💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › alexander-volodarsky-theses-about-russia.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:47:24. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Theses about Russia Author: Alexander Volodarsky Date: 18 November 2017 Language: en Topics: Russia Source: Retrieved on 20th February 2022 from https://www.nihilist.li/2017/11/18/theses-about-russia/
Certainly, Russia is not an eternal and timeless category. It is not a
mystical center of evil, the successor of the Golden Horde, a product of
breeding and degeneration, etc. We drop all the standard Russophobic
stamps. We consider the Russian Federation in the current temporary and
political context like a huge state with a low population density, an
authoritarian regime, which in the current form is built by law
enforcers. The Russian bourgeoisie dependence on the large state
officials. In this text we will only superficially go into the
experience of the USSR and the Russian Empire — my goal is not
historical research proving the similarity and continuity of different
«Russia», we can accept this thesis on faith or not, the final
conclusions should not depend on it.
I want to expressly declare that Russia belongs to Russian nationalism,
not «Russia’s». Rather, nationalism belongs to Russia, it really aims to
construct not a Russian, but a multi-ethnic and multicultural nation of
Russia, but Russian chauvinism is the glue that keeps this construct
together. Russia is a colonial empire, a kind of a XIX century relic,
but there are no seas between metropolis and the colonies. Until
recently, this particular feature was the guarantee of its territorial
integrity in many ways. Economic and cultural ties were stronger than,
for example, between Britain and India, geographical proximity is
facilitated by direct police and military control. It allows Russia to
retain its land effectively.
Russian imperial nationalists almost literally reproduce the racist myth
of the «white man’s burden». They see themselves as noble colonizers who
have brought (and continued to carry) the light of civilization to the
unreasonable and savage people.
Of course, there are no formal differences between the «Russian masters»
and «native servants» before the law. But this equality is conditional,
it continues only as long as the representatives of «national
minorities» behave in accordance with the rules and norms dictated by
the «titular nation». Till the first racist cop, who will look at not
even the behavior, but the slant of the eyes. A few years ago there was
a prime example, when the Yakut, Russian citizen, who did not speak
Russian, couldn’t get a passport, and was identified as an illegal
migrant and was almost deported. Russia differs in this from another
«multinational state».
Despite the fact that Ukraine is a multinational and multicultural
state, the situation when two citizens of the country do not know each
other’s languages ​​and can’t communicate is almost impossible. Economic
interests are also sufficiently cohesive: that the Donbas without
Ukraine or Ukraine without the Donbass is not very comfortable, the
regions depend on each other. Russia is the state of a multitude of
people and cultures, which sometimes have no common ground, and they are
held together by the «civilizing» mission of the Russians and the
financial interests of the big capitalists associated with the state
from the metropolis, standing exclusively above them.
Soviet nationalism after the 1940’s, after Stalin’s «return to
patriotism», was also based on a variety of Russian Great Power
Chauvinism. He builds a people’s hierarchy, at the top of which there
are «brothers-Slavs» under the leadership of the elder Russian brother.
That is why, by the way, any using of «fraternal peoples» is deeply
reactionary. It’s surprising when the leftists use it. National cultures
in modern Russia (as well as in the USSR) can be strongly encouraged at
their local level, but at the state level they are still rigidly
inscribed in the hierarchy. No Russian «melting pot» exists — in this
boiler everyone has their «layer». Peoples take their places and rarely
mix.
Therefore, in a polemic context it is perfectly correct to talk about
«Russian government», «Russian army» and «Russian invasion of Ukraine»,
not «Russia’s»: it is Russian chauvinism who leads Chechens, Buryats,
Yakuts to slaughter.
The metropolis keeps its colonies not only through direct violence. As
the experience of the Chechen wars shows — this bloody path is very
expensive and inefficient. Practice has shown that it is much more
profitable to buy local elites, generously provide them with money and
provide complete freedom of action. They set the «rights» in the
territory under their control. With corruption and the death penalty,
but with complete loyalty to Moscow. Almighty regional princes (ideal
example of which is president of Chechen republic Ramzan Kadyrov) wallow
in money and enjoy the benefits. There are examples of clashes between
«Chechen police» and police and even Russian special services. And the
last-mentioned always lose — in most cases Kadyrov’s boys got away with
it.
At the same time, ordinary Chechens, like the inhabitants of other
«national» regions, are immediately under double oppression: their lack
of rights is determined by the racism of the Russian chauvinist center
and the arbitrariness of local regional elites who have carte blanche
from Moscow, are practically omnipotent on their territory.
The principle vertical in Russia is not the power of a «strong center»
over «weak regions». This is the power of a «strong center» over «strong
regions», and this is important to understand when we get down to the
next topic — the inevitable disintegration of Russia.
When I write about the inevitability and necessity of the disintegration
of Russia, I do not mean the mechanical division of the country into
parts by the occupation forces of NATO, the construction of the «Russian
Wall», which would divide the country into «zones of influence». When I
write about the disintegration of Russia, I mean a natural process that
will inevitably follow after a strong central government restraining the
regions by bribery or intimidation is eliminated. Elimination of Russia
as a single state is not the goal, but an unavoidable consequence of the
liquidation of authoritarian power, because only authoritarian power can
restrain centrifugal forces.
Again, let’s back to the Chechnya example.
Imagine that the Russian left came to power in the course of the social
revolution. How would the left-wing government plan to explain to Ramzan
Akhmatovich that a new time has come, and he should stop walking in
golden slippers, stop eating human liver for breakfast and, in general,
we need to transfer power into the hands of ordinary Chechen workers? Of
course, someone can tell Ramzan Akhmatovich about decentralization and
democracy, and if this «someone» is lucky, he will die his death, die of
laughter from biting his own tongue. I will be told that the
revolutionaries will not speak to the satrap, but will speak to the
Chechen workers directly. By the way, how many Chechens are there in the
left organizations? Are there people who know the Chechen language among
the Russian leftists? And the languages ​​of other peoples of Russia?
Knowledge of the language, of course, does not guarantee success in
agitation, but is the minimum standard for it.
So, in Russia there are more than 80 regions, and not all these regions
are interested in submitting to the results of the coup in Moscow. The
Vertical of Power in Russia works only as long as it is generously
«lubricated» with blood and money. After all, why should Siberia, with
its minerals, feed Moscow and obey its orders? What is the reason to
give income from oil and gas to an insatiable center, if you can sell
them on your own terms? There is still a huge territory, most of which
is empty. And there is China, which can pay generously to use this
territory.
The only practical recipe for retaining the «territorial unity» that our
hypothetical revolutionaries can offer is Boris Eltsin’s recipe. This is
a new war, a war for the retention of colonies. And since Chechnya is
not the only problem region, this war will be total, and Ukrainian ATO
against this background will seem an easy walk. The talk about the
territorial integrity of Russia, which exists today, will turn into
unprecedented war crimes tomorrow. A Russian man from an organization
that consists predominantly of Russian men can talk as much as he likes
about overcoming ethnic hatred, but in his performance this will be
nothing more than another mask of civilizing chauvinism, another «Great
Russia welds a nation».
Undoubtedly, Russia could maintain conditional integrity on the basis of
unified class interests rather than national interests (although at that
time it could hardly be called «Russia», and in general «state», rather
«federation of communes»). Only, a prerequisite for the proletariat to
be able to recognize and articulate its fundamental interest is, again,
the collapse of the regime, that is brutally suppressing the workers’
speeches and serious attempts of the organization.
And the collapse of the regime will automatically be a trigger the
mechanism that splits the state, and the more rapid and painless this
split is, the greater the chances for the development of class
organizations in some regions.
The Russian Federation can be compared to a terminally ill patient who
is connected to a life support system. This apparatus is a repressive
authoritarian state. If you turn it off — it will die, if you do not
turn it off — it will be possible to delay the inevitable for up to
several weeks, months and even years, but many others will die.