Talk:Putinism

Soapboxing The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Current status: The end of Putinism and conclusive victory of Western-style liberal democratic Ukraine

Putin is in fact always ending up screwing anything he tries to accomplish. Under him, USSR collapsed, Russia lost wars in Pridnestrovie, Afghanistan, Iraq, Chechen, Abkhazie, Ossetia, Syria and Ukraine! All country is falling apart and everybody tries to run away or has to live in poverty. Corruption and violent crime are rampant! Now, people are getting even poorer and beginning to starve. Russia does not have any modern technology, only small number of oligarys rob everybody and live in palaces, the rest of the population is terrorized.

He is in fact very sick - he has terminal cancer of several vital organs, as also confirmed to Milwaukee Sun by the ex-CIA retired military officer living in Tel-Aviv, speaking on condition of anonymity. He is also limping, and his hands are shaking, due to the severe and very painful illness of his legs and hands. He cannot be cured, and he takes blood baths inside the carcasses of hunted animals, as also reported by many reliable media outlets, like Chicago Tribune and Daily Mail.

He ran his army in trouble in Ukraine, where half of the Russian soldiers were quickly killed by brave Ukrainian defenders of democratic European ways, and the other half just surrendered after witnessing that Ukrainians live in European comfort - with running water and sewage in many Ukrainian houses, electricity, washers and driers and flushable toilets, due to democracy. He now faces the prospect of surrendering to Volodymyr Zelinski, the brave Ukrainian president, and paying trillions of Euros to support Ukrainian progress and strengthening of European-democratic way of life in Ukraine!

He tried to support American ex-President Trump, but Americans quickly elected a much better, pro-Western and pro-NATO president, who supports the defense of Europe!

These days, as reported by many very reputable Ukrainian sources, Putin is hiding in his cold, dark and wet bunker somewhere in the Uralb mountains. He will likely be soon deposed by the coup d'etat staged by his henchmen who do not like that he is always screwing up, or captured by European Ukrainian army. After that, he will hopefully be extradited to Haag or Tel Aviv, where he will be tried and hanged quickly.

This is actually quite good overview of the current status of Putinism, with many well-research sources! We should work together to make it into a section in the main article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:9A00:C390:ADDF:4DC6:926D:65E7 (talk) 05:57, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

"Reputable Ukrainian sources" are funny, of course, but don't expect them to be neutral. You're talking nonsense. The USSR collapsed under Gorbachev, and not under Putin, who you need to be to not know this. It sounds like a populist fairy tale, and please don't call me a kremlebot, but your sources can't be trusted. What kind of cancer, what kind of Trump, a bunker, this is just conspiracy nonsense, I understand that maybe you are angry at him, maybe you are a Ukrainian or some Canadian, and you have the right to be angry at anyone, but please do not spoil the article 81.163.41.230 (talk) 19:49, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

The quoted sources are not only reputable Ukrainian sources, but also many Western very democratic and anti-Putin sources, like New York Post, NBC News and The Guardian. They all are saying the same. 2601:646:8080:10B0:A704:B2C2:A863:A862 (talk) 13:07, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

81.163.41.230 : please feel free to add the Ukrainian or other sources to this valuable discussion of dreadful Putinism. 2601:646:8080:10B0:B80D:F23D:525F:CA95 (talk) 07:03, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

References

missing important section: History

There is no explicit section, or link out to a section, for how Putinism came to be. Which is odd since there is a section targeting the relationship to history (and I don't think that section is named very clearly). Ironically, the history section of the Russia page isn't much use either (well, there is a whole lot that I found was unclear and went looking for clarifications). The closest I've found so far to being useful is the page on Putin.

I know very little about the subject matter so I can't really contribute, this info should be here or at note with a link out.

Porco-esphino (talk) 02:53, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

missing important section: external politics

I cannot believe you missed the main motif: Make Russia great again after gorbachev and yeltsin yielded it to the West). Munich speech of Vladimir Putin, Foreign policy of Vladimir Putin.- Altenmann >talk 01:31, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

I agree, and you are very welcome to improve this page. I will be busy at real life work. My very best wishes (talk) 01:35, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Information from ruwiki

Due to attempt of deletion article "ru:Путинизм" in ruwiki i want to save information in this article·Carn !? 12:24, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done·Carn !? 11:27, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

This article is written mainly from journalistic and journalistic sources. The article in ruwiki have higher quality because it uses academic sources. I am currently also collecting sources from other Wikipedia (German, for example) and I am going to add information from them to this article.·Carn !? 11:27, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Disputed information

I do not know whether or not there is reason to believe information in this article is disputed, but I have assumed good faith and turned another editor's free text 'disputed' note into proper use of a template. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 17:19, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

This Article is very biased to be honest and argues not very plausible. There are actually no Oligarchs in Russia because the very very rich Enterpreneurs in Russia have no political power anymore in opposite to the US that is according to a serious American Study an Oligarchy. The Intelligence Services have also a lot of power in US and UK. The term Putinism itself is only a political buzz word and not a scientific term. The hatred of specific ethnic groups is not a part of Mr. Putins style of rule. Georgians were not victims of a hate campaign in Russia like Novaya Gazeta claimed.--88.65.185.114 (talk) 13:39, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Remove “international support”

The International support section contains no substantial information nor is it cited and should be removed. Even still, you can’t positively relate French right wing politics with Russian Putinism considering the vast differences in government, geography, history, economy etc. 216.73.160.9 (talk) 21:56, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

duplicate source

sources 66 and 82 are the same. also it's a guy citing himself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A04:4540:7111:DF00:95CD:1166:ADF7:EFCC (talk) 01:46, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

What do you mean "it's a guy citing himself"? Renat 10:31, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Fascism

Recently, categories relating to fascism and far-right politics have been added to this article and to other relating to Putin's regime or the war in Ukraine, but is there any basis for adding these categories? Labelling politicians fascist and comparing to Hitler is extremely common after all. -- 2804:248:f675:6f00:585f:cedd:f49a:da8b (talk) 20:22, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

We follow what reliable sources say, and those categories are very relevant to Putin and Putinism. You'll need a strong consensus to remove them, so I have restored them, per the RS in the article. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:15, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

That's not how it works, the user who made the changes is the one who needs consensus, and he doesn't have, and there's nothing indicating that this is a majority viewpoint, these categories are a violation of NPOV. -- 2804:248:f62d:1600:3c6d:91c8:8f33:7559 (talk) 20:39, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

That kind of is how it works. Furthermore, this is not labelling a politician fascist nor comparing him to Hitler. This article is not about a politician. This is adding categories to a subject field, whose relationship to fascism is being discussed by academics. —Michael Z. 21:23, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Exactly. Those categories are backed up by RS and content in the article, so that's why we have them.

IP2804 (and your other IPs), you made a BOLD deletion, and that was REVERTED. Now we're DISCUSSING. You are not supposed to restore your BOLD deletion. That's how WP:BRD works, so your restoration is edit warring. That can get you blocked. NPOV has nothing to do with this, and neither does BLP, as this is based on RS. We document what RS say, no matter what their POV is. It is a violation of NPOV for an editor to allow their personal POV to influence their edits. They are supposed to simply document what RS say and keep their own views out of it. Your edits are personal POV editing, and that is forbidden here. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 21:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Ok, you don't need to add these categories to document what sources are saying, that's all, once you do that, you're pratically labeling Putin or Putinism as "fascist", which is questionable. -- 2804:248:f62d:1600:3c6d:91c8:8f33:7559 (talk) 21:48, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

No, we document what RS say, NO MATTER WHAT it may or may not mean about Putin. If this were a serious and totally false allegation (which it is not) about him, we would follow WP:Public figure and document it. You can have any opinion about Putin and fascism you want, but RS dictate what we write. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 22:09, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

As I mentioned before, you can simply document what RS says without adding these categories, and since Putinism refers to Putin's political system and "ideology" (if we can call it that), you can't pretend that this is not about him, finally, per WP:CATPOV and WP:CATDEF, categories should generally be uncontroversial, but these categories are pretty controversial, and they also need to be defining, while there are sources that do define either Putin or his political system as "fascist", this doesn't seem to be a common and consistent definition. -- 2804:248:f62d:1600:3c6d:91c8:8f33:7559 (talk) 22:26, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

I think "far right" is the consensus of experts. "Fascism" is problematic because all fascist regimes were based on a powerful mass party, and Putin has nevertried to build one. Rjensen (talk) 03:39, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Putin built a powerful mass party, United Russia, and ensured all other parties are “systemic opposition.” (But I think that a fascist group, system, or ideology can be fascist without building a “powerful mass party.”) —Michael Z. 04:32, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I disagree, Putin is often labeled "far-right", but this doesn't seem to be consensus, and I would argue it is problematic too. -- 2804:248:f6f7:6f00:a431:80b8:8dc0:24fd (talk) 04:34, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

The subject of this article is not Vladimir Putin, so its categories do not have to be defining of Vladimir Putin. Can you show that calling Putinism “fascist” is controversial in WP:reliable sources? —Michael Z. 04:35, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

"Fascism" is not defining of "Putinism" (Putin's political system) either, and there doesn't seem to be consensus among experts for this. -- 2804:248:f6f7:6f00:a431:80b8:8dc0:24fd (talk) 04:40, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I’m not sure that is a provable assertion. —Michael Z. 19:22, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Trolling on this talk page

@Ymblanter and Qzd: You both reverted this troll] on main article but can you both ensure now that this IP hopper's trolling is reverted on this talk page as well? I don't think anybody would want to entertain his demand to discuss his intended outright BLP violations and full-blown trolling contrary to the facts that Russia won Georgia war, won Chechen war, successfully expanded Assad's control over Syria and saved it from falling, etc. because WP:NOTAFORUM and WP:DENY are a thing. Orientls (talk) 06:14, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I do not think for a number of reasons that my intervention here will be generally perceived as positive, though it was obvious trolling indeed. Ymblanter (talk) 16:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Eurasianism Removed

Eurasianism has been recently removed in an edit by ADRIAN55 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Putinism&oldid=1110774425

Does this removal have any basis? Eurasianism is a very clear characteristic of Putinism. AWishfulMan (talk) 17:30, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Classification

Shouldn't Putinism be classified as fascism? It's labelled as such by outside sources, and it's justified and warrants the category. Firekong1 (talk) 18:42, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Putinism and fascism have as much in common as Orban and Kim Jong Il. He is just a conservative nationalist oligarchic authoritarian leader, even the cult of personality is limited by praise in the media 81.163.41.230 (talk) 19:41, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 June 2024

Under the section Relation to Far-Left in the second paragraph:

"In October 2021, while criticizing the modern "Western agenda", he likened it the one of the Bolsheviks for being based on the advocacy of the "so-called social progress"."

I believe this should be altered to "he likened it to the one of the Bolsheviks" or "he likened it to that of the Bolsheviks", as the current sentence appears to be missing a determiner or function word. 2600:1008:B02C:3B83:0:15:9049:3B01 (talk) 19:08, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

 Done Tollens (talk) 09:26, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

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

• Putin and Trump meet in Anchorage, Alaska.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:07, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

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

• Putin and Trump meet in Anchorage, Alaska.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:06, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Infobox

If we are going to include an infobox, we should only include key (undisputed) facts that are easily verifiable and reflect the main text (not supplement it) per MOS:IBP. The term "authoritarian capitalism" is not found in the main text. The terms "neo-imperialism" and "irredentism" are only briefly mentioned in the main text and attributed to a "number of commentators" rather than being written in wikivoice. The "historical" positions and political position is also original research. "Neo-liberalism" is not mentioned in the main text and this cited source does not refer to it as a "historical" position but calls Putin's regime "a radical version of neoliberalism" without any suggestion that this suddenly ended in 2008 as the last iteration of the infobox suggested. "Anti-communism" is not mentioned in the main text and is unsourced (let alone dubious). The "right-wing to far-right" label is also based on original research.

Before adding an infobox, please make suggestions on what to add here first. Clearly there are issues with the infobox that need to be addressed before we include one. Mellk (talk) 11:37, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

i’m not too sure if i agree with the political position being OR. that’ll be later.

on “Characteristics”—to sum it up—it’s authoritarian, irredentist, all-Russian (which is ultranationalist), eurasianist, imperialist, and ethnonationalist.

on “Classification” and “Ideology”, it’s corporatist, and anti-American. lastly, fascist, but disputed.

that’s a lot, so we could just include, authoritarianism, russian irredentism, ethno-nationalism, authoritarian conservatism (stated at Putinism and fascism), and Ruscism (disputed).

these ideologies easily match up with it very well being far-right, since there’s territorial claims, invading other countries (eg, Russian invasion of Ukraine , and more. Tonkarooson • 📭|edits. 21:13, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. Some of these positions are very much debatable, for example "ethnonationalism" and Putin being far-right. Putin promotes the idea of a multinational Russian state, rather than a Russian state being built for ethnic Russians (and the immigrant population is one of the largest in the world). In fact, there was major opposition from far-right groups during his first presidency because he was seen as not promoting the interests of ethnic Russians, and thus the government cracked down on such groups. Of course, things have changed since then, but I do not think it is fair to say that he made a complete 180 degree turn on this position.

For example, Putinism – Post-Soviet Russian Regime Ideology (2024) by Mikhail Suslov says: "The most notable paradigm for interpreting Putinism as an ideology with a stable conceptual core is putting it on the platform of conservatism... While Russian imperial hubris is certainly an important emotional component of the present-day ideology, Russian nationalism as an imperative of building a nation-state for ethnic Russians is not only absent but also vigorously repressed by the authorities... Putinism is an ideology with a certain degree of internal coherence, which has been achieved due to its belonging to a larger group of ideologies on the political philosophy platform of right-wing communitarianism and populism." (pp. 12-20)

I think the best way we can start is by finding some sources that refer to Putinism as including certain political positions. Then, if necessary, we can write about this in the main text and then include it in the infobox once we can agree on a draft. But this book by Suslov is a good starting point. Mellk (talk) 12:02, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

So sorry for the late reply, @Mellk!

This looks to be good research, good job lol :). Me saying Putin is far-right is merely just an opinion, so we obviously can’t base it off just that. all the sources we have are right in the article; that’s what I was basing the info box off of. It’s probably safer just to add authoritarianism, irredentism, and fascism (debated).

the thing you said about the infobox. I was wondering, why can’t we have an ideology infobox? Idk if it has ever been proposed, but I believe it’s an acceptable template, especially since you criticized its usage. Tonkarooson • 📭|edits. 04:53, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Right-wing populism category

At least it should be removed. English Wikipedia and Populism articles define populism as follows: Populism is a contested concept for a variety of political stances that emphasise the idea of the "common people", often in opposition to a perceived elite. According to this example, Putin is not a populist because he is an elitist based on the typical silovik. ProgramT (talk) 07:28, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Putin's friendship with right-wing populist leaders, like Trump and Erdoğan, does not automatically make him a "populist". What "common people" does Putin stand for in Russia? As of 2025, the Russian elite are mostly right-wing anti-liberal authoritarians who support Putin. ProgramT (talk) 07:39, 2 January 2026 (UTC)