[this analysis was written for the Unz Review]
As the Presidential elections in Russia are drawing near I am amazed to see how much interest this event is generating in spite of the fact that it sure seems to me that this will be an incredibly boring and, frankly, totally useless event.
But first, full disclosure: I don’t have much faith in the so-called “democratic process”. Just look at the EU and tell me: do you really believe that the people in power represent the will and interests of the people who, supposedly, elected them? There are exceptions, of course, Switzerland is probably one of the comparatively most democratic countries out there, but mostly what we see is that western democracies are run by gangs of oligarchs and bureaucrats who have almost nothing in common with the people they are supposed to represent. As for the USA, for decades now every time the people voted for “A” they always got “non-A” as a result. It is almost comical. So here is my personal conclusion: democracies are political systems in which the real ruling elites hide behind an utterly fake appearance of people power. Put it differently, the “democratic process” is the device by which the real and hidden rulers of the world (or “worldwide behind the scenes powers“, to use the expression of Ivan Il’in), legitimize their power and prevent their overthrow. This is the same technique used by used car dealerships when they place tens, sometimes, hundreds of US flags on their lots before a car sale: it’s just a basic trick to induce the ‘correct’, patriotic, state of mind. This is also the reason why there are elections every 4 years in the USA: the more illegitimate and despotic any putatively “democratic” regime is, the more often it will organize elections to, so to speak, “increase the dose” of patriotically-induced stupor in its people and give them the illusion that the regime is legitimate, their opinion matters and all is well. Finally, when needed, slogans such as “democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others” are used to put to sleep those who might have doubts. In terms of real people power “democracies” are probably the least truly democratic regimes imaginable simply because they are by far the most capable of hiding who really runs the country and where there real centers of power are. Do I really need to add that the worst kind of “democracy” is the capitalist one? You disagree? Then why do you think that Mayer Amschel Rothschild allegedly declared “Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws!“? Nowhere is the concentration of capital easier to achieve than in a society which makes it possible for the real ruling class to hide its power behind a screen of electoral farces.
Russia’s modern “democracy” fits into this mold very nicely and the upcoming elections are a perfect example of that. But here I need to make another disclaimer: if judged superficially, just by the usual set of legalistic, external, criteria, Russia is a real democracy: there is freedom of speech in Russia, plenty of elections, you can criticize Putin or any other politician to your heart’s content, when journalists are murdered (which happens), it is never on the Kremlin’s orders (simply because the Kremlin does not need them dead). The Russian media is infinitely more diverse (and interesting!) then the dull propaganda machine called “the media” in the West. And even harsh critiques of the government (like, say, Maksim Shevchenko) do get positions in various official human rights monitoring bodies, etc. In reality, Russia is far more democratic than most western countries.
So what is wrong with this rosy picture?
What is wrong is that this is all a farce, a facade, every bit as fake as western democracies are. But in a very different, uniquely Russian, way.
For one thing, there is no real opposition in Russia. Oh sure, Zhirinovsky has been in politics for years and delivering his unique mix of very sound and truthful ideas and utter, idiotic nonsense. ”Zhirik” (as he is called in Russia) is really a court jester, whose role is to amuse but also often say things which others don’t have the courage to say. By the way, regardless of crazy nonsense he regularly spews, the man is very intelligent and well educated and when he acts like a clown he is fully aware of it (you can even see his laughing eyes when he offloads some particularly offensive and outrageous comment). Zhirik and his “Liberal Democratic” (I kid you not!) party is basically the ideal “Kremlin-approved” pseudo-opposition which gets a lot of people who otherwise might feel really disgusted with Kremlin politics to vent, go vote, and then basically support Putin even if they don’t realize it. Zhirik and his LDRP are also very useful to harshly criticize, ridicule and discredit the pro-US “liberals” (in the Russian meaning of the word) whom I refer to as “Atlantic Integrationists”. Next, comes the Communists.
The Russian Communists are a pathetic bunch, really. I wish the English speaking audience could listen to how their longtime leader, Gennady Zyuganov, speaks: he even sounds like an old Soviet Politburo member. The Russian Communists have, for many years now, been a completely reactionary and fossilized party: mostly the peddle Soviet-era nostalgia, minus the Gulag, of course, and with a new and fantastically hypocritical respect for religion. If Zhirik is a least really funny, Zyuganov will bore you to tears! So for these elections, the Russian Communists did something really weird: they chose to back an outsider, Pavel Grudinin, who is as much a real communist as the Barak Obama was a real democrat. I guess their stupid plan was to show something akin to a 21st-century version of “Communism with a human face”, except for this time the face looks strikingly similar to Charlie Chaplin.
But don’t completely dismiss the Communists quite yet. For one thing, many Russians are deeply opposed to the neo-liberal policies of the Medvedev government and even though Putin talks a very social talk, the sad reality is that he also is clearly a proponent of western-style economics. Putin gets away with this by two simple tricks: a) his superb foreign policy b) by deflecting most criticisms on Medvedev. Slick move, but not one good enough for a nation and culture which has always been strongly social and collectivistic, which instinctively feels that capitalism and individualism are morally repugnant, and practically unsustainable, and which views the accumulation of capital as something profoundly immoral.
I have often made the case that culturally Russia is not, and has never been, European in any meaningful sense of the word. This is particularly true in the typically Russian mix of, on one hand, contempt for the accumulation of wealth and individualism and, on the other, the Russian fixation on the notion of moral justice. Russian heroes can be monastics or soldiers, but never businessmen or bankers. The traditional Russian culture, which has never undergone anything resembling the western Renaissance or Reformation, has retained a social ethos which is much closer to Middle-Eastern Islam or Asian Confucianism than to the western values of the so-called “Age of Enlightenment”. And while Marxism-Leninism was clearly an ideological import, it found in Russia a much more fertile ground for its values than the “enlightened” Masonic values imposed upon the Russian society by the westernized Russian elites, often with a great deal of violence, during the 18th– 20th centuries. There is a reason why nobody followed Kerensky and his Masonic gang while the Bolsheviks did get a lot of support from the people in spite of their rabid hatred for religion and their russophobia. Thus, a full 750 years after Saint Alexander Nevsky spoke his famous words “God is not in force, but in truth” we saw, Danila Bagrov, the hero of the famous movie “Brother 2”, say this in his now famous monologue with a prototypical US capitalist “tell me, American, wherein is strength? Is it in money? My brother also says that it is in money. And you have a lot of money, and so what? I think that real strength is in the truth – he who has the truth is the stronger one!“. What we are dealing with here is what Ivan Solonevich used to call the “national dominant” – a core component of the identity, worldview, and ethos of a nation. Seventy years of Bolshevism, followed by a decade of “democratic” capitalism did definitely manage to damage and diminish this “national dominant”, but it is still here and its political and social potential is still immense. This is why “Leftist” parties should never be completely dismissed in Russia: Russia will always be a country drawn to social, “Leftist”, collectivist values and ideas.
Back to reality now: Grudinin is as far away from Saint Alexander Nevsky or Danila Bagrov as can be and the so-called “Left” in Russia is as uninspiring and sterile as it is in the West. But if 70 years of obnoxious Bolshevik mismanagement have not managed to discredit the collectivist and social values inherent in the Russian people, neither will one really bad choice for a presidential election.
Still, the sad reality today is that the Russians don’t have a real, truly socialist, candidate to vote for. If Zirik is a right-wing jester, then Grudinin is left-wing fake.
And yet, even being the fake that he is, Grudinin is enough of an irritant (not a threat, that is overstating the case) that the Russian state media has now clearly embarked on a Grudinin-bashing campaign (which he richly deserves, but nonetheless). We should never forget here that the Communists did win the 1996 elections (which Eltsin stole with the full support of the West, the same West which also supported Eltsin using tanks in 1993 to kill thousands of people in a democratically elected parliament). That was a long time ago, but what I think is that this still shows that there still is a large potential voting base for Communists in Russia, but only if the Communists presented a credible candidate. Speaking of which, while Zyuganov himself looks like an old stuffed Politburo relic, there are much smarter young Communists in Russia, just as some younger LDPR members also look pretty sharp. But here is the crux of the problem: the Kremlin clearly has enough power to make darn sure that all which the Russians get as a “choice” are either court jesters or fakes. So while the democratic form is respected, the substance is entirely missing.
Next, there are what we could call “all the others” (Sobchack, Iavlinsky, Baburin, Suraikin, Titov). Just forget about them, they basically don’t exist. Some (Baburin) are better than others (Iavlinksy), but the reality is that they are all irrelevant.
And then there is Da Man, The Boss, the Ubercandidate who crushes everybody just by his presence and who will easily win yet another term: Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Compared to Putin, all the others look like confused kindergarteners playing pretend politics in the electoral sandbox allotted to them. Now, I am a self-confessed Putin-fanboy and I am very happy that he is in power. But that does not entail that I should kid myself, or anybody else, about all the problems with the current situation. Let me list a few of these problems:
First, and this is crucial, Russia is at war. Let me repeat this: Russia is at war with the AngloZionist Empire. The fact that this war is roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and 5% kinetic does not make it less real or less dangerous, if only because these ratios can very rapidly change. Furthermore, Putin is a brilliant man placed at the top of an extremely bad system which almost cost Russia her very existence. As a result, Putin put his efforts in mostly two directions: protect Russia against the western aggression and struggle against the pro-western 5th columnists inside Russia (oligarchs, Zionists, “liberals”, russophobes, etc.) including inside the Kremlin (the Atlantic Integrationists à la Medvedev or the IMF/WTO/Washington Consensus types à la Nabiulina & Kudrin & Chubais, etc.). Of course, Putin did try to fight corruption, mismanagement, fraud, etc., but the two spheres where he hit the hardest were defense and aerospace. He also created the ONF (The All-Russia People’s Front) to try to “reach” deeper inside the Russian society and economy, and this also worked. But the fact remains that most of Putin’s energy was directed at fighting the war against the Empire and the 5th column inside Russia. Most of the country is still in dire need of reform.
Second, and to my personal great regret, Putin is a neo-liberal. A real anti-liberal would never have kept people like Kudrin (who, by the way, was fired by Medvedev, not Putin), or Nabiulina and all the rest of them. Alas, Putin failed to kick this entire gang were it belongs: in jail. He got some of them (Serdiukov, Uliukaev) but most of them are still here (notice that neither Nabuilina nor Chubais ever made it to the US sanctions list?). I am no mind reader but my best guess is that Putin sincerely believes in what we could loosely called “regulated capitalism” or “social democracy” and that the kind of ideas presented by, say, Sergei Glaziev, really frighten him as a possible return to the kind of disaster-economics the Soviet Union had in the 1980s. I think that he is wrong, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is that most Russian people clearly would want a number of things which Putin is not willing or able to deliver including a much harsher crackdown on corruption, much more vigorous social policies (social or “socialist” in the Russian sense of the word, meaning socially-oriented and not driven by capitalist ideology) and a much more equitable distribution of wealth. By all accounts, and in diametrical opposition to what nonsense spewed by the AngloZionist propaganda, Putin is not at all a nostalgic of the Soviet era. In fact, he seems to have somewhat of a phobia of anything which could remind somebody of Soviet-era policies even when these policies were clearly superior to what we see today in Russia (say in education, health, fundamental science, social programs, etc.). Whatever may be the case, I don’t think that anybody will deny that most Russian people would be happy if the entire “economic block” of the Medvedev regime would be fired (or jailed or, even better, summarily executed by a firing squad) and replaced by much more “left/socialist/communist” leaning economists. The fact that the Russian Communists completely fail to provide such an alternative is great for Putin’s reelection but very bad for Russia.
Third, Russia today is ruled by one man: Putin. Great guy, I totally support him! But one man ruling a country is a very bad thing not only because sooner or later this man will leave the scene and leave no credible successor, but also because a President should not be dealing with the pavement of the road in small cities in the Urals or get involved in the geographical distribution of maternity wards in Siberia. Yet this is exactly what is going on. The Russians have even an expression for that “Putin rules in a manual regime” meaning that he has to do everything by himself. This is sheer folly and this is obviously unsustainable. Oh sure, there are very sharp and good people around Putin, but none of them can match his unique combination of charm, charisma, intelligence, courage, patience, and determination: as soon as Putin leaves, for whatever reason, this entire system will come tumbling down precisely because it is not a real *system* but a “one man show”. And this is exactly what the Atlantic Integrationists are obviously waiting for to strike again.
So if Putin is so bad, why do I support him? Simply because at this point in time there is no alternative. And it’s not really that Putin is “bad” – but rather that he is a human being, not a miracle worker with a magic wand in his hands who can reform Russia simply by waving it and saying “abracadabra”. Especially not while Russia is at war with an Empire which threatens her very existence!
In the West, the AngloZionist are clearly backing Grudinin (see here here here here here here and even the always hyperpoliticallycorrect Wikipedia loves him!). The reasons for that are really simple: not only would the AngloZionist prefer *anybody*, including Count Dracula, over Putin, but if even if a purely nominal pseudo-Communist like Grudinin came to power the entire western “elites” could finally all loudly proclaim that: “Aha! Here is the proof; here is a wave of revanchist Communism in Russia and that is like the USSR 2.0 – welcome to the next Cold War!!“. In reality, the Russian Communist Party, chock-full of very real capitalists, (see machine translated article here) who Communist only in name, but its members still like red flags and pictures of Lenin and that ‘s good enough to scare those who already want to be scared (westerners). In the meantime, while the Russian state-media is bashing Grudinin, “somebody” is clearly actively promoting him in the Russian social media. Any guesses who that “somebody” might be?
As always, Russia’s “western geostrategic partners” are misreading Russia and wasting their breath (and money!). Here are the latest polls: Putin 71.5%, Zhirinovsky 5.5%, Grudinin 7.3% and the rest don’t matter. You don’t want to believe them? Fine. But when the difference is by a full order of magnitude your doubts won’t make much of a difference. Besides, you really don’t want the figures of being any different, trust me, because if the jester or the fake comes to power, then the crisis which will hit Russia and the rest of our planet will really be immense and very dangerous: we already have one clown in charge of a nuclear superpower, we most definitely can’t afford a second one.
The sad reality is that these elections will change nothing and they are not only boring (no real, credible, opposition) but also useless. A grand waste of time and money. And yet, they are also necessary.
They are necessary because in the “Empire of Illusions”, to borrow Chris Hedges’ excellent expression, everybody simply has to play by the AngloZionist rules: elections are an absolute “must” even if they are self-evidently farcical. So the Russians will get their “secular liturgy” (which is what elections really are), the right guy will stay in power, which is good, even if his staying in power has nothing to do with the formal trappings democracy. Yes, Putin does have the support of the overwhelming majority of the Russian people, even those who do not trust polls or election results agree on this, and that popular support is by far his most important power base (and the main reason why Putin-haters either stay quiet or become politically irrelevant). But the reality of that support is neither expressed by, nor conveyed through, Presidential elections. Putin does have the nation behind him, but not because some electoral farce says so. If by some magic trick, say, some court would strip Putin of all his legal powers, he still would have a much higher moral and, therefore, practical authority than any other person in Russia. Alexander Solzhenitsyn once said that all regimes can be positioned on a continuum ranging from regimes whose authority is based on their power to those whose power is based on their authority. Putin’s real power is not based on any Presidential election, nor is the based on the Russian Constitution, it is based on his moral authority with the Russian people. This is not something which can be expressed in percentages or numbers of cast bulletins, but it is no less real.
So the Empire’s goal is simple: not to replace Putin, at least not yet, but to prevent Putin from obtaining a clear majority in the first round. The plan is simple: if Putin gets a majority – denounce Russia as a non-democratic authoritarian state. If Putin by some miracle fails to get that majority, prove to the world that he is nowhere as popular as most people say he is and hope that all the anti-Putin forces combined will turn to Grudinin or Zhirinovsky (either one will do). If Grudinin goes into a 2nd round that will prove that Russia is a country with a strong nostalgia for the Soviet era (expect a myriad of references so Stalin in the Ziomedia), if it is Zhirinovksy, announce to the world that rabid Russian nationalists are about to invade the Baltics or nuke Turkey. When Putin eventually wins, declare that the election was stolen and explain to the zombified audience that Evil Vlad is nothing but the ideological sum total of commies and nationalists combined into one big “Russian Threat”.
Sounds stupid? Yes, of course. Because it is. But that’s the plan anyway.
The Saker
The western style egalitarian democratic process is one of the worst inventions ever to inflict mankind. Democracy is a populist enterprise. It has an amazing propensity to dredge up the worst kind of people in society.
The Russian style legitimacy test elections are fine. I don’t think Putin believes in democracy but I think he does believe in some sort of legitimacy stamp from the public which these elections accomplish.
The future belongs not to these faux egalitarian democracies. The future belongs to meritocratic governance. Like we see in Russia, Singapore, China and Hong Kong.
Please explain how these listed countries are “meritocratic”?
Especially Hong Kong, which is really just a province of China these days?
Hmmm, maybe I misunderstand the word? Lets check? Dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/meritocratic) says …..
” 1.an elite group of people whose progress is based on ability and talent rather than on class privilege or wealth.
2. a system in which such persons are rewarded and advanced:
3. leadership by able and talented persons.”
To me, Russia just happens to be lucky right now in that a talented and able person rose to the top. But I see little in the structure of that system that says its guaranteed to happen again. Consider Putin’s predecessor.
I don’t know much about the internal processes of China’s (fake)-Communist Party. But I doubt that talent in leading a nation is guaranteed among those who fight their way to the top of that dog pile. At this point, I’m not even sure how talented or able Xi really is. Doesn’t seem to be a Hillary level of complete idiot, but its too early to know if he qualifies as ‘able and talented’. Maybe “belt and road” becomes a giant waste of money that bankrupts the nation. Like I said, its just too early to know. And again, little about the system seems to guarantee that the most talented and able at leading a nation rise to the top of the dog-pile.
Hong Kong’s is a province of China. Like Russia, its leaders are chosen in an election, with the twist thrown in that only candidates approved by the Chinese government can run, and then its unlikely that they can really do anything that’s not approved from higher levels.
Not exactly how Singapore fits in. It seems to be a limited one-party democracy. Kind of like Chicago then. Again, nothing about the system seems designed to make the most able and talented states-persons rise to the top.
Of course, any one who rises to the top of any system of choosing leaders will always claim that they are the most able and most talented. I’m sure Donald Trump and Teresa May would tell you that, as would Hillary if she could ever rig an American election to gain office. Should we take a poll of world leaders to see how many think they are the most able and most talented person who could have gotten the job? I suspect I know the outcome already. How many national leaders get there without a big ego?
I still think Churchill was probably correct when he said that democracy was the worst form of government, except when compared to all of the other options.
HK is a province of China and China is a meritocracy. Xi Jimping started out as a mayor and moved up through the system. So did Hu Jintao before him. They wont have stupid pointless elections anytime soon.
Putin has power because he is competent. Putin has popularity b/c he got real tangible results. He will not be unseated by some egalitarian election. He will only become politically vulnerable if he falters. That is meritocracy.
Singapore is purely a corporate model. Corporations run meritocratically Russia has shades of this too.
All elections in capitalist kakastocracies do is divide society against itself, with increasingly vicious partisan hatred between the acolytes of, generally, two near identical parties that both serve the rich owners of society only. See the moronic inferno of the USA for the prime example. Hence China’s rapid growth, vast social investment, and the happiness of its people (often at or near the top of global surveys of social satisfaction).
Since the early 90”s most reports are of decreasing Chinese happiness with cause of increasing wealth inequality.
It seems they have the been fed the same “keeping up with the Jones” medicine as most others in the rat race.
As an expert-amateur I see ideologies when I see them. They are sectarian, absolutely truthfull, aggresive at most, ridiculous ,/and do not see it/, antilife, fanatic, full of destructive hatred.
And they are everywhere. This push people away. When something is too much it is too much.
BTW I just wanted to make clear-since you posted that Churchill quote, democracy is the worst form of government ever invented.
Saker
I gather you are not a Nabuilina fan. All I know about her is that she is buying tons and tons of gold for the state. This is a very smart thing to do. Russia has more gold than China now.
I wouldn’t count buying gold as neo-liberal or capitalist. Neo libs hate gold. Buying gold strengthens the outward financial shape of the country. It puts appreciative pressure on the Ruble which helps every Ruble earning Russian out there. It is a very Russian thing to do. This is physical gold we are talking.
This low debt , gold heavy classically conservative monetary policy totally goes against the new age neo-liberal Keynesian money printing debt heavy gold light idiocy we see across the western world and even China.
Kudrin invented the reserve funds that were topped up in the booms times and then used for social spending and a financial safety net in the recessions is also a very practical and somewhat collectivist thing to do. The true new-age neo-liberals said that Kudrins idea was stupid because the money should have been “invested” instead of just sitting there.
You might not be a fan of these people but you havn’t seen nothing yet. You havn’t seen a new age neo-liberal. A new ager would throw out all the gold and buy paper garbage. A new ager would load the country up with debt and create these inefficient beaurcratic social programs. Russia would turn into another debt laden boat anchor like the Anglosphere.
Exactly the way I see things too.
Ivan
Absolutely my point too.
Totally, agree.
According to Greek economist analysts, it was Ms. Nabiullina that saved the Russian economy from the US sanctions; going against liberal financial thinking, Ms. Nabiullina allowed over 300 private banks to go under, in order to preserve the Russian credit system. I am not an analyst, but this group have been writing very astute articles for a number of years.
Furthermore, it appears she is the brain behind the crypto-rubble.
I generally like Saker’s articles a lot; however, this post felt like it was outside of Saker’s expertise.
Nabuilina hiked interest rates to crippling hight (to support the exchange rate of the Ruble) because in the integrationist period Russian companies (i.e. oligarchs) borrowed heavily in the Western markets, and with falling Ruble would have to default. She did the right thing under severe circumstances.
Well, of course Ziuganov sounds like a Soviet-era communist party official with his stentorian voice – that’s the whole idea. The trouble with KPRF is not that they are communists (they are not), but that they are make-believe communists. They are a manufactured communist party with a mission: to serve as a venting hatch and/or scarecrow, catering to a range of agendas designed by their handlers. They do not so much “love” red flags and other communist insignia: it’s part of their job. Grudinin is a pro-western candidate. You nailed it: “they” will try to engineer a second round of elections by not giving Putin a clear victory in the first round. If only you could stop poking the Soviet Union with a stick. “Disaster economy” in the 80s? Leontieff, the prizewinning western economist, was invited to the USSR to assess the state of the economy circa 1987. The party elite who invited him expected Leontiff to issue a death sentence for Soviet economy. Instead Leontieff said: “There is not a thing wrong with your economy systemically, there are just plenty of non-systemic irregularities, which are fixable.” He left, and the “party people” kept it quiet and went along with their demolition plan. You keep pretending that all that is good in the Russian national core stems from before 1917. You have to say this, because Solzh. is your authority. The truth is the Soviet system was organic to Russia, it was a new modus vivendi of the russian empire. The Soviet Union was Russia. You cannot be a Sovietophobe and a Russophile combined. A Sovietophobe equals Russophobe. If you love Russia, gotta love the Soviet Union. No can do? Well that’s too bad. Such duplicity is a mental health hazard. You put the Soviet Union down, that’s what you do, and this kills the desire to reasearch honestly. But you cannot research honestly if Solzh. is your guiding light. It’s a cul-de-sac. As Zinoviev said: “They took aim at the Soviet Union, but ended up hitting Russia.” You were there, taking aim with the AngloZio empire!
You have to say this, because Solzh. is your authority.
What a fantastically stupid thing to say! The idiocy of that statement actually awes me. Really. As if by the fact that I quote and admire Solzhenitsyn I committed some kind of lobotomy, recused any critical thought and only parroted him on everything. Have you even read my article on Stalin for example? Or did you notice how much Solzhenitsyn hated both Marxism AND Socialism? Do you sense that hate on this blog, seriously?! Did you even read my article and specifically what I say about the social/collectivistic roots of the Russian ethos? You think Alexander Isaevich would agree with that? Please look at this page /blogs-philosophy/ and just look at the list of names I quote (not the quotes themselves, nevermind that). Do you really think that I have some One Authority which I subserviently worship?
It is YOUR hatred of Solzhenitsyn, combined with probably your ignorance of most of what he wrote, which makes you think that because I admire that man I cannot think by myself or completely disagree with him. That in spite of the fact that I call myself a Putin-fanboy in THIS article today and go on the criticize him!
The kind of black and white, us versus them, mentality really makes me feel like throwing in the towel and giving up on all of mankind. I can deal with ideological adversaries, but ideological drones (/when-sanity-fails-the-mindset-of-the-ideological-drone/) like you make me feel that any struggle is in vain and that humans are basically hopeless.
You and the likes of you depress and discourage me because while you sure ain’t the brightest out there, you sure are the majority…
Lord have mercy!
The Saker
We have duly noticed (and on other more or less pro-Russian sites) the incessant attacks against Solzhenitsyn from ‘sovok’ brainwashed zombies. They affect to not see that the origin of this slanderous demolition cum character assassination of Solzhenitsyn is in America and is led by the usual Russophobic mob, the ones who brought the international revolution to Russia. The renewal of the offensive might be due to the impending publication of the English translation of “The Red Wheel” by his son Stephan (notice that his ‘200 years together’ is still banned in the Anglo-Zio sphere). The subject being “the very heart of the Russian Revolution: the toppling of Russia’s 1,000-year monarchy”, cannot but enrage those who see that published in the year of the commemoration of the centenary of the ritual murder of the Tsar Martyr (when tens of thousands of pilgrims are expected to participate in the commemoration in Yekaterinburg).
I am not so sure that this is a “Sovok” thing. Look, Solzhenitsyn was, in my opinion a giant and a great author and even philosopher, but he was far from infallible. Not only could he be wrong ideologically (for example, when he wrote that Communism always breathes in the neck of Socialism), but also factually (the number of victims of the Soviet regime he quotes have already been proven wrong). And I have no problem with people disagreeing with him or disliking his opinions (for example on Vlasov and WWII). What bugs me is idiots whom I call “ideological drones” – folks who are just not intellectually equipped to see that most arguments, especially historical ones, are complex, nuanced, and folks who project unto others their own mediocrity and need to have some “authority” telling them what to think.
Nowadays there is a lot of criticism of Solzhenitsyn in Russia and that is fine. In fact, that is very important and helpful. ALL major authors should be read *critically*. My favorite ones are Dostoevsky, Tikhomirov, Solonevich, Iliin but I find points of disagreement with all of them. After all, they wrote in the 19th and 20th century, OF COURSE there are things which they got wrong, did not know or could not predict.
No, the truly Sovok thing is to think in crude, binary terms like Mish above. Look how he writes, he even THINKS is slogans! (“The Soviet Union was Russia. You cannot be a Sovietophobe and a Russophile combined. A Sovietophobe equals Russophobe“). This is scary stuff, people thinking in short slogans because any discourse goes right over their heads, you can’t reason with them because they are UNABLE to think in anything but short “thought bursts”.
But when well-read smart people criticize Solzhenitsyn (or anyone else), I always see that as a chance to learn something and thereby enrich myself. I have no problem with that :-)
Cheers!
The Saker
@Solzhenitsyn … was far from infallible
It goes without saying. But his wholesale rejection is based mostly on the ‘wrong’ number of victims he quotes (for which he clearly said he cannot vouch and asking for publication of official figures) of the ‘internal repression’ for the whole period from 1917 to 1959 and not, as it is always implied, solely of the GULAG. There haven’t been 60 mil., therefore he is lying and therefore everything he wrote are lies and he is lying because he was viscerally an anti-Soviet, reactionary obscurantist antisemite in the pay of the ‘Sovietophobe’ imperialists. In addition he was an informer of the NKVD! And such a mediocre, boring writer!
He is not forgiven for this thoughts:
“Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.” Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.”
Here I are 10’000%!! His Tempelton speech (http://orthochristian.com/47643.html) is, in my opinion, the most important speech of this life. THAT is why I respect and quote him, not because I have to check with Alexander Isaevich before making a selection at Starbucks…
Cheers,
The Saker
Thanks for this comment. As much as I respect Saker for his insights (and typically agree with him on most issues and cutting through the BS), the contradiction of being both “a Sovietophobe and a Russophile” has long bothered me. As someone who has actually lived in the USSR, I would have to agree that ” the Soviet system was organic to Russia” (to a large extent, for sure). I disagree that it was somehow a western “imposition.” This is not to deny that many bad things were done in the name of the system (I only have to look at my family’ history). But it all must also be put in the context of tremendous and ongoing western pressure to destroy the country. Any paranoia may seem more understandable, when one considers 1917 end-of-war agreement with Germany, assassinations in 1918, civil and intervention wars, and cutting off of diplomatic relations. I would say that we (the world) deserve a more sophisticated and nuanced understanding of the Soviet era – and, particularly, in the context of the world events at the time.
@” the Soviet system was organic to Russia”
You make it sound like the Saker said that. I went over the text several times and I couldn’t find it. What I found was:
“Russia will always be a country drawn to social, “Leftist”, collectivist values and ideas”. There is a (not so) subtle difference. Russia was drawn to anarchist ‘values and ideas’ (the most outstanding theoreticians of anarchism were Russians – Bakunin and Prince Kropotkin and the Russian people was often attracted by it) as well.
What I found was also:
“If Grudinin goes into a 2nd round that will prove that Russia is a country with a strong nostalgia for the Soviet era”. That doesn’t mean that Russia really has an unqualified ‘nostalgia for the Soviet era’.
The West may try to prove that by pushing Grudinin. But imv Grudinin is positively viewed as the ‘communist we can do business with’, like Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin (up to a point) and the turn coat nomenklaturists who mushroomed after the ‘fall of communism’. The communists that the bankers can do business with, that’s it.
Another Anonymus
I grew up in the Soviet Union. Some of my childhood was spent in one of those communal apartments on Griboedov’s canal in St Petersburg. I remember talking to a lady who used to own this very same apartment together with her husband before 1917…(She was a treasure of real stories). In short, the Soviet system was never organic to Russia. The real Russia (before 2017) MOD note: did you mean to say 1917? had phenomenal standards of living (as evidenced by the apartments that used to be occupied by the ordinary people of that time), was 100% self-sustainable, capable of producing just about everything, had superior education that produced one of the top intellectual elites of all times, etc, etc Soviets killed and tortured an unimaginable amount of people that is unprecedented in the entire history of humanity. How does it make it organically Russian is beyond my understanding.
To moderator from “The Real History” My comment was meant as a response to Mish ( at 2:39 am UTC). Other wise it is a bit out of context. Could you please move it up. Thanks
Did you click the reply button? Comments are posted as submitted, when submitted. Sorry. MOD
“….had phenomenal standards of living (as evidenced by the apartments that used to be occupied by the ordinary people of that time), was 100% self-sustainable, capable of producing just about everything, had superior education that produced one of the top intellectual elites of all times, et….”
What you seem to be saying in this statement gets clear in the end, when you add the fundamental word, “elites”, since those high standards of living were only for a bunch of priviledged people around the Tsars, and that “100% self-sustainable” way of life, “capable of producing just about everything”, was just laying on the backs of millions of serfs and peasants who were far from enjoying such high standards of life and education and such abundance of everything…This is why most of the plain people supported the revolution, no other way it could be so succesfull.
Education was only for the “elites” and their offspring….the peasants´ and workers´offspring started working at factories and lands already in their childhood to never more leave, since there was no way to go out of that destiny, people like you and your acolites, so interested for yourselves, consider dictated directly by God, who, by unknown reassons, selected you all amongst the rest of humanity to wear a comfortable and full life while most of humanity languish in conditions of slavery and full ignorance.
A well respected historian (don’t remember which one) once said that 90% of history books and archives are written to conceal the truth and this is one of the reasons why I always try to speak to people who witnessed certain events whenever opportunity presents itself. The woman that I mentioned in my comment came from a typical working class family of that time. She knew Greek and Latin…and together with her husband owned the apartment that was later split by the Soviets in order to accommodate 15 (or so) other families. All of that to say is that I was not talking about the ruling class of pre-1917.
Where were living these 15 (or so) families before the Soviets accomodated them with a living space?
Frankly, I’m surprised you raised this point. It is a well known fact that when Soviets started stealing everything from the peasants and starving them to death, those who wanted to survive had to move to the cities.
We with our looks from outside , can not fully appreciate and understand of the Russian souls. They are too many things we are not and frankly even when we try hard , we can not grasp it all. Incredibly creative, drunks, fatalists , caring for each other, many things in one multinational country. Dostojevskij.
Gogol , he knew a great deat from the Kronikas , history books written in each village.By village people
. Poets of incredible talents.And so many.
Disaster came when peace loving Russians protested and Bolsheviks from outside , living comfortably and plotting to steal Russia /full of naive people /and her riches used the chance. hijacked Soviet Comittee by help of Trockij in Jan.1918.
Trockij was Mensheviks then attached himself to Bolsheviks and ended as many others, who bertrayed .
East countries are bit more complicate. We do not have /full time on / the American dreams to get rich.
Life is much more, than that..
“The Real History”,…” 90% of history and archives are written to conceal the truth.” Exactly.
Sits perfectly with Orwell’s; “He who controls the past, controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”
Thank you to the Saker for this article which reminds us that first and foremost, Putin is a Russian phenomenon. It’s worth noting however, that countless peoples worldwide – especially those who are victims of Western terror, see in him an individual of great integrity, a symbol of defiance, a David to the West’s Goliath. Until Putin, we had no one. Now we have hope. Its a fact that the power-mongers will be brought down by the very power they wield. Almost every story, every tale from nursery rhymes to Hollywood blockbusters tell the story that never tires of being retold. Ironic it is though, that we always feel that karma applies to someone else, never to ourselves.
@the peasants´ and workers´offspring started working at factories and lands already in their childhood
Soon they would work for free in vacations in the islands of the GULAG Archipelago.
Another Anonymus
“. . . everybody simply has to play by the AngloZionist rules.”
Then why doesn’t China have these election things?
In the West, people gave up exposing democracy for what it is. People just want to fit in. Russians do. Why not dismiss democracy as not least evil, but next-to-worst: democracy may not be better than any other political system ever invented, but it potentially beats all-around-hell hands down!
They throw their hands up and shout “innocent” when accused of “Stalinism” or “tyranny.” Isn’t this a reoccurring theme when we discuss Russia? People too often argue that an innocent man adamantly denies wrongdoing. Wrong! That’s what someone who’s afraid of being beaten does! A powerless slave cries “innocent.” This is about power relations. We accuse a Rothschild of a crime and you know what he does? Nothing. Because he’s guilty? He is guilty! But he’s silent because he’s Rothschild.
Being a Western country means being Americanized, or Yankeeized, or Globalized. Not just in a Global order, but brain damaged by it, made into an American wanna-be. It’s not a Russian problem. It’s an anglo-american problem, keeping people off track and unbalanced, bottom lips quivering: teenagers trying to gain acceptance with the in-crowd is what the world’s made of. If people could just try and change the beat a little. Add a new song, “When will the tyranny of democracy end” ; it’s a song that comes after, “no one has aided 20th century genocide more than human rights watch,” and one that compares Washington to Hitler instead of Hitler to Stalin.
The next time a Russian is accused, regardless the charge, it should be translated as Mickey Mouse accused Kenny Rogers of stealing his sunglasses. Then, proceed with a charge against liberalism. Wait a second: None of this should be put on on Russia. If I’m in the West, I have the same problem the Russian does! Yet we want someone else to be the martyr. “Let Russia take the hit!” Sorry, that’s wrong.
We were granted free will not to be liberals, not to be free spirits (not to take the bait, nor the bite), but to reject all worldly artifice. All of it. Putin’s not a liberal. He simply has the same problem I do.
Exactly.
If you accept the enemy’s “value” system, terms of judgement, worldview, and morality, you have already lost.
Indeed, you have lost your soul in your desire to be Americanized or be accepted by the self-proclaimed Free World.
This is the core problem not only with Russia but all other nations like China, Iran, etc. that seek some kind of multipolar world.
One primary reason that the Americans and their stooges hated the Soviet Union or Communism was *not* because of “totalitarianism” but because it represented a different economic and political system.
Anglo-Americanism, Zionism, and Westernism are essentially fundamentalist civilizations.
They simply cannot stand any alternative to their way of life and system–economically, politically, ideologically, culturally, or morally.
For these people, their First Commandment is this: Thou Shalt Worship No God but the Anglo-American/Zionist God!
No need, it’s a one party system, which on the top of that is based on “dictatorship of the proletariat”. Only faces of the “aparatchiks” change.
@S,
Well Communists never had much support in any country 6% to 16% of the population. They only captured the steering wheel in some countries thanks to very nasty and tumultuous events.
Actually, the only way to have “democratic” elections would be to get the money out of them (disallow funding by private clubs). The problem with the faces always has been who do they benefit from and who stands behind them? What is the alternative? Anarchy? Well no. Royals? Hell No!
I do agree with your statement, Russian elections are non-event, Putin will win as long as he decides to run. He is a much better choice than unelected Tsar. I understand, Putin decided to run as an independent, which in a way is good, because he decided to split away from the party of oligarchs. Does it mean that we can expect some clean-ups? Maybe. So I say, this election may be an important event for Russia.
@wildclover
Very strong points, mostly brilliantly correct.
If there is one country that refuses to worship at the altar of western democracy and to play by the western playbook, it is China. To that extent China is stronger than Russia. Russians cringe to be accepted and admired by the west. Even when they achieve something they have to proclaim “Look, we did it better than the west”, just like a child gets excited about learning to cycle or run better than his Papa. The Chinese just ignore the west; for them it may as well not exist. Now that is true independence of mind and true sovereignty!
Wildclover nails it with genius when he writes “Being a Western country means being Americanized, or Yankeeized, or Globalized. Not just in a Global order, but brain damaged by it, made into an American wanna-be”. Exactly! Here is my theory: The number of American (or western) wannabees in a nation is in inverse proportion to its true sovereignty and the self-confidence of its people.
Russia has many deep problems when we see things this way, including serious problems in Putin himself and his government . The Saker has analyzed this aspect so well in this article.
Perhaps after the elections the Russians will abandon referring to Americans as their “partners”? It may have been a witty joke 5 years ago. Today it comes across increasingly like grovelling before the masters of the universe and has zero satire value left.
‘If there is one country that refuses to worship at the altar of western democracy and to play by the western playbook, it is China.’
Yep, you nailed it
This will be China’s century. Whether that is good or bad we will know in a few hundred years.
Napoleon Bonaparte said:
“China is a sleeping giant. Let her sleep, for when she wakes she will move the world.”
In terms of time frames, when Deng Xiao Ping was asked what he thought of the French revolution, he replied, “It is too early to tell”
Without getting into a debate about Mao Ze Dong, I believe that at his heart he had the interests of the Chinese people. As a man, he made the occasional error of judgement ……. : (
He wanted to sweep away all that he perceived as bad of the ‘old China’, that had oppressed the people.
That included Confucianism, Taoism ……
and of course the Christian church that had arrived after the swords and guns of Europe and England
The Cultural Revolution was the nadir of that.
However, from around 2008 it was realised that worship of the god of mammon, ie: capitalism, had left a large hole in society, so Confucianism, Taoism was revived to give a moral heart to China.
Unfortunately the ever opportunistic Christians grabbed hold of the coat-tails of this ‘enlightenment’ and are spewing their medieval nonsense again.
Yet, for all my contempt of the church in general – note, I did not say God ….. the ‘church’ – I agree that we need more to guide us than secular values and individual free will.
One of the more negative, but truthful and insightful, analyses by The Saker. It left me begging the question form S – OK, what is Putin doing about a successor? He knows the wolves are going to be circling after the election. He knows Medvedev is smiling more these days. No real structural changes have taken place since Putin arrived (those that have changed have changed more towards the favour of the Atlanticist view – a more liberal economy). Does Putin think about what follows him? He knows he can’t run for another term. Surely he must put some thought into that. He is not unmindful of his power, or the fact that it is a one-man government right now. He is not.
Would be very interested in a follow-up analysis of what S thinks Putin will do in his last term, what his goals and objectives might be. What are the real chances of an ultimate Atlanticist victory? S says that the people clearly do not want Medvedev or his followers in power. What are the chances that a charismatic left-leaning nationalist will rise at the right time? He seems assign to these Atlanticists the power to take over in a post-Putin era.
This election signals that the end is at least in sight for the Putin era. The West will be playing run out the clock. Russia and China (and all those striving for a multi-polar world) IMO, need to establish some unassailable accomplishments towards that end in the time remaining. I, and I believe many others, feel that it could all slip away without VVP at the helm.
I’ve always felt that the BRI would never succeed on the scale that is envisioned unless a defensible main line was first established. In my mind, that would be easiest to accomplish by connecting China to Europe via Russia. While the other nodes shouldn’t be ignored, a concrete fait accompli is essential in order for the entire project to proceed. Otherwise, the West (read US) will interfere and nibble away until the whole concept gets thrown on the scrap heap.
The problem, as I see it, is that China has a long range mindset while, in reality, the whole multi-polar idea, of which the BRI is an integral component, is now on a six year, do or die time frame. The world will not get this opportunity again.
BRICS is DEAD. Brazil is run by a coup regime imposed by US-trained and controlled ‘judges’. A military dictatorship there is certain, soon, and a death-squad rampage. India in firmly in the Zionazi camp, Modi, a fascist, Hindutva supremacist, an ideal ally of the Zionazi original under Bibi. South Africa is gone to the Western camp under Ramaphosa, the black oligarch. It’s Russia and China, and maybe Iran (Venezuela is nearing the end-stage)against the Exceptionalist ubermenschen. A New Dark Age of Western supremacist neo-feudal and neo-fascistic rule is about to envelope humanity.
Did the thought that Russia is a country that exists for over a thousand years and survived social cataclysms of a greater magnitude than ‘the end of the Putin era’ (still to come) ever crossed your mind?
I don’t know what the Saker thinks, but I think Putin will not serve out his last full term in power. He will quit a year or so earlier, which will give him the opportunity to appoint a successor himself, like Yeltsin did him. That way, people get a chance to meet the new guy before the next election, circumventing the political party process of selection and leaving things to chance, potentially surrendering decades of hard work to the liberal scum and undoing all the good.
As for the one man show, I expect these next few years to be very radical in multiple ways. Putin knows it’s his last term, his last chance to prepare the country for when he is no longer there. Will we like the “new” Putin? I don’t know, Saker makes a few good points against the man, but he still is the best leader this planet has seen in the 21st century. I expect radical anti-corruption campaigns, radical economic reform, radical foreign policy decisions (not war, but rather aggressive economic developments within BRICS and maybe SCO countries). We are already seeing massive economic projects developing, I expect this to not only continue, but to accelerate massively.
The West is failing, it’s collapsing, from the economy to society everything is breaking down and disintegrating before our eyes. I mean FFS these morons in the US are seriously debating giving children of 6 years hormone blockers if they exhibit signs of transgenderism… it’s disgusting what is happening and this can not go on for very long. The next few years, while the dying beast is lashing out, will be a trying time for all nations who, thus far, withstood the pressure. The collapse of the West and the empire with it is inevitable, it’s just a question of whether or not sane enough people show up before that happens to prevent a war, because a third world war will probably wipe out the vast majority of the people on this earth.
” there is freedom of speech in Russia, ”
-That is not quite true, Russia has been restricting freedom of speech quit heavily as of late, VPNs are even banned in Russia, sadly Russia is following the path of EU when it comes to freedom of speech, and while Russia still is far off from having the same draconian anti-freedom of speech laws, Russia is slowly getting there.
you are conflating restrictions of freedom of speech itself with restrictions on the information space. Not only does Russia ban VPNs, even encryption like the one offered by Telegram is also subject to outright persecution. But the CONTENTS of free speech are still very minimally regulated, i.e. there are very few opinions per se which are banned (apology for war, hate speech, etc.).
Apples and oranges (although in this case I agree that both these apples and oranges are rotten!)
Cheers,
The Saker
If democracy is so bad, what alternative do you support?
You don’t need to present an alternative in order to criticise what we have. Think about democracy, here in Germany for example… people don’t want sanctions against Russia, there are sanctions against Russia. People don’t want military build-up in the east… there is military build-up in the east. People don’t want NATO expansion or even NATO itself… NATO is expanding and building more bases on our soil. People don’t like the course the EU has taken… so we get more EU stuffed down our throats. People don’t want austerity, we get more austerity. It’s the same thing in the US. 80-90% of people want single-payer health care and it has a snowballs chance in hell of ever getting through the bureaucracy in Washington.
Democracy is merely the best way to hide the plutocracy of the oligarchy, not a good system itself. The US and a few select allies have high living standards because the oligarchy allowed them to have them, as a counter to Soviet ideology, which ultimately succeeded, even to this day people believe in the “American dream” and other such propaganda nonsense. Just look at Mexico, directly underneath the US and could not be in bigger contrast, more so in the past but still. Western countries pretend to pump billions into Africa in “aid” and have absolutely no progress to show for it. If the Western system was so great, everybody would benefit. South Korea was the last vassal to receive this “generosity.” Look what happened when the Soviet Union ceased to exist, it all went downhill. Every Western country or Western allies are up to their earlobes in debt, rapidly accelerating downwards. There is no ideological battlefield any more despite serious efforts to pretend there are. Russia is a capitalist democracy like the rest of them.
I would like a “direct democracy” like they have in Switzerland, unlike our “representative democracy” it actually seems workable.
A democracy can work, if there were more citizens and less consumers. Most people don’t have a clue that by supporting Ukraine against Russia, they side with Nazis, for example, or moderate terrorists in Syria. When I first woke up to reality, I got physically sick just thinking about the misdeeds of my government, not kidding. However, if democracy truly worked, it would’ve been banned a long time ago. We have no free press, we have no freedom of expression. Everybody who speaks out against something the elites are pushing will have their character assassinated and discarded as an “alt-right Nazi,” a “Putin-troll,” a “conspiracy theorist” etc. RT America is full of ex-MSM journalists who dared to speak out against various topics like the Iraq war or the TPP.
Mostly agree. I true democracy requires highly educated populace (not necessarily academically, but in a sense of understanding what really matters and maintaining that understanding long-term) – and also an engaged one. A true democracy is a lot of work. Alas, most of us get a bit lazy, preferring to delegate power to a few chosen ones. As that happens more and more, the voices of the people get marginalized. Somebody much smarter than me should do an analysis of the interplay between democracy, the principle of choice that is a part of this image of democracy, and the virtue of choice as used in a capitalist, consumerist society.
Ivan Solonevich
… His best-known work is People’s Monarchy (1951) in which he fully developed his doctrine of monarchy being the only viable and historically justified political system for Russia….
People are way too undisciplined and stupid for anarchy, thus remains the benevolent dictatorship…, somewhat like a crew of Putin-like people running the show. ;-)
‘Democracy’ in ANY meaningful form is IMPOSSIBLE in a capitalist kakastocracy. In such States, the money power rules, ABSOLUTELY, in politics, through straight bribery ie ‘contributions’, ‘lobbying’, ‘speaking fees and book deals’ etc. Elections are simply a sick farce designed to hide reality.
To begin, the two parties traditionally allowed to gain power are basically identical, and absolutely so where it counts-in serving the rich. The Gilens and Page study in the USA proved that point, although any sentient, non-brainwashed observer would see it within minutes. Then, all the brainwashing system, the fakestream media cancers, the PR and advertising mind molesters, the ‘think-tank’ propaganda sewers, and the ‘entertainment’ complex (where Arabs and Moslems are ALWAYS loathsome, and Jews ALWAYS clever, witty, cute and tormented by memories of the Nazi Judeocide, the de facto ‘Holocaust’ pseudo-religion that serves Israel so well)is controlled by the rich, ie the Right.
Then you have the electorate where everyone (theoretically, because in reality this is garbage)has a vote of the same value, despite the manifest and often grotesque differences in intelligence, knowledge, compassion, empathy and moral understanding. With the ubiquity of ‘divide and rule’ tactics employed by the Right, you end up with vast constituencies of the insatiably greedy, who insanely think they’ll be a rich ‘winner’ one day, the deeply racist and xenophobic, and the plain lover of violence and intimidation, like the US ‘patriots’.
The elections themselves are farces. Third parties are actively discouraged or suppressed. The candidates lie through their teeth, offering bribes they never intend to keep, impugning the character of their opponents, and appealing to the fear, stupidity and hatreds of the masses, all assiduously cultivated before, during and after the farce, by hate-machines like the Murdoch cancer. Decades of smearing, as Corbyn in the UK has suffered from the ‘antisemitism’ industry stand-over thugs and the Tory elite still fighting the anti-Communist cause, have driven all decent, sane and rational figures from public life. Here in Austfailure we are and have been governed by a series of State and Federal regimes of exquisite degeneracy, stocked to overflowing with vicious imbeciles, unrepentant racists, homophobes, gropers and other misogynists, Islamophobes, Sinophobes and Russophobes and absolute arse-lickers of the USA and Israel.
And between elections, the suckers have NO say in governance, and very little, and diminishing, say in their private lives. All ‘freedom’ is mediated by money power alone-NONE whatsoever arises from one’s humanity or citizenship. That’s really existing capitalist democracy, not the sham faery tale.
It does seem likely that Ukraine will attack or stage a provocation of sort in Donbass to disturb the elections.
Putin is not a neo- liberal – he is what we would describe in the UK as a conservative in the one nation sense
-Supports the family,
-religion be that Christian / Buddhist/ Islam etc,
-Strong defence
-strong economy
Bro liberals don’t have any values it’s all about the money
It is my hope that the people who put Putin in charge originally have been working on selecting his successor.
Excellent article, as always from The Saker. I would like to add a few points. When it comes to democracy in the West, it is ofcourse one big joke, especially in the US, where in Washington DC you have the White House (residence of the Chief Actor), the Congress (the Chief Theater in the city) and also the HQ of the Freemasons, who control everything, pulling strings from the shadows. The media in the US concentrates on the White House and the Congress, “forgetting” to mention the HQ of the Freemasons. Barack Obama, for example, is a member of the Prince Hall Masonic Lodge, introduced for Afro-Americans.
Democracy in the West is, ostensibly, based on democracy which existed in Greek city states of the past. However, in reality it is nothing of the sort. What we have here is one gigantic con job used to fool the masses in believing that they, through democratic process, control their destinies, when they do nothing of the sort. Democracy was introduced to guarantee the rule of the elites, who remember the peasant uprisings in Europe in the 14th century. The intent is to ensure that the modern peasants do not become homogeneous, but are kept heterogeneous. This is done by dividing them and having them vote for political “parties”. You thus always get divisions among the “mob”. I always laugh when I hear that a country is a parliamentary monarchy. Indeed. Who then rules ? The monarch or parliament ? In Britain the monarch is ostensibly only a titular head of state, but the powers of the Queen are immense, including the right to declare war on her own initiative, the right to dissolve Parliament without an explanation, the right to remove the Prime Minister, again without an explanation, the right to appoint generals, admirals and intelligence chiefs, etc.
When it comes to Russia, the Russians have a saying, which goes like this:”You cannot rule Russia without God and the czar”. Indeed true. Russian culture is based on the Christian Orthodox Faith, headed by the Patriarch and the czar. You can even say that Russian culture always had democracy, based on direct democracy, where you always had a feeling among the people for fair play and humanity, something the Western mentality is incapable of understanding. The Patriarch was the head of the Church, while the czar was the head of a huge family called the Russian people, his duty being to protect that people. In many ways Russian culture is similar to that which you can find in Japan, for example.
Russian culture received two severe traumas. The first was when the Russian elite became divided between Westerners and Easterners. The Westerners wanted, basically, to copy everything they found in the
West, no matter how illogical it was for Russia, while the Easterners only wanted limited Western influence, keeping the bulk of Russian culture. The second trauma was during and after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, financed by Western bankers, when the Bolsheviks went after the monarchy and the Russian Orthodox Church, killing off the clergy and destroying an immense number of churches and monasteries. The aim was to destroy Russian culture. Even so, it survived, with Putin rebuilding 30.000 churches, for which he deserves every praise (this fact the Western media basically likes to ignore, presenting him “as that KGB guy”.
When it comes to Putin, he came to power in the nick of time, being placed there by Russian patriots, who understood that Yeltsin was destroying the country with his mismanagement. Yeltsin was given an offer: If he resigned and handed power to Putin, he would not be prosecuted. He agreed, and the deal was wisely kept.
What Putin did is incredible. He saved the country from dissipation, he curtailed corruption (eradicating it entirely is still not fully possible), he achieved great success on the international field and concentrated on building up the infrastructure. Yes, the work on building up the infrastructure is not complete, but then again you need time for that, bearing in mind the size of Russia.
On this rare occasion I cannot agree with The Saker that the West does not want, at least for now, to remove Putin from power. The West has been doing that the moment it became clear that Russia was not going to break up. Look at the vilification campaign against Putin and the NGO sponsored protests in Russia.
It’s impossible to remove Putin from power, because of two factors. Nobody in Russia can forget the Yeltsin years, when Western bankers, corporations and domestic oligarchs plundered Russia of 100 billion dollars a year, and when mass poverty ensued. Secondly, Russians are constantly watching Ukraine after the Western sponsored coup d’etat against Yanukovich. And what do they see ? They see Poroshenko assuming the role of Yeltsin, opening up the country to plundering, both foreign and domestic. One former Ukrainian official has admitted that 8 million Ukrainians have fled the country, of whom 4.4 million fled to Russia. These 4.4 million no doubt had plenty to say to their Russian hosts.
The West is continuing with their old little tricks, vilifying Putin on the international field and trying to overthrow him domestically, using NGO’s. It’s NOT working, for the reasons I have stated. In fact NGO’s are having a tough time finding people of quality, enlisting such non entities as little Ksenia Sobchak, thinking that the American mentality will work in Russia, the intent being for female voters to vote for her. They will not. The latest candidate is Paul Grudinin, who I didn’t even know existed until about a week ago. I heard about him only after reading a totally absurd article written by the famous analyst Israel Shamir, who was obviously given the task of raising his image and popularity by writing a heap of nonsense, based on his personal “opinions” and based on the “findings” of liberal websites inside Russia, who have stated that Grudinin is enjoying a voter popularity of between 30 % and 80 %, no less. Well, the West has made another blunder in their choice of candidates. It come to the “smart” conclusion that American style politics can work in Russia, the intent being to create a Russian “Trump”, since both Trump and Grudinin are businessmen. It wont work, especially since in Russia people are debating if Grudinin has two or five Swiss bank accounts, no doubt filled with “honest” money. As for the Russian Communists, I think we can conclude that they have been penetrated by the West. The only thing which has kept them “alive” is nostalgia for the old times by elder members, and the shocking social situation in Ukraine.
Finally, what is going to happen after Putin retires ? Who takes over ? Well, Putin will be in power another five years, as it’s certain he is going to win the elections. This gives him five years to prepare a successor who will appeal to the masses. I am just going to reiterate that for years it’s been common knowledge inside the Russian Orthodox Church that it is only a matter of time before the monarchy is reinstated. There have even been rumors of a name (Michael Romanov ?). It is logical that the Romanov’s return. We shall see.
@BF,
Excellent comment. My thought about the return to tsar is this would not be wise. The problem is that you are stuck with some inbred, who may or may not be an idiot. The system, where the system (the force behind) controls the events is somewhat close to the tsar, but there is some control as long as its not infiltrated by the likes of trotsky’sts.
Anonius
Well, contrary to popular belief, the Russian Orthodox Church has plenty of candidates to chose from, both inside and outside Russia. I don’t think that those born and living outside Russia will qualify, only the domestic ones.
Western intelligence agencies are certainly coming to the conclusion that a monarchy in Russia is possible. Romanov descendants, born in the West, have already arrived, finding residence in the Crimea, no doubt a symbolic gesture on their behalf, proving that they support (?) the reunification of Crimea with Russia. I wonder if they came of their own free will, or if they are following instructions. I think we can give them the status of “soldiers of fortune”. Personally I think that a domestic candidate will be picked. I don’t think that he is going to be an “inbred”. Britain, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, etc., have monarchies, of whom the populations basically approve, especially in Norway.
Sorry BF, you can call me Republic.
Because the have been so brainwashed they do not know any better.
BF,
I am back my friend to talk about tsars, etc. After I posted my other comment I thought about it and I decided to add couple of thoughts on the subject. Sparta had two kings, sort off to keep things in balance. Macedonia had a king, who had to be approved by the council of prominent citizens (oligarchs if you will, heads of influential families). But here is the butt, Philip II, the father of Alexander the Great presumably had 7 or so wives, I guess in order to produce a viable heir. Well, long story short he had one son whose name was Archidas (today this name would be laughable, but anyway) who really was an idiot. Alexander was the only other choice. Alexander, just before he died at 32, asked that his little son be assigned the job. The problem with his son was that he was not viewed as Greek because of his Persian (Bachtrian?) mother. So, the council conveniently assigned his idiot brother the the position and shortly after that Macedonian Empire was split into five pieces, which was divided between his cousins and some generals. So much for kingdoms.
Return to Romanovs, in reality they were never Russians.
Anonius
Those who butchered them in that cellar thought they were really Russian.
You should probably read this book about the sexual decadence and wild extravagance of the Romanov’s https://thebookroomatbyron.com/p/history-the-romanovs-1613-1918–103?barcode=9780297852667
Perhaps Russia needs a new Peter the Great, a really talented, energetic, psychopath.
But Peter the Great was, if you listen to some, the first western puppet, who created the conditions which snowballed into the mountain of suffering which exploded in the ‘liberating’ revolution brought about by the… Western puppet masters.
Anonymous
No, Peter the Great was not the first Western puppet in Russia. That is going too far. However, he did want to modernize Russia.
Peter the Great was no Western puppet but a ruthless, ambitious, determined autocrat. He was very eager to advance Russian science and technology to fortify Mother Russia. To achieve this, he invited Western scientists and industrialists and succeeded convincingly as Charles XII of Sweden was to find out in no uncertain terms. It used to be a hallmark of Swedish history books in the past to blame various countries in Western Europe for “treason”, LOL.
To put all this into perspective: Today, Vladimir Putin regards the West as a market for Russian exports. Quite accurate as the West’s deindustrialized wasteland a.k.a. “Post-industrial society” and its “European values” (the staging of faggot parades and colour revolutions worldwide) is not particularly useful otherwise. It’s comical how the political pygmies of the EU and the US keep on yapping as if they had something coveted by Russia and as if their “European values” had any authority over intelligent people anywhere.
Mulga Mumblebrain
No, I don’t think Russians need a psychopath, as it’s contrary to the Russian Orthodox tradition. The ones who butchered the Romanov family can be placed in the category of psychopaths.
If a monarchy were re-established in Russia, why would the Czar have to be a Romanov?
I think its time for a new dynasty: the Putin dynasty!
Antoinetta III
Because Czar Nicholas is a martyr and because the Romanovs made Russia great and because the legacy of the ‘revolution’ that murdered them must be buried forever. It would be an act of repentance. I am sure that Putin would be appalled by the thought.
That sounds reasonable to me. And let it be known that the Romanov dynasty got what it deserved in 1918. Nicholas II was a sheer Western puppet, happily sacrificing millions of Russians to please his ‘Western partners’ who had Russia by the balls through debt obligations. His indifference to the suffering Russian people and his gross incompetence are the hallmarks of a Western traitor — Alexander Kerensky and Boris Yeltsin spring to mind immediately.
Today, the situation is reversed: Russia is free of debt and the West is totally bankrupt all along the line. So if the Russian monarchy is to be restored, only patriotic Russian hardliners should be considered. Hereditary succession should only be allowed if the aforementioned criterion is met.
Nussiminen
No, I don’t think that the Romanov dynasty got what it deserved, although it did make mistakes, like taking the French offer for an alliance after France was defeated by Prussia (even Dostoyevsky questioned this this). In 1911 Pyotr Stolypin, the Russian prime Minister, was assassinated in Kiev. Before his assassination he stated that by 1920 the Russian GDP would surpass that of Germany and the US combined. He gets assassinated and Russia gets the Bolshevik Revolution. Hardly coincidences.
He got assassinated and Russia got the Bolshevik Revolution which laid the basis for the USSR as a scientific and technological superpower.
Stolypin’s statement was rubbish. The US had the entire world to plunder for raw materials.
Nussiminen
Russia began to industrialize under Count Vitte. This process was interrupted by the First World War, the Russian Revolution and the Civil War that ensued. Immense damage was done to Russia. The industrialization process was continued under Stalin, who used centralized methods to establish an industrial base. He is not given the full credit he deserves. After that we get World War Тwo, and new damage to Russia. The war ends, and Russia (ie. Soviet Union) recovers. Remarkable achievements if you take into account what happened between 1914 and 1945. The only point which is debatable is which system was better to industrialize Russia, the capitalistic under Vitte of the centralized under Stalin. Having a centralized system is probably more efficient in laying the basis for industrialization. Germany after 1871 used both systems, military style centralized planning inside a capitalistic system. Ofcourse, it’s again debatable if an economy, after industrialization, can function efficiently under a centralized system, or if both private and government enterprise are needеd, a 50:50 solution, something you have in Austria, as well as in Russia today.
As for the US, yes, it still plunders world wide. Russia does not need to do so, bearing in mind it’s size and all the raw materials it has.
Antoinetta III
A Putin dynasty ? Not even Putin would approve of that. His achievements speak for themselves. That’s what makes him popular.
mod-to note: Line removed -please refrain from attacks on fellow commentors, subtle or otherwise. Your response above is strong enough to make your point.
I wouldn’t call Putin a proponent of western-style economics.
He’s a capitalist, which automatically places him OPPOSITE to western-style economics.
The Goldman lands are debtists, not capitalists. We run on abstract numbers like share price, which are totally manipulated by the casino.
Putin is continuing the Soviet tradition of running with very little debt, basing the economy on REAL PRODUCTION OF REAL THINGS. His central banker Nabullina allows high interest rates instead of forcing rates to zero. Unforced interest rates are the natural feedback mechanism that keeps savings ahead of debt. A real-value economy needs to have big savings and small debt, so producers can invest in better factories and bigger farms without ceding control to the banks.
Polistra.
You make very good points about economics.
Russia does not promote cheap debt and credit cards – which is a neo liberal way of getting everyone into debt so it gives banks power.
Russias policies are conservative – high interest benefits people who save – not people who borrow.
I would also add that there used to be a video on YouTube featuring the sacking of kudrin. Medvedev did the act – He was president at the time. And he has not been brought back
Basically, what you are saying is that the ruling Russian elites need the common folk purely to defend Russia and their interests but not exactly because they respect and love the common people and Russia.
Therefore the renaissance currently taking place will not hold.
None the less, see what is physical and spiritual possible when interests collide between the ruling elite and the common people. Looking from historical perspective seems a commoner can only dream of a brief period of colliding interests and this is truely sad!
Seems magic in grand numbers pays off but greed reduces it to a small number of elites. Sharing cake is simply not in them.
1. Central banks (and centrally managed currencies) are not a capitalistic concept, there was no central bank in US until 1913.
2. The problem with democracy is that nobody has access to relevant information to make the informed choice which is the same as to say: secret societies manipulate public opinion.
3. once (socialist) government has gotten big enough to subsidized more than half the population, its nolonger democracy as a majority of people’s “income” depends on getting big gov to be re-elected. Then it becomes indeed an hidden tyranny on the remaining minority of productive elements until collapse. That is why greeks cant get out of EU, too many people depending rotten on existing system. Democracy is ok if government is kept away from taking charge of people’s life even if its done supposedly with good intention (way to hell is paved with good intentions)
I agree with Saker in that Putin is neo-liberal but disagree on the part that Putin believes in social democracy. My view is that Putin is representative of Russian national oligarchy which DOES want to integrate with the western ruling classes but on equal terms. It is, BTW, why I think Putin’s responses to American aggression is muted, or that he still does not get rid of 5th columnists: he really does not want to alienate them totally and waits for a faction in western elite to take over. In my view, this is never going to happen: as Saker frequently points out, because of the cultural tendencies of the west, they have never considered Russia as equal partners and will never do. In fact, the only reason they could not suck the blood of Russia to the bone and let the country slip from their fingers is their total disregard for the interests of Russian elites which do want their country and themselves be regarded as equals to their western partners.
However, this is their main weakness: they cannot beat imperialists on their own game. The correct course of action is to fully reject them: i.e. withdrawal from IMF, worldbank, and other financial institutions, placing controls on the transfer of capital, nationalizing strategic industries, etc. Obviously, these are actions which will reduce the power of the oligarchy in Russia and thus impossible to implement by Putin (unless an open conflict with the west forces him to do so to put the economy in complete footing). Incidentally, Russian communist party offers exactly that. So, unlike Saker I take them seriously not because I don’t believe in what Saker writes about them but because such transformation has its own life and real leadership would eventually emerge from such dynamics. And, such leaders could not care less what the westerners think and write about them, unlike Putin
But what kind of neoliberal increases state ownership, decreases debt, increases public spending and increases welfare?
That’s profoundly the opposite of neoliberal ideology.
As I said in my own post below this is actually a comparatively left wing strategy reminiscent of the mixed economy and social responsibility doctrine of the UK 1950-80.
Yes indeed there were some elements of social policy. But the most important things like monetary policy is decidedly neoliberal, so are the so called privatisation of state assets except for military and energy industries. The tax policy is one of the worst in the world even worse then the new trump taxes. And he seems content with all of this.
Besides; low debt is not necessarily a good thing for the 99 percent. In general tight money is bad for average citizen. There are many other elements of his economic policy that is bad for 99% but also makes Russia vulnerable such as issuance of government debt in foreign currencies or purchasing of US debt instead of domestic investment
Sadly parts of Rosneft have been sold (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-rosneft-privatisation-insight/how-russia-sold-its-oil-jewel-without-saying-who-bought-it-idUSKBN1582OH).
You’re correct when criticizing the flat income tax of 15%, because it affects the rich and the poor. For a billionaire it’s some chump change.
Further it should be pointed out that conversations about debt also should include the information of the ownership of the debt. The previous indebtedness to the IMF was indeed a catastrophe for Russia. The Russian Federation itself should invest in Russian companies (or at least try to encourage its citizens to do so) instead of trying to attract foreign investors.
Aside from my additions: excellent comment.
https://russia-insider.com/en/russias-presidential-elections-2018-first-impressions/ri22605
Additional thoughts by also brilliant Gilbert Doctorow…
https://russia-insider.com/en/moscow-begins-crypto-elections-testing-thumbs-nose-us/ri22588
Testing a blockchain system of vote counting….so it is block solid no fraud potential etc
@the AngloZionist are clearly backing Grudinin… even the always hyperpoliticallycorrect Wikipedia loves him
Why? An enigma wrapped in a mystery. But perhaps there is a key.
Wikipedia:
“Pavel Grudinin was born in 1960 in Moscow. He says he is of Russian origin and had a Jewish grandfather…
Some Russian politicians of the left-wing have negatively perceived the nomination of Grudinin as Presidential candidate for the Communist party. The main reasons for criticism are that Grudinin is a businessman that is representative of the “bourgeois class”, and previously Pavel Grudinin was a member of United Russia…
Have Grudinin, according to the Declaration, in 2015, only interest income amounted to 752 million rubles. Can you imagine how much money he has? Plus, he’s the owner of the farm, which in itself is worth several billion rubles. This is a real billionaire. Very large.”
The right kind of oligarch with the right kind of grandfathers.
Nice. let the West and the EU minion stomach the coming results of the Italian general elections first :)
I have read that Sergueï Choïgou is popular in Russia, but why can’t he be a valid repacement for Putin if the later dies (apart that Medvedev is in his way)?
Whatever the political system, corruption is ALWAYS the major problem. It has cursed every political system. Greed is the main driver of corruption, just as ‘lust for power’ is the main driver of oppression. Both are endemic to human nature, as are love, altruism and generosity. Capitalism is the expression of greed and lust for power, socialism for the other side of human nature. Which prevails depends on the ‘tenor of the age’, or the prevailing narrative of the time. At present, the USA has the greatest influence in determining the ‘tenor of the age’, hence the corruption of modern society. Will the ‘good side’ of human nature reassert itself before the ‘bad side’ brings irreversible destruction? That is the outstanding question facing humanity.
“Sounds stupid? Yes, of course. Because it is. But that’s the plan anyway.”
Not at all, it sounds logical in practical terms, so its reasonable, albeit the reasoning is crooked. The ending is a very accurate prediction of what should happen, with much reserved right for different endings…
On the general note, many points in the article are for discussion, for which I have a special thanks to you) But in the wholeness of it all, you are correct and educational, with many of your points being truly accurate and illustrating. Again, thank you!
” or jailed or, even better, summarily executed by a firing squad”
love your great comment, but this one reminded me of the famous
quote of Nietzsche:
“He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster. And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee.”
I think beware
Indeed, think at Nietzsche, what happened to him and his admirers.
Joke of the day ….
“Condemning the move, US State Department for its part said that “the United States absolutely opposes the use of violence or intimidation to express political views.””
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201802231061931252-us-delegation-palestinians-eggs/
America is an unintended self-parody.
Everything out of their mouths is contradicted by their actual behavior.
Funniest of all, the Americans think that nobody notice this and that they continue to run their mouth with impunity.
Saker, podrias hacer un diagnostico tan bueno como este a Venezuela? creo que los tiempos por aca estan de gris a gris oscuro. Parece que hasta en lo militar el gobierno actual necesita de realidad.
mod-to note: Machine Translation: Saker, could you make a diagnosis as good as this one to Venezuela? I think the times here are gray to dark gray. It seems that even in the military the current government needs a reality.
Vladimir Putin is foremost a patriot. To us in the west this does not really go home. It does to me however, knowing Russias history, it does go home. I am as patriotic as a Russian I can never disband my Danish ancestry, and will be a Dane before I am a Swede (Dual citizen). I was born in Denmark, it is my “Motherland” and I have to, with gnashing teeth, accept the stupid decisions it has made. That is democracy. But I am an armed peacenik, with Russian friends, they share many of my beliefs, or I share their. It is not important. What is important is we learn to live in peace with each other and respect each other. And that goes for brown people too. Refugees are welcome, not economical immigrants.
Areica has always been a mess. They need about 150 years come of the trauma of trying to figure out, that a nation can not be build on family affiliations. They will learn, eventually. I know they will, was there long enough to learn. I vastly different roles.
Becoming a nation is no simple matter, the US is no nation. Sweden is a nation, Denmark is, Germany sis remakably enough too, as is Russia and a slew of other states.
This is nationalism the good way, I dont reject other people and their countries. I just think my own is better, and I willl stand by it.
Would changing how people vote in Russia make any difference?
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-22/moscow-begins-crypto-elections-testing-thumbs-nose-us
Putin a neo-liberal?
Putin has increased the role of the state in the economy, increased welfare and state-spending and decreased debt – this is almost the exact opposite trajectory a neoliberal (in te current sense of the word) would have taken.
Its hard to know what Putin’s personal views are because he has to balance so many opposing factions (something he is good at doing as Saker has pointed out in the past), but his government’s policies are best described as the “social welfare capitalism” that was the norm for a while in the UK and western Europe between 1950s and 1980.
In terms of current western government ideology it would be considered positively Leftist, and is actually slightly more “left” than the program being put forward by Corbyn’s Labour Party.
This is not to suggest Putin is a socialist (though he may be a closet one for all I know; he may be anything for all I know) but rather to emphasise how radically and rabidly rightist western governments have become in the last thirty years. Putin’s moderate socially responsible and truly capitalist system is now equated with Marxist ideas in some unhinged western minds.
But anyhow – no, Putin’s govt would be considered a long way from neoliberal by most of the current proponents of neoliberalism.
So-called Democracy–particularly, the Anglo-American model of democracy–is a *secular religion* in all but name.
The vast majority of people in America and its clone countries simply cannot bring themselves to question this religion.
This is not only true for mainstream society but also the fake dissidents and faux critics–including the fake Anglo American Left–that infest many alternative media sites.
You can see this fundamentalist belief in the Democracy God among some of the commentators here, who present themselves as politically “woke”–to use a favored American catchphrase.
To question democracy itself is a major Thought Crime–a Thought Crime that will spawn predictable denunciations and rationalizations from the Democracy Cult followers.
In fact, for many people, questioning democracy is akin to questioning the Holocaust or other forms of “anti-Semitism.”
And the famous quote from British war criminal/national hero, Winston Churchill, that “democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time” is oh-so-clever as a soundbite, but that is all it is.
It would be more truthful to say that: Democracy is the *best* form of government–particularly as a system of social and political control based on the deception of popular sovereignty.
Democracy: The God That Failed
https://mises.org/library/democracy-god-failed-hans-hermann-hoppe
I strongly recommend the book. I use it with my students in high school.
Saker, while I’m definitely no fan of ‘bourgeois democracy’, I think this piece was overly cynical, particularly the parts about Pavel Grudinin. Saying that Grudinin is not “a real communist” reminds me too much of sectarian rhetoric that comes out of various Western leftists (particularly Trots and anarchists). Grudinin may not be the type of communist that some want, but his views (which we could describe as market-socialist or NEP) are certainly in line with many of the world’s most significant, modern communist parties (i.e. Chinese and Vietnamese). Furthermore, his economic views are definitely to the left of president Putin, which you described as neo-liberal (and unfortunately, I have to agree on that point). So Russian voters really do have a real choice, unlike the laughable US “elections.”
Note to any random American commenters, I had distant relatives that were sent to Siberia from the Ukrainian SSR during the late 1930s, so spare me your anti-Soviet comments and inflated death figures, they mean nothing to me.
So in this mad universe the west are backing a candidate whose economic views are to the left of Putin’s? What nonsense is this?
And I can only repeat a question no one has bothered to try and answer – what kind of neoliberal increases state ownership, decreases debt, and increases social spending and welfare?
“What kind of neoliberal increases state ownership, decreases debt, and increases social spending and welfare?”
The confusion among the West’s ‘anti-authoritarian’ Cultural Marxists stems from the fact that Putin does believe in free enterprise, but not in accordance with the hideously corrupt neoliberal-fascist interpretation of the concept. What’s the difference? Easy: Compare Russia and the Ukraine. Slandering Putin as a neoliberal is plain silly — he personifies Russia’s ascendance from the utter living hell of neoliberalism now enjoyed by the Ukros.
“So in this mad universe the West is backing a candidate whose economic views are to the left of Putin’s? What nonsense is this?”
In all likelihood It’s pure hogwash, yes, but it should be noted that Western imperialism does have a track record of backing, inter alia, left populist movements — provided in that case their leaderships are corrupt and/or very incompetent.
West likes to destabilise russua whuch seems difficult with putin at helms.
Hence anyone but putin.
West rightly thinks of one or two moves rather than long term planning but no doer russia.
I have thought long and hard to pinpoint what makes Putin “special” among political leaders in the last several decades, and I believe it boils down to him exhibiting a rare quality of genuinely caring about his country, and always placing its interests above his own personal interests. Making Russia Great Again was never a slogan for him, he seems to truly desire to take on the many difficulties faced by Russia (some inherent, most foisted upon them by the West), but doubtless does not always have the power to implement everything he would like. I say this because I’m not sure I can go quite as far as the Saker in deeming Putin to be a neoliberal, nor that the West is pleased with his re-election and salivating over what comes next.
It is a valid argument to make that “the proof is in the pudding,” and Putin has not canned, jailed, or deported many of the Atlanticist holdovers from the Western rape of Russia in the government’s economic sector. But although it frustrates me, too, I think the situation is complex enough that the jury is still out. He commenced his tenure as the representative of the patriotic core of the old intelligence community which stepped in to bring an end to the Yeltsin fiasco, but did not have the power to take full control without a bloodbath—hence the deal struck with the oligarchs for the neoliberal co-regent Medvedev (I’m not going to pretend democracy had anything to do with it). With Russia as the all-powerful boogieman now, it’s easy to forget what an unmitigated disaster Putin inherited. Republics were seeking independence and refusing to send revenues to Moscow, the US and Saudis were fanning the Wahhabi flames in Chechnya and Dagestan into open rebellion, inhuman terrorist attacks were rampant, the military was dispirited from things like no pay, cruel fighting in Chechnya, and the Kursk loss, and most of the societal securities in employment, housing, education, and medical care had been dismantled by the West and their cronies.
Per the deal with the oligarchs, certain limits and fealty were required of the oligarchs, and state ownership of critical sectors was secured, at which point the Atlanticists in the economic sphere were a much lower priority, which tends to explain much of Putin’s perceived inaction on the economic front. That, and mainly that he and his allies still did not have the power to take on that enormously wealthy group. However, with the kind assistance of the clinically insane West, his approval reached the point that he could form a shadow economic advisory team, force some resignations/prosecutions of some Atlanticists/oligarchs, force the reinvestment in domestic production and infrastructure, and, as recently reported in the Vineyard, is bringing to fruition an apparently extremely high-level shake-up in Dagestan. One wonders if this might not be a test case of sorts, working out the best tactics to use in removing “untouchable” oligarchs.
But back to Putin’s fundamental character, I don’t believe he would be able to abide the thought of leaving Russia in jeopardy of Western takeover when he ultimately retires, so I am cautiously optimistic, as other writers have been, that this election and final term will show us a much more domestically active Putin. I do not expect him to attempt to do away with capitalism, but I think he sees old-school Industrial Capitalism, carefully regulated and socially responsible, as not evil per se. Unfortunately while Western capitalistic theories still pretend to be based on the idea that capital is relegated to investment in local labor or local industrial growth, the neoliberal abomination of Globalist Financial Capitalism has carefully stripped away all potential social benefits of capitalism, leaving only gluttony for the few. I suspect Putin will try to strike a balance more akin to a Russia-centric Industrial Capitalism as a compromise, and will have the mandate to force governmental officials to conform or be replaced.
For the same reason I can’t imagine that Putin and his backers, who have consistently demonstrated long term thinking, will overlook the event of his eventual retirement. I really like the idea put forward above that he might step down just short of his term, such that he could appoint a carefully groomed successor in his vein, and get the population acquainted with them prior to the next election. And of course Putin will continue to be an extremely influential advisor after stepping down, so his successor should be able to ride his coat tails quite well, and even use Putin to “meddle” in some domestic situations where it is awkward for the new president to become officially involved.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I think the West’s overplaying its hand in the ‘90s with Yeltsin and shock therapy, and then recently with the sanctions and vilification of all things Russian, might serve as the best inoculation against a Western takeover in Russia for quite some time. For the good of the world, I certainly hope so.
Marx in his preface to the 1883 edition of the Communist Manifesto was more optimistic for socialist revolution in Russia than generally known. I hope that with Putin running as an Independent instead of with the corrupt neoliberal United Russia party, that it will open up more political space for a real left revival in Russia. The Communist party must be self-critical and learn from It’s past mistakes or it will die out completely.
I am a firm believer in the freedom of any person to display any politicians with a banana stuck in their buttocks. :)
https://www.rt.com/news/419740-erdogan-banana-german-artist/
Of course, I was born and am a citizen of the nation that was founded on the principle of giving a King the finger. Or, at least that was the original idea of the American Dream. That we are all free and don’t need to bow before Kings or other leaders who are way too full of themselves. Citizens always having the right to display images of such ego-maniacal politicians with a banana in their bums is an important and needed balance in any human society.
There is no substitute for freedom. And putting the sovereign power of a nation into the hands of the people is the best guarantee of freedom possible. And that is the definition of “democracy”, that the sovereign power of the nation resides in the hands of We the People.
True that the American people have lost this, no longer have any hold on power. But that simply tells one that America is no longer a democracy. Political scientists who’ve studied America describe the country as an oligarchy. Although, recent events would seem to suggest that the choice of the oligarchy can be over-ridden by an entrenched beauracracy. Although from reading a list of government types https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_forms_of_government, it appears that often America can be called a “Kakistocracy”
The comment sections on the RT website are absolutely overwhelmed with bots and pitiful propaganda against Putin, the Russian government and military – looks like the USA has decided that having invented an “influence campaign by trolls to affect our eleckshuns”, they will now proceed to do a vulgar, intense version of their fantasy without realizing that by doing that which you complain about invalidates your complaint. It’s pretty sad, and has ruined the usually amusing interactions between the resident CIA trolls and apparently real people who read RT’s articles. One of them was particularly amusing: apparently Putin has an army of Russian Federation citizens (tens of thousands) which make up a terrorist force to disrupt other countries and occasionally carry out terrorist attacks in Western countries!!! After that, and hearing some guy on Fox talking about “Russia weaponizing refugees to destroy Europe”, it seems clear that black is literally white in the West now when it comes to hysterical imperialist propaganda. I can only shudder with horror at the generations of young people growing up with all this mental abuse – especially after the damage already done by the decades of Cold War propaganda. Check it out for yourself: https://www.rt.com/news/419753-syria-unsc-resolution-ceasefire/ scroll down to comments section. They all have like 500 upvotes or more! Pretty pathetic if they think that will stop Putin winning. The more disturbing ones were on other pages, though: “We must do some actions in St. Petersburg…” “These enemies must be destroyed…” They were more worrying. I pray that God keeps Russia safe until Putin wins that election.
America is a mental institution masquerading as a nation.
Witness the unending spate of mass shootings that define American society.
Those shootings are symptomatic of a country that is sick in its soul.
And those hordes of American trolls on RT (some of whom are likely some species of American spooks or military) are the internet version of the unhinged babbling that one would hear in an asylum for the criminally insane.
One thing to note however is that America and it’s coalition of the killing always try to portray themselves as being threatened or victimized by “evil doers”–so as to justify their wars of aggression against so-called evil-doers. See America’s lies about non-existent Iraqi WMDs as but one example of many of this US scam.
“Witness the unending spate of mass shootings that define American society.”
Yes, and the equally insane psychobabble to the effect that with all these private firearms, the US kakistocracy will be finished off one day. As I said, what some envisage as the “one last stand” in the terminally rotting US would, in all likelihood, amount to a psychotic shoot-out between our dear Exceptionals and Indispensables over whatever dwindling resources are still available to them. Self-worship and greed are very poor revolutionary traits indeed; what passes for the ‘American Revolution’ proves the point superbly.
Putin and Russia are enjoying the rewards of social cohesion brought about by hard work and self-reliance. The terminal prolapse of the West only escapes the wilfully blind. Amusingly enough, blaming Putin/Russia/the Kremlin for practically everything these people don’t like has a sinister little grain of truth. The ‘idea’ was that Russia should have been smashed and grabbed with the Russian population rapidly moving out/dying off, hence giving Western imperialism a prolonged lease of life. What remains — apart from nuclear war — of the West’s horrific punishment of Putin/Russia/the Kremlin now amounts to meddling with the FIFA World Cup, the Olympics, and the Eurovision “Song” Contest. The prospect of any fabulous Western garbage like Ksenia Sobchak beating Putin at the Presidential Elections is just silly beyond laughable.
Of course, non-entities like Sobchak – as well as the ruling class of the US Empire and their lackeys – know full well they stand zero chance of beating Putin in a free and fair election, which is why she has been campaigning in Washington, DC rather than Russia. In all the MSM reports of such bizarre activity, not one pointed out the absurdity of campaigning in a foreign country – a self-declared “adversary” who has waged economic, informational, and (limited) military war against your own country – not to mention the inappropriateness of the interference in Russia’s election such campaigning entails. Hypocrisy seems to not be a moral failing in the US empire – in fact, it is almost a virtue to do unto others as you falsely claim they have done unto you. Clearly the likes of Sobchak are meant to be the cutout representing the “anti-corruption” crook Navalny as Washington’s decreed President-to-be of a conquered Russia – and rather than attempt to contest an election they are certain to lose, the effort will be to disrupt, attack and interfere as much as possible while continuing such pressure as is imagined will cause the “regime change” they long for to take place. Once again, the USA’s shameful lies in accusing Russia of “interference” with these ridiculous pseudo-legal processes while actually and openly attacking the accused’s election expose to the majority of the world’s people what the USA is – a morally bankrupt dying Empire who we are all sick to death of and wish would simply die with some dignity. One silver lining from this is that a precedent has been set for all those countries around the world to make a big fuss about the USAIDs and NGOs waging their constant influence campaigns – as has been noted by some of the neocon regime change parasites, it will cause big problems for “spreading democracy” to the “subhumans” who think they have sovereignty and the right to control their own resources, economies and alliances. History has a momentum of its own, and many empires have made the same mistake in thinking they can avoid their inevitable end.
The portrayal of traditional Russian society borders a fairy-tale. Seriously, unbearable misery of underprivileged masses was a recurrent topic in 19th century Russian literature, or descriptions of Russian society by people with otherwise friendly attitude towards Russia. The disastruous revolutions Russia experienced would not happen, had there not been powerful tension between fantastically rich and miserable majority.
This level of terrible inequality was not something that appeared in Russia overnight, nor was it an westernizing import. During the centuries, the feudal bonds degenerated into slavery-like serfdom in all of Eastern Europe, including Russia. During the western Renaissance and developing capitalism in the Western Europe, countries like Poland, Hungary and Russia saw the increasingly powerful serfdom-related legislation.
The problem is that the most disastrous revolution in Russia happened after the abolition of serfdom and engagement of Russia on a path of industrialization and massive reforms. It is ironic that the Tsar liberator of the serfs was murdered by the revolutionaries fighting for the alleviation of the terrible sufferings of the serfs (and we would think of ‘Zemlya y Volya’ founded by a certain Mark Andreyevich Natanson and morphed into the terrorist organization ‘Narodnaya Volya’).
Serfdom was reinforced in Russia once she was increasingly integrated into the market economy of the West and as a solution for ensuring the huge demand of Russian wheat (and other agricultural products, like hemp – all hemp used to make ropes and sail for the English navy was imported from Russia). It was quite a rational response to the challenges that Russia was facing in the 17-19 centuries and not just the result of the greed of the ‘elites’ as the jaundiced views of Marxism-Leninism would like us to believe (which would make us believe that the waves of banditry, lawlessness, vagrancy, anarchy that recurrently swept the plains of Russia where the exclusive result of the ‘class struggle’ between the ‘fantastically rich’ and the ‘miserable majority’). Paradoxically many serfs opposed their liberation.
The ‘revolution’ supposedly started from beneath was extremely busy crushing peasant rebellion (e.g. Tambov Rebellion where chemical weapons were used) and practically reintroducing serfdom.
I am very curious as to what you (the Saker) think about the possible way of a reform in Russia? What do you think should happen? How? What is the final goal? If at all possible, could you, please, share your vision of Russia’s ideal path. Thank you for your work.
Blessings,
AYS
As lucidly written as it goes, what’s more to say. It is my feeling, as well, and I would very much like to get a vision of a new society originating from Russia. And I do not think my expectations are too high. West is a cul-de sac, unable to offer any ideas, and the Russia is still in the process of formulating them, I think. It would be really too much to expect any grand social innovation right now – the country was on the floor a mere decade and a half ago, and the west is trying with all its powers to prevent the Russia rebirth and failing miserably, thank God. A bit of patience is now necessary, I think. What has been made already is so heartwarming to me that I cannot quite express it.
Be very wary near Sergei Glaziev, the Alfa-Group man, who demands mineral resources of Russia be all sold for a fixed rice.
He knows how to wrap it into pretty talks, like Obama did, but that only makes him more dangerous.
Is Putin still micromanaging? Hasn’t he managed to inject some robustness and heirs into the system so that it can continue after he’s gone? Hasn’t this been one of his highest priorities?
Christians are next. https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/02/christian-leaders-in-jerusalem-close.html?m=1
Thank you Saker for your explanations… I’ am an “old communist”, in fact a friend of the Russian People. I visited your country 5 times and I met the nicest men and women on the earth. Of course, it is exaggerated to speak so, but it is my feeling.
Reading a message from you give hope to the people who loves Russia. I agree totally with your political analysis. Unfortunately, as a French guy, I prefer to read you in French but have to thank you in English … Please go on and explain us what we have to understand in this crazy world.
Ray McGovern (raymcgovern.com)–former cIA Russia expert analyst watched the Russia Broadcast version of the interview with Putin (as well, apparently, of the USA bowdlerized version) and has insightful comments including some implicitly endorsing The Saker’s analysis.