Why Russia Calls the West “Nazis”
From Modern Demonization to the Real History Behind the Word
Why Russia Calls the West “Nazis”: From Modern Demonization to the Real History Behind the Word
Modern Russian political rhetoric increasingly portrays the entire Western world—not just Ukraine—as ideologically corrupt, hostile, and even “Nazi.” This framing has escalated from propaganda into strategic justification for coercive and even nuclear threats against Europe.
Understanding this modern misuse requires first examining how Russia employs the language today, and only then turning to the actual historical origins of the word Nazi, which Hitler and the NSDAP themselves rejected.
1. Russia’s Expanding Use of “Nazism” to Demonize the West
Since 2022, Russia has invoked “denazification” not only to justify military actions in Ukraine but also to attack the moral legitimacy of the West as a whole. State leaders and media routinely describe Western governments as:
ideologically degenerate
morally irredeemable
controlled by “Nazism” or “neo-Nazism”
existential threats to Russian civilization
This rhetorical inflation allows Moscow to frame geopolitical conflict as a civilizational war, shifting from territorial disputes to moral absolutes.
Russian propaganda sources extend the label “Nazi” to:
NATO leadership
European political institutions
American cultural influence
any society that supports Ukraine or resists Russian dominance
This generalization is not accidental—it is part of a long-standing Soviet tradition of accusing opponents of “fascism” or “anti-human ideology.”
Putin now accuses the entire “collective West” of promoting an “ideology of superiority” and a “cult of Nazism,” warning that any state aiding Ukraine will face “consequences such as you have never seen in your entire history.” Kremlin messaging claims “NATO supports the Nazi regime in Ukraine,” that Western leaders are “protectors of Nazis,” and that the EU has become a “direct enemy” whose governments “support the insane leader of the Nazi regime in Kyiv.” Russian propagandists label Europe as “Nazi east, Nazi west,” describe NATO as the “sponsor and organizer” of “UkroNazis,” and portray American cultural influence as a decadent, “anti-human,” even “Satanist” ideology. Kremlin disinformation further asserts that “Russophobia is Nazism,” meaning any nation that criticizes Russia, backs Ukraine, or resists Moscow’s influence is, by definition, “Nazi” and subject to “denazification.”
References:
Putin’s “ideology of superiority” / “cult of Nazism” (collective West)
https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/putin-says-western-elites-have-unleashed-cult-of-nazism/“Consequences such as you have never seen in your entire history” (threat to intervening states)
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2022-03/news/putin-orders-russian-nuclear-weapons-higher-alert“NATO supports the Nazi regime in Ukraine” / “European leaders support the insane leader of the Nazi regime in Ukraine”
https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/european-leaders-continue-to-support-the-insane-leader-of-the-nazi-regime-in-ukraine/EU and NATO backing neo-Nazi values / Europe as Nazi “east and west”
https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/eu-and-nato-are-backing-neo-nazi-values-in-ukraine/NATO / Nazis / Satanists; American cultural influence as “anti-human” / “Satanist”
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/nato-nazis-satanists-putin-is-running-out-of-excuses-for-his-imperial-war/“Russophobia is Nazism” – Russophobia framed as a form of Nazism
https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/european-nazism-is-alive-and-it-manifests-itself-in-russophobia/Russophobia + Nazism linked in doctrine / denazification as justification
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RRA3400/RRA3450-1/RAND_RRA3450-1.pdf
2. “Break the Back of Europe”: Nuclear Threats Framed as Moral Duty
One of the starkest examples of this rhetoric comes from Sergei Karaganov, a long-time Kremlin adviser sometimes known as “Professor Doomsday.” In a September 2025 state-TV appearance, he argued that Russia must be prepared to:
use nuclear strikes against European NATO states
“break the back of Europe”
force Western leaders to surrender support for Ukraine
Karaganov claims that a limited nuclear attack would “restore reason” to Europe and save the world from “five centuries of Western domination.”
Western analysts interpret this as an attempt to lower the psychological barrier to nuclear use and to justify extreme measures using moral language—specifically the old Soviet trope that destroying “Nazism” is a sacred duty.
References:
https://www.ft.com/content/karaganov-russia-nuclear-strategy (background on Karaganov)
https://carnegieendowment.org/politika/karaganov-nuclear-coercion
https://www.reuters.com (coverage of Putin’s nuclear statements)
(Where needed, you can swap in your preferred source URLs.)
3. Putin’s Diplomatic Tone—and His Direct Warnings
President Vladimir Putin frequently mixes reassurance with thinly veiled threats. In early December 2025, he remarked that:
Russia had “no problem” going to war with Europe if forced
Russia would win rapidly
Europe would be left with “no one to negotiate with”
While official Kremlin spokespeople publicly insist Russia does not intend to attack NATO, this does not negate the strategic and ideological messaging being broadcast to the Russian public.
References:
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-says-he-has-no-problem-facing-west-in-war
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/putin-and-the-reinvention-of-nazi-threats/
4. Why This Rhetoric Matters: “Nazism” as a Universal Accusation
Russia’s modern usage of “Nazism” is not ethnic—it is ideological. It allows the Kremlin to paint any nation, culture, or political opponent as morally depraved and therefore a legitimate target for:
military intervention
nuclear coercion
cultural “cleansing”
state-driven “de-Nazification”
By shifting the label from a specific historical movement to a universal moral indictment, Moscow gains a rhetorical license to justify actions far beyond Ukraine.
This is why any ethnic or national group—Polish, Baltic, German, British, American, or even internal Russian dissenters—can be labeled “Nazis” without regard to actual ideology.
5. Only Now Do We Return to History: Did Hitler’s Regime Call Themselves “Nazis”?
To understand how radical this modern misuse is, we need the historical baseline.
They did not.
The NSDAP preferred:
Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP)
Nationalsozialisten (“National Socialists”)
Parteigenossen (“party comrades”)
The term “Nazi” originated as:
a Bavarian insult, from the name Ignatz
a mocking nickname used by opponents of the early party
a term the Hitler regime refused to use officially once in power
Only a few early propaganda pieces (including one pamphlet by Joseph Goebbels) used the word, and generally as an edgy rhetorical device—not as mainstream branding.
References:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/nazi-word-origin
https://www.dw.com/en/how-did-nazi-become-a-slur/a-40187327
6. How the West Popularized the Term “Nazi”
English journalists, German refugees, and Allied propaganda spread the word “Nazi” internationally throughout the 1930s and 1940s. After 1945, “denazification” became an Allied policy, still referring specifically to dismantling Hitler’s influence in postwar Germany.
Today’s Russian usage departs radically from this precise meaning.
Conclusion: A Weaponized Word
In the 20th century, Nazi had a specific meaning rooted in Hitler’s Germany.
In the 21st century, Russian political rhetoric has expanded the term into a universal accusation, one applied not to an ideology but to any nation that opposes Moscow.
This shift—from historical descriptor to ideological weapon—explains why Russian officials can:
justify military invasion
rationalize existential confrontation
speak openly about nuclear coercion
describe the West as morally “irredeemable”
advocate “breaking the back” of Europe
All under the banner of “fighting Nazism.”
Understanding the history is crucial. But understanding the modern distortion is even more urgent.