This anthology explores the memory work performed by Baltic, Central and East European far-right actors in the online space. Situated at the crossroads between memory studies, far-right studies and media studies, the volume’s seven chapters show how a wide range of far-right actors, from small movements to major parties, have exploited digital communication technologies in order to establish their plays with the past in the mainstream discourses of their respective national contexts. With focus on the online memory work of the far right in Austria, Belarus, Czechia, Lithuania, Romania, Sweden, and Ukraine, the anthology eviscerates the nexus between politics, media and memory in order to show how the spaces of flow of digital communication proper of the network society have empowered the memory work of marginal but dangerous societal actors. As the anthology’s chapters show, the online space has raised the visibility and success of organised intolerant groups and, consequently, it has magnified the societal impact of their memory work. Thanks to digital media, the memory work of the far right can compete on an equal level with state-endorsed memory politics. By meddling with the past and how it is perceived by civil societies on websites, blogs, and social media, the far right has succeeded in overcoming its marginality and in normalising its messages of intolerance on a continental scale.

This anthology explores the memory work performed by Baltic and Central and East European far-right actors in the online space. Situated at the crossroads between memory studies, far-right studies, and media studies, the volume’s seven chapters show how a wide range of far-right actors, from small movements to major parties, have exploited digital communication technologies in order to establish their plays with the past in the mainstream discourses of their respective national contexts. With a focus on the online memory work of the far right in Austria, Belarus, Czechia, Lithuania, Romania, Sweden, and Ukraine, the anthology dissects the nexus between politics, media, and memory to show how digital communication have empowered the memory work of marginal but dangerous societal actors. As the different contributions show, the online space has raised the visibility and success of organised intolerant groups and, consequently, it has magni ed the societal impact of their memory work. Thanks to digital media, the memory work of the far right can compete on an equal footing with state-endorsed memory politics.  rough manipulation of the historical narrative and thereby the perception and understanding of the past in civil societies, on websites, blogs, and social media, the far right has succeeded in overcoming its marginality and in normalising its messages of intolerance on a continental scale.

In Chapter 1, “To Weaponise the Future: Digital Posters and the Counter-narrative of the Second World War in the Belarusian Far Right”, the author turns his attention to the digital work with the counter-narrative of the Second World War by ultranationalists in today’s Belarus. In many European countries, the historical narratives that have built their post-war identity are under attack today, and Belarus is no exception.  Thee country suffered more than most other European states in the Second World War.  No historical event has had a greater influence on the collective memory, and the Second World War is a foundation for the creation of a modern Belarusian identity. Unlike many neighbouring countries, Lukashenka’s government politically marginalises such ethnic referents as native language and national history, basing its nation building on the idealised past of Soviet unity. The ongoing political crisis is used by present-day populist activists, who promote alternative perspectives of the past in order to advance alternative values in the future. Using perspectives from visual and textual analysis the chapter ex- amines contemporary digital posters about the Second World War made by anonymous artists and distributed via so

This article analyses the memorialization of Ion Moţa and Vasile Marin, two Romanian Legionary movement volunteers who died while fighting for Franco in the Spanish Civil War, as an entangled history of Romanian and Spanish fascisms. The commemoration practices and narratives recounted in the Spanish and Romanian newspapers and archival sources from the period 1937–41 show that commemorating foreign ideological peers and appropriating symbolic elements of foreign fascisms in order to memorialize fallen comrades served as resources for legitimizing the struggle against domestic competitors. Although the totalitarian ambitions of Spanish and Romanian fascists remained unfulfilled, the Spanish-Romanian entanglement contributed to consolidating Moţa and Marin as martyrs of transnational fascism.