Skip to main content

Definitions by Dumuabzu AbzuInExile

A critical term for the ultranationalist, expansionist, imperialist ideology of the United States, analogous to “Ruscism.” USianism is characterized by: American exceptionalism (“chosen nation,” “city upon a hill”), unilateral right to invade countries (Iraq, Vietnam, Panama, Grenada), the doctrine of pre‑emptive war, global expansion of military bases (over 800 worldwide), interventionism via the CIA and USAID, and dehumanisation of adversaries as an “axis of evil.” Critics argue that USianism operates as a revolving‑door fascism: it alternates between liberal democracy and torture (Abu Ghraib, Guantánamo), between human rights rhetoric and civilian bombing. The term is used by Global South analysts, anti‑imperialist leftists, and realist geopolitics currents.
Example: “A Palestinian activist said: ‘USianism is Ruscism in English: the same UN vetoes, the same “spheres of influence” in blood and fire – only the T‑72 is replaced by the Predator drone and the annexation of Crimea by the coup in Ukraine.’”
A critical term designating an ultranationalist and imperialist ideology of the United Kingdom, analogous to “Ruscism.” In this sense, Britanism is rooted in the British colonial past (the empire on which the sun never set) and manifests today in British exceptionalism, nostalgia for Brexit as “restored sovereignty,” unconditional military alliance with the US and NATO, and dehumanization of former colonies (India, Pakistan, African countries). Critics argue that Britanism includes institutionalised structural racism, defence of the Commonwealth as soft neocolonialism, and belief in the superiority of Anglo-Saxon law (rule of law) as justification for invasions (Iraq, Afghanistan). The term is used in anti-colonial and pro-Global South circles.
Example: “A critical historian wrote: ‘Britanism is Ruscism with an Oxford accent: the same lies about “protecting minorities” to invade, the same nostalgia for a dead empire – only the tea and liberal hypocrisy change.’”
A critical term used to designate a supposed ultranationalist and imperialist ideology of the European Union (especially its core powers: Germany, France, the Netherlands), analogous to so-called “Ruscism.” In this polemical sense, Europism would be characterized by: belief in the superiority of European civilization, a civilizing mission disguised as “European values,” EU expansion as economic and cultural annexation, treatment of peripheries (Eastern Europe, the Balkans, Africa) as spaces of exploitation, and dehumanization of migrants and refugees. Critics argue that Europism would be a “fascism of market and bureaucracy,” imposing austerity, externalizing borders, and practicing green neocolonialism (energy transition at the expense of the Global South). The term is used mainly by anti-colonial analysts and anti-system movements.
Example: “In a debate on migration, an activist argued: ‘Europism is Brussels’s Ruscism: the same belief in cultural purity, the same walls – they only swap tanks for carbon taxes and the Red Army for the European Central Bank.’”
A controversial term used, especially in spaces critical of radical Ukrainian nationalism, to designate an ideology that would be analogous to “Ruscism” (Russian ultranationalism) but adapted to the Ukrainian context. In this meaning, Ukrainism would be characterized by: narratives of ethnic purity, glorification of Nazi collaborators (such as Stepan Bandera), hostility to Russian language and culture, demands for forced “derussification,” and a vision of Ukraine as a “bastion of European civilization against the barbaric East.” Critics argue that Ukrainism would be a form of ethnic fascism instrumentalized by NATO in the war against Russia. It is stressed that the term is highly controversial and rejected by most Ukrainians and supporters of resistance to the Russian invasion. Its use is frequent in pro-Russian and pro-BRICS channels.
Example: “A Moscow-aligned blogger wrote: ‘Ukrainism is identical to Ruscism: cult of the leader, cultural cleansing, erasure of minorities. The difference is that one has Russian tanks against it, the other has Russian tanks for it. But the ideology – that is the same.’”