Talk:Republic (Slovakia)

Rename article to Republika (Slovakia)

The translation of the party's name to Republic only leads to misunderstandings, see that both versions are used in other articles in Wikepedia, e.g. on the 2023 elections. Meerwind7 (talk) 07:44, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

This is not a fascist party

L’sns are the fascists these are right wing populists like the afd in the article it says that milan ulrik(party leader) rejects fascism 93.106.8.187 (talk) 06:39, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but that's irrelevant.

Firstly, no one calls them fascists. They are objectively not. Neo-fascism is a separate, albeit related, concept.

Secondly, what their official stance on these subjects is, while relevant, ultimately not the ultimate deciding factor on what they can be considered as a subject. For the same reason one is not necessary innocent no matter how much they plead they are.

Thirdly, your revert included the removal of the fact they're considered extremist. While we can discuss whether or not it should be worded this way, whether they're neo-fascist or not, the general, undisputed consensus is that they are indeed extremist. They are one of very few parties advocating for a Slovak Brexit, among other things, the only notable party advocating for the same thing being ĽSNS, the "fascists," as you call them.

Anyways, I'm open to constructive discussion about this! But since this is not at all convincing, I reverted your changes. Please do not revert it again as to not cause edit warring. Please do leave a comment if you have anything more to say about this! — Soggy Pandas (talk) 16:08, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

@Soggy Pandas: I think we should change the ideology in the Infobox back to what it was in this revision (and potentially alter it a bit). Currently the ideology and the political position link to the same thing (Far-right politics). Ideology and political position on the political spectrum should be distinguished. --CaeCalig (talk) 16:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

That's all good with me. My aim was to simplify it a bit, as quite a few articles on political parties only have a single ideology mentioned. But it can be changed back if this isn't considered an ideal solution, of course. — Soggy Pandas (talk) 17:36, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Anything that is unsourced should not be added back into the infobox. National conservatism, in this case, can be added back if there is actually a reliable source that describes the party as such. The source that was in the article until now was an interview with Uhrik in which he described the party as "conservative and nationally oriented". Vacant0 (talk) 17:42, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Seems this part of the infobox is quite controversial. I didn't put much thought into it before, since getting the rest of the article right is what mattered to me. But I'll actually review what's best to put there according to reputable sources. — Soggy Pandas (talk) 15:45, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I have reached the conclusion that defining the party's ideology as far-right populist, Eurosceptic and Russophilic is the most correct way to address this.

My reasoning behind this stands primarily on what interviewed experts define the party as. It should be noted that experts do not consider the party to yet be properly neo-fascist, even if it does have neo-fascist links and tendencies. This is why I view it is best to state this on the page, but leave it out of the infobox, and why I wrote the second sentence of the article the way I did. — Soggy Pandas (talk) 22:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Nothing here justifies my edit being reverted. There are multiple citations given for neo-fascism and "far-right populism" is not a political ideology. Helper201 (talk) 22:00, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

You could have waited for 5 minutes. Putting this frustrating behaviour aside, see what I wrote above. — Soggy Pandas (talk) 22:08, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Firstly, "far-right populism" is not a recognised political ideology we use on Wikipedia. Secondly, we have multiple citations for neo-fascism, so I strongly disagree with any sort of removal of this. Helper201 (talk) 22:12, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I do not see how that's relevant. But feel free to use "right-wing populism". It is far less clear and less accurate, but if you so wish, then so be it.

I'm trying to make the article as accurate to expert assessment as I possibly can. And as it stands, according to political experts, not journalists, Republika is an extremist, but not neo-fascist party. While it's great that you have links to news articles calling the party neo-fascist, confirming that it is, in fact, regarded as such, again, it is not actually considered neo-fascist by political experts. Wikipedia should strive to be as accurate as possible, and that's my goal. I consider the appreciation of nuance to be crucial to understanding politics, and by lumping the party into the same category as ĽSNS without making it clear what the difference is hinders that.

TL;DR: As it stands, the party should be, by all accounts, considered an extremist one, and its neo-fascist members and tendencies must be noted. But the primary definition of the party shouldn't be "neo-fascist", as it's not accurate and directly contradicted by expert assessments. The neo-fascism infobox should be removed and primary ideology defined as far-right populist, or "right-wing populist", if you so will. — Soggy Pandas (talk) 22:31, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I understand your point and apologies if I've angered you. However, there's nothing wrong with using news sources on Wikipedia. While expert opinion is preferable, that doesn't mean that any of us can deny or dismiss what is stated by news sources. Helper201 (talk) 22:36, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

That's not my point. My point is that while the party is widely considered neo-fascist and often described as that, it is not the most accurate description despite being popular, as stated by political experts. And I believe this article should take make that clear. — Soggy Pandas (talk) 22:41, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

If it’s widely considered and described as such the article should reflect that. It is not up to editors to decide upon what is accurate and not accurate. We shouldn't be selecting certain academic sources to try and combat non-academic ones or pit them against each other, nor imply or come to our own conclusions. Either way, neo-fascism has plenty enough evidence for infobox inclusion. The ins-and-outs of the party's relation to the ideology and who describes it as such can be detailed in the "political positions" section but I strongly disagree with removing neo-fascism from anywhere this ideology is currently mentioned on the page. Helper201 (talk) 22:51, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Fine, then. I disagree with your conclusion, but ultimately, I think the difference between our versions of the page is minimal enough that I'm leaving it be as is, for now. We'll see how the party profiles itself in the future, and whether it goes more-so in the neo-fascist direction or merely right-wing populist. If the latter, this conversation might have to repeat itself.

PS: I've noticed you've edited the Slovak Wikipedia page to reflect what's written here. Good luck with that! Also, it's "neofašistické", not "neofašista". The former is an adjective, the latter a noun! — Soggy Pandas (talk) 23:10, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

articles came out after the edit on wikipedia it could be posible that there is a circular reference going on where journalist want to write an article about this so they google republika see wikipedia article says it is fascist. question no further (because they hate all right wing populist parties) and then write an article about it being fascist.

it is noteble that in articles published earlier than these described republika as far right and having split from fascist/nazi L’SNS and they write about a difference and don’t say both are evil fascists or whatever 193.210.200.72 (talk) 10:16, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Here are even more citations that call the party neo-fascist:

• https://www.milano.zone/2023/08/18/republika-fined-and-order-to-apologise-for-spreading-hate/
• https://spectator.sme.sk/c/23206525/news-digest-president-dismisses-politicians-wild-claims-of-a-coup.html
• https://www.thefreelibrary.com/News+digest%3a+President+dismisses+politician%27s+wild+claims+of+a+%27coup%27.-a0761413829
• https://www.zazoom.it/2023-08-18/the-hateful-eight-di-tarantino-stasera-in-tv/13367508/

Helper201 (talk) 22:16, 2 September 2023 (UTC)