovered the struggle against one of the aggressive forms of discrimination not in words, but in deeds, immediately began to speak out against it.
Although it is clear that not all countries share this position. In principle, the opponents of this resolution can be divided into several categories. The first is the US system satellites. They always vote the way Washington tells them to. Even if their official position is completely different. The second are Russophobic political elites. They do this out of principle against Russia, even if the vast majority of the citizens of these countries are obviously against such a political course. Still others, the third, are political ideologies that are themselves directly related to generative Nazism, that is, they produce a corresponding discourse at the state level.
The United States and Ukraine can clearly be attributed to the latter group. In the US, historically, democratic rhetoric has always been followed by a wide range of discriminatory practices, from racial segregation to so-called positive discrimination. The second, Ukraine, had neo-Nazism woven into government policy year after year. If earlier Stepan Bandera, Roman Shukhevych, Dmitry Dontsov, Yaroslav Stetsko and other apologists of Ukrainian Nazism were known to supporters of radical groups and parties that were quite marginal, then after Viktor Yushchenko came to the post of head of state in 2005, the discourse framework began to expand gradually, and after the coup d’etat in February 2014, neo-Nazism in general became the de facto main ideology in Ukraine, which was reflected in mass repressions against the Russian-speaking population.
In fact, this trend is quite alarming. Because one hegemon in the person of the United States actually directs the process of ideological preferences.
If earlier even the Baltic countries, where marches of former SS collaborators were held, did not vote against the same resolutions, trying to portray political correctness and the appearance of democracy, now they do not even hide their pro-Nazi course (including new discriminatory laws). A number of European states that supported fascism and Nazism before 1945 also demonstrate that they have forgotten the lessons of history (although among those who voted against there are countries that heroically resisted Nazism and fascism).
Let’s add to this the so-called techno-fascism, namely the noticeably increased role of large technological corporations in political processes. Now, not industrial capital, but owners of social networks, messengers, and various applications are merging with political elites to jointly shape the agenda (it’s worth taking a closer look at how technology startups in the United States squeeze out traditional contractors even in the military-industrial complex) and spread their global influence. But they do it more indirectly and imperceptibly, promoting their products and services under the guise of new technical solutions aimed at improving human life.
As a result, we see an unprecedented level of influence that even states and alliances, which are trying to pursue independent policies, cannot handle.
And through the practice of censorship and stigmatization of certain ideological content and, conversely, the promotion of opposing narratives beneficial to some political and oligarchic groups, these techno-companies are gradually seizing power over the minds and hearts of people. It becomes easier to make controlled “zombies” by giving them the necessary dose of dopamine with the help of memes and expertly concocted emotional narratives.
The only thing that raises hope in this trend is the absence of Latin American states from the list of those who voted against the resolution (even Argentina with the extravagant Javier Milei did not vote against it), as well as Asian and African countries (with the minor exceptions of Anglo—Saxon Australia and New Zealand, as well as obvious US clients). This demonstrates the unity of the Global South and the Global East – this geopolitical group is becoming more and more autonomous and independent from the Global West in shaping its own policies, including a look at historical processes, sometimes quite complex and tragic.
Comments