César Vidal Labels Pedro Varela a Nazi Over Ukraine Support

César Vidal Calls Pedro Varela a Nancy for Backing Ukraine

Can a bookseller once convicted for selling banned literature be branded a Nancy by a historian based in Miami? That is the core question raised by this controversy: a tweet from César Vidal accusing Pedro Varela of supporting Ukraine and calling for Russia’s destruction under the headline "Hitler was right," adding that "Nancy always help each other." The link included in the tweet no longer works; according to early comments, the article was removed from Varela’s own account, which reportedly shifted its stance from pro-Ukraine to pro-Pilingui.

The accusation lands on contentious ground. Varela is known for his Barcelona bookstore and for having been imprisoned, as noted in the discussion, for crimes that his defenders argue were not committed. Vidal, meanwhile, is described as a historian with a consistent narrative since adolescence and a polemicist accused of drifting toward Zionist and evangelical positions. The result is a clash of credibility where few agree even on what the now-deleted text actually said.

What Is Known About the Tweet and the Deleted Article

The initial message reproduces Vidal’s tweet with an explicit accusation: Varela supported Ukraine and sought Russia’s destruction. However, the link is broken. A subsequent comment claims the article was deleted from Varela’s account, noting that the shift in position—from backing Ukraine to backing Pilingui—occurred rapidly. There is no way to verify the original content with the available evidence.

This lack of primary source is part of the issue itself. Those demanding proof of support for Ukraine cannot obtain it; those making the accusation offer none either. The debate thus oscillates between memories of what was read and suspicions that the link was removed to hide an error or a lie.

Why Ukraine or Russia Support Divides the Far Right

The core disagreement is not about Varela or Vidal, but about the war. Some argue that a NATO victory would cement the current status quo, while a Russian victory, though solving nothing, would open the opportunity to decouple from the United States and build a sovereign European bloc. On the opposite extreme, others contend that Russia is a capitalist country with a corrupt society led by a caste of satraps, just like the United States but in a shabbier version, with hostility toward gais being its only distinguishing antiestéticature.

Between these poles emerges a third path: those who believe neither Russia nor the United States represents anything for Spain, asserting that the nation is Spain and that geopolitical blocs are a waste of time. Thus, the debate over Ukraine becomes a debate over what it means to be right-wing.

The Argument That Both Sides Are Part of the Same Game

One detailed intervention argues that Russia is simply the USSR playing the "good cop" now, having played the "bad cop" during the Cold War, and that neither Russia defends Christian interests today nor did the United States in the 1950s. The conclusion is that both sides are directed from above by the same forces, precisely what National Socialists denounced. In this view, supporting either side is falling into a trap.

The same comment introduces a historical nuance: Bismarck did not want a German-Russian alliance but rather continued the Reinsurance Treaty with Russia to wage war against France without risking an open front. This precision matters because it dismantles the opportunistic use of the German Chancellor as an endorsement of a strategic alliance he never sought.

César Vidal’s Decline as a Polemicist

Much of the conversation focuses not on the accusation but on the accuser. It is recalled that Vidal has spent the last two years labeling forced vaccination advocates as "Nancy," and that this gratuitous use of the term erodes his credibility every time he employs it. His departure from a radio program due to being deemed unacceptable is also mentioned, alongside descriptions of him as a liar frequently debunked by others.

The portrait emerging is that of a polemicist who has turned labels into tools and, by applying them to Varela, risks receiving a blowback. The lingering question is simple: if everyone using the term "Nancy" on social media is, according to one intervention, a globalist, a "Turcochino," or controlled dissent, what category does the person using it to attack a bookseller fall into?

Pedro Varela’s Trajectory and the Cost of Defending Him

The harshest messages target not Vidal but those attacking him. It is recalled that Varela stood on the front line during attacks on his bookstore, dodging objects and refusing to retreat, while the Mossos d'Esquadra (Catalan police) blocked street entrances, allowing aggressors to act freely. It is emphasized that he has maintained the same discourse since adolescence and entered prison with dignity for crimes his defenders consider uncommitted.

Against this backdrop, Vidal’s accusation reads as betrayal among supposed allies. The phrase summarizing this stance is that, if a choice must be made, Varela is chosen without hesitation. The discussion leaves an uncomfortable residue: two figures sharing enemies accuse each other of serving the adversary.

---

In the end, the missing article remains absent, the link stays broken, and nothing has been proven. The only verifiable facts are that one tweet accused, another responded, and a Barcelona bookstore still stands. Almost nothing, for so much talk of Nancy.