Mike Rosen’s Nov. 16 column purporting to give the proper definitions of fascist, socialist, etc. would not pass the examination of any sociologist or political scientist, whether conservative or liberal. Rosen ignores certain facts of history that make his definitions absurd. The ironic thing is that if he understood the ways that about Russia and China were really being made, he’d find plenty to complain about.

China has always stayed loyal to its Communist Party and Marxist-leninist thought. Under Xi Jinpeng, the nation has moved to a centralized personality cult of the Mao variety, and would be an example of “repressive socialism” — though Xi occasionally uses populism of a Donald Trump variety.

Russia, by contrast, gave up all adherence to socialist views when the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991. In its first decade, Boris Yeltsin and others steered the country through a period of “cowboy capitalism” where oligarchs won control of most of the economy. From Vladimir Putin’s rise to power at the end of the 1990s, the country became an authoritarian right-wing state with no hints of leftist principles in their government or economy.

What is ironic in this picture is that some members of the pro-socialist “new left” in the U.S. and Europe became fans of Putin for some inexplicable reason, and took the position of supporting the invasion of Ukraine. Those that Rosen calls “left” are really fairly centrist Democrats and Republicans, who have indeed become fairly uncritical in support of sending Ukraine more weapons. But because the pro-putin left supports a Russian government that is unquestionably rightist, they end up allying with people like Tucker Carlson. If Rosen were to criticize these strange bedfellows, he’d have an interesting column. As it is, he’s gotten almost all the definitions precisely wrong.

Loring Wirbel Colorado Springs