Hacker News Reader

Comment by redsummer | Hacker News Reader

Why do they call Roman Protasevich a ‘top dissident’? He was part of the neo-nazi Azov Division.

Please don't spread Kremlin misinformation. Roman is a journalist and never was part of Azov neo-nazi group: http://euromaidanpress.com/2021/05/26/protasevich-is-a-dissi...

I find it funny how every time a dissident angers a dictator, suddenly a bunch of contextless statements like that start circulating all over the internet, like clockwork.

Indeed, Kremlin propaganda runs like clockwork.

Because life isn't black or white. Someone can be a leader in the dissident movement and also part of other cultural groups. You will find people who join things are more likely to join other things.

Can you perhaps explain what Azov Division is and why it is "neo-nazi"? Before your comment disappears in down votes.

Meta comment - I am a bit sad that a question like this always disappears in hn's voting mechanism. I would really like to understand how the supporter's for Belarus' current government understand the situation and forcing down of the ryan air plane.

I don't have a horse in this conflict. But I sense it is a part a bigger conflict between the remains of the Soviet Union and the west. Much like Ukraine or ex-Yugoslavia.

It's this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Battalion

I don't know why they're neo-nazis, but they seem to like the aesthetic.

Who would you suggest get the title? Honest question.

Is there actual evidence he was in Azov?

Is there actual evidence Azov is neo-nazi as opposed to having some neo-nazi members?

You do realize that nothing motivates neo nazis more than opportunity to kill some foreign invaders?

Ukraine struggles with a sense of national identity because for the most of history it was a buffer region of roving cossack bands up until the 18th century. The concept of Ukraine as a national entity is still very new.

Ukrainians in Azov super-hate communism because of what happened in WW2 so they adopt the opposite stance from WW2. In the grand scheme of "history of Ukraine" they don't have much else to draw from.

You're worried to much about the symbols they use and are arguing "well, what really even IS a neo-nazi" when you should be asking questions like "Why does Azov run military training camps for children" Western journalists from Vice even covered them. Associated Press did as well, before editing the article to take out the part about the camps being funded not by the united states, but the Ukraine national guard (US gives money to the Ukraine national guard, not Azov directly so it's Kosher)

I always criticize Azov or any other organization for doing crap like that (militarizing kids, nazi-ish symbols, etc), but I don’t want to throw the baby away with the bath water. Azov is a volunteer battalion of people that decided to risk their lives to defend Ukrainian borders from Russian invasion when internal politics and military were in disarray. Only a certain kind of people will volunteer to do that and I’m thankful for their service. I also think that crimes perpetrated by Azov members should not go unpunished and it’s weird and stupid that I even should say that out loud, as if it’s not a default position.

He was never a part of Azov. The allegation seems to be part of a smear campaign.

Now, you could argue that Azov isn't neo-Nazi at an organisational level. But the Wolfsangel and blacksun in their logo make that a bit difficult.

I will not deny that people with despicable views have joined those volunteer paramilitary groups when Russia invasion started. But it is quite natural and very different from what is implied by saying “Azov is neo nazi”.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com