On February 24, Russia invaded Ukraine, and the entire world began watching. All over Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, in neighborhood storefronts and pinned on jackets, the blue and yellow horizontal lines representing the blue skies and yellow fields of wheat in Ukraine — representing the flag they have flown since their independence in the early 1990s — have been shared to show solidarity with the country.
We do not see the Russian flag being flown, but what we may see is the letter Z. In fact, right here on the Upper West side, there’s an apartment with a conspicuous letter Z in its window.
Advertisement
What we do know is that the letter Z has been adopted as the symbol of support for the invasion of Ukraine. It began showing up on Russian vehicles of war, such as tanks and other military carriers. This in itself is not uncommon; in fact, US army vehicles have their own insignias. Where it gets unusual is that it has now spread outside of the military and into the life of civilians. It is often coupled with the phrase “We do not abandon our own,” either as a hashtag on a meme or a chant. It’s interesting to note that the symbol used is from the Latin alphabet, rather than the Cyrillic alphabet. The Russian Defense Ministry said it comes from the phrase “za pobedu,” which translates to “for victory.”
Oh, for Pete’s sake. Are we all now going to be afraid of the letter “Z?” That would be playing right into Putin’s propaganda.
As pointed out in the article, the letter “Z” does not even appear in the Russian (Cyrillic) alphabet. And the Russian Defense Minister slyly skirts the use of the phrase he cites, saying only that it means “for victory.” What he doesn’t add is that it was SPECIFICALLY used during WWII against the Nazis; i.e., “for victory… against the Nazis.” Given that one of Putin’s primary stated goals is to “deNazify” Ukraine (a country with a Jewish leader, a large population of Russian and Ukrainian Jews, and generally well-disposed toward the Jewish people), the use of the “Z” for his given reason is particularly noxious.
But that doesn’t mean that every time we see a “Z” we should be concerned. As the article also notes, it is the first letter of Zelenskyy’s last name. In that regard, I think Zelenskyy ought to poke some fun at Putin by co-opting the letter “Z” for himself and his supporters, but perhaps stylize it in the form of the Superman “S.” That would be a real dig at Putin.
the problem with the “but Zelensky is Jewish” line is that would mean that racism against black people is a thing of the past in the USA because Obama.
furthermore, it is established fact that the Azov Battalion is a Neo-Nazi part (official now) of the Ukrainian army. And those Neo-Nazis have done a lot of the fighting in eastern Ukraine since the 2014 coup.
and yes, there are hard right, basically Nazi, factions within the Ukrainian government.
the Nazi collaborator from the 1940s is officially a hero of Ukraine.
Nope, have no idea what Z means in this context, and I wonder at this “concern” blogging.
There are neo-Nazis everywhere, apparently including New Zealand. So what’s your point? My point is that Ukraine does not need “de-Nazification” any more than New Zealand does. So Putin using a symbol that the Russians know is SPECIFICALLY associated with WWII and the Nazis is a dangerous form of propaganda.
As for your Zelenskyy-Obama comment, that is just silly. As I myself implied (“a large population of Russian and Ukrainian Jews, and generally well-disposed toward the Jewish people”), Zelenskyy being Jewish is not the be-all and end-all of anti-Jewish sentiment; of course there is always going to be SOME. Just as there is, and has been, throughout the world for centuries.
I still don’t understand your point, or why you seem so ready to “defend” Putin and Russia here.
The Neo-Nazis in New Zealand have not been fighting a New Zealand war against rebels in the east for the last 8 years. The Azov Battalion has.
Also the Azov Battalion has been officially part of the Ukrainian army for years.
News to me that Russia has an active Neo-Nazi Battalion in it’s army or national guard.
Furthermore a Nazi collaborator from the early 1940s, Bandera, is NOT an official hero of New Zealand.
Hope you can see the differences now. You really should have looked into this before postings your “what aboutism”.
“generally well disposed”, as someone else says: You know this how, and you’re ignoring the Ukrainians part in the Holocaust.
Your responses only compound the problems with your initial post.
As always, you miss the important points, only to harp on the details that YOU decide are the important ones, or the ones you can be provocative with. But then, you do this every time you respond to anything I write, without knowing a lick about me or what or who I know. You clearly love to hear yourself talk. Keep going. We’ll let other people decide for themselves.
Why don’t you identify what important points you think I missed?
You set up a massive false equivalence with that preposterous “but New Zealand” line, excused neo-Nazis as an organized force within the Ukrainian army and you managed to trivialize the Holocaust.
Good job./s
If you were being honest with yourself, you’d think a tiny bit about what you posted. And you’d look up who Bandera was.
I did none of those things. That is what YOU “read into” my comment. I doubt many (any?) others read the same things into it. You have a way of dissecting people’s posts so that (i) they seem to have the worst intent, and (ii) you can find things to argue with and highlight your own knowledge – even when that knowledge only tangentially relates to the original comment. Since you so completely misrepresent what I say, I see little point in continuing to engage. I do not have to defend myself to anyone, least of all you. You might want to start by trying to read people’s comments with a less hyper-critical, even cynical eye.
You did everything I said, especially emphatically say, “what about [the irrelevant] Neo-Nazis in New Zealand”.
It’s telling that in your responses you have NOT managed to demonstrate that you didn’t do what you did.
I’m not even the only commenter here who as called attention to your trivialization of the Holocaust.
If you’d stuck with “I’ve been in Ukraine, and many Ukrainians accept Jews in the 21st century”, then you’d be on firm ground.
You did everything I said, especially emphatically say, “what about [the irrelevant] Neo-Nazis in New Zealand”.
It’s telling that in your responses you have NOT managed to demonstrate that you didn’t do what you did.
I’m not even the only commenter here who as called attention to your trivialization of the what many Ukrainians actively participated in during the early and mid 1940s..
If you’d stuck with “I’ve been in Ukraine, and many Ukrainians accept Jews in the 21st century”, then you’d be on firm ground.
You lost as soon as you said, “what about New Zealand”.
You continue to play the provocateur. You say, “I’m not even the only commenter here who as called attention to your trivialization of the what (sic) many Ukrainians actively participated in during the early and mid 1940s..”
The only other commenter who has made reference to it at all was “Just an Observer,” whose comment suggested that I somehow thought it was “PC to ignore” the Ukrainians role in the Holocaust. This is also not what I said or suggested, and I made that clear.
And if we are going to discuss actual history, while there were collaborators in Ukraine who helped the Nazis, they were actually a very small number. The majority of the 1.5 million Ukrainians eventually killed during the Holocaust were not killed as a result of collaboration by their neighbors, but by Nazi kill squads. This is historical fact.
You can keep attacking me all you want. You seem to enjoy it, since, as noted, you do it every time I post something.
Zorro!
Ian Alterman, when you say that Ukrainian population is generally well disposed towards Jewish people, how do you know it? Because now it is PC to ignore their role in Holocaust? Sure today they are heroes involved in heroic struggle against the Goliath of the Russian military machine. And antisemitism very well may be a thing of the past there, at least to some extent, since many elected government officials in Ukraine are Jewish. I wish it to be true. But as a person who lost tens of relatives there in 1941, mostly at the hands of their Ukrainian neighbors, when I hear similar rhetoric, it is painful. Alas, it shows how little many in the US know and understand the history. At least people can now find Ukraine on the map. And no, if does not mean that I support Putin and his war. I detest it and support Ukrainians who are fighting for their independence and freedom. But please do not throw around phrases like that. Painting all Ukrainian history in rosy colors does not serve well anyone.
I also obviously abhor what was done then, and I am sorry that you still feel affected by it. But you yourself admit that that was in the past. And while you think I am “throwing around phrases,” you do not challenge the substance or accuracy of my comment. As for how I know, I know both from firsthand knowledge, and from knowing a bit about the progression of Ukrainian socio-politics, not least when it comes to acceptance of, and even support for, the Jewish people.
The reason the 1st Amendment exists is to protect UNPOPULAR speech. If all speech were “popular” then we wouldn’t need an amendment to protect it.
Regardless of the real intent, the fact stands that yes, even Russian sympathizers have the freedom to express themselves and their alliances — they may not like the reaction to their speech but that’s their free choice to make.
What I’m more concerned about is speech-shaming and doxxing.
If your skin is too thin to entertain the existence conflicting viewpoints, then this whole “freedom” thing may not be your cup of tea.
Well said!! 🙂
I live in this building lol! It is the person’s name.
LOL! Thanks for clearing that up. Now we can all sleep soundly. 🙂