I didn’t expect the mid-2000s discussion about Russia needing its own global project to return. At that time, this discussion was abstract in nature, not everyone was sure that Russia would survive … But today the question is quite different, because it is already obvious to almost everyone that Russia’s role in the world will significantly increase in the a very near future. In fact, it has already increased, thanks to Putin (I’m not kidding), but it will soon become clear to everyone, even outspoken liberals.
What needs to be done in the economy to ensure this process is generally more or less clear, although to implement this point, of course, it is necessary to organize a serious purge in the elite that has developed over the past 30 years. In fact, my personal opinion (i.e. unsupported by facts, but based on subjective feelings) here is that Putin has not wanted to opt for this scenario for a long time, because it will inevitably lead to bloody excesses (local or even more). massive). But, apparently, in recent months, him “Sold” and he realized that Saltykov-Shchedrin was right in his logic “Education should be implemented in moderation, avoiding bloodshed as much as possible”.
As of today, this is probably no longer possible. Human methods of presenting to current officials the idea that the homeland is sacred and that stealing is bad have not worked. They fought for their right to steal and not be held accountable for it in the 70s and 80s, they got it in the 90s and they won’t give it up. Well, therefore, they will have to be fought rigidly. Nothing personal – this is a question of the country’s survival, the trick is just that for such a fight, it needs to be supported by the people. And not in the logic of “We will remove these people to take their place and steal for ourselves”, but in the logic of “We will give up the old world, we will shake its dust off our feet”. That is, we are talking about changing the model as a whole.
And so, in addition to the economy, we face two serious challenges. The first is to develop an idea that unites people within the new model (where stealing is not good!) And at the same time will provide an opportunity to get a very serious support group in neighboring countries (the conditional “Greater Eurasia” in Putin’s terms, or the “Eurasian currency zone” in terms of my 2003 book, or something else. Please note, not to create a PR appearance of such support, but to gain true support and unity of the nation.
It should be noted that current professional PR specialists and political strategists cannot solve this problem in principle – they create an appearance and do not form reality. We need completely different people here, but how they will get into the present Kremlin is still not very clear to me. However, none of my business, I have never been involved in state propaganda. In the end, even how ordinary economists will get into government is not very clear.
As was noted in the mid-2000s, there are two global projects that claim to be successful in solving this task. These are the “Red” and orthodox projects. The logic of the Orthodox project was expressed in an outstanding document prepared by the efforts of my co-author Andrey Kobyakov (there were other characters, but they played a clearly secondary role) called “Russian Doctrine”. I also participated as much as possible (for which I got the diploma “Udarnik of Orthodox Labor” from the hands of Metropolitan Kirill at that time). But about 15 years have passed since then.
And it became clear that the Orthodox project today does not meet the stated goals. Has little consensus among the population (everyone remembers the story of St. Isaac, which Metropolitan Varsonofy wanted to privatize in his favor, and with the support of the local authorities?), The Russian Orthodox Church is very strong, clearly a comprador group oriented towards the Vatican and, finally, outside Russia, the Orthodox ideology is very weak today. The Russian Orthodox Church follows the state and does not prepare the ground for its arrival, its propaganda activity outside Russia is extremely low. That is, it is impossible to use Orthodoxy as a tool of “Soft power” today. So this option will not be implemented, let’s face it, the Orthodox community, which was given a serious chance in the early 2000s, has lost it.
Now the “Red” project. Everything seems to be fine here, Stalin’s degree of approval goes off the scale, people demand social justice, especially since even against the backdrop of totally capitalist countries, our officials look like occupiers and rapists. And in Eastern Europe, people are looking more and more in our direction, because while the money was given, the USSR could be reproached, and when it stopped being given, everyone began to remember that work and housing came given to everyone for free … And even in Western Europe, they began to remember the logic of “Red” project, and with the development of the crisis, such thoughts will multiply and multiply a lot. Furthermore, our alternative is Orthodoxy, and theirs is aggressive Islam!
Objective! Remember that the “Red” The project has already won in our country, but failed to hold its position. Why? Because it did not have a developed mystical component. The true “Mandate of Heaven”, in Chinese terminology, about which Andrey Devyatov writes so much. No, when the workers have nothing to eat, Marx’s logic works. And when the capitalists began to share (in competition with the USSR, of course), something else became necessary. And this “Something” the USSR could not develop. Stalin tried to implement the scenario of “Orthodox socialism”, but I didn’t have enough time.
Hence, as the value base of both the orthodox project and the “Red” are equal (by the way, Islamic, even in its normal forms), it is urgently necessary to develop the logic of the “Orthodox socialism”. Well, or, for Muslims, Islamic socialism (remember the Ba’ath party). With a socialist economy in spirit and Abrahamic values. This is a fully functional construction, you can take the same as a basis “Russian Doctrine”, has put in it modern philosophers who, in the absence of work in their specialty, work as political scientists and political strategists, and let them write and organize public discussions. They will be very useful and people will understand a lot of things.
And now, finally, to the discussion about the monument in Lubyanka square. Well, first of all, we are glad that we have not been offered a monument to Gaidar or Yeltsin (however, judging by the attitude of the people towards the Yeltsin Center, such a monument should be encased in barbed wire and surrounded by toothed dragons ; although he has already explained many times that Yeltsin has done very well for our country). And the two options proposed are just a choice between files “Red” (Dzerzhinsky) and Orthodox projects (Aleksandr Nevsky). Taking into account a number of circumstances.
First of all, Dzerzhinsky is associated in the world not only with the greatness of the USSR (and a certain useful fear of Russian intelligence agencies), but also with imperial ideas in general, as well as with the friendship of peoples (Dzerzhinsky is half Polish, half Jewish, but absolutely Russian in his points of view). Secondly, he (of whom few people know), along with Stalin and Uritsky, was the man who mediated between the General Staff and the Bolsheviks in October 1917. That is, it is to him that we owe the fact that the compradors of the government provisional, which overthrew the tsar-father and sold the motherland, was demolished. Just like Gaidar-Chubais in the 1990s and after.
And Aleksandr Nevsky chose not the west as a partner (like his brother, by the way), but the Eurasian steppe. I will not interpret the yoke here (although I have an opinion that for the ordinary Russian population this yoke was not very noticeable, Kiev itself was destroyed by Yury Dolgoruky, Andrey Bogolyubsky and many others), I will only note that the Consequently, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which chose the west, has simply disappeared. And Poland, in general, did not achieve much, it was constantly used as cannon fodder against Russia. So Nevsky proved to be a great strategist here and his place in the history of Russia is far from the last, plus two clashes with Swedes and Germans are not the main ones here.
By the way, it seemed to me that people, in general, voted for Dzerzhinsky (since he voted for Stalin in the vote on the symbol of Russia, only those who controlled the vote did not like). It is about 70%. But, again, this is my personal opinion. And therefore, for an outside observer, I would return Dzerzhinsky in his place, but I would put Alexander Nevsky or Ivan the Terrible on Vasilyevsky Descent. As all the other squares around the Kremlin and Kitay-gorod are already occupied. Theoretically, Aleksandr Nevsky could be put in Vladimir’s place (he should rather be near the Cathedral of Christ the Savior), but that’s okay, let’s not take a bad example in terms of monuments. And let’s not forget that it will not be too long and we will have to choose a place for the monument to Stalin.
In conclusion, I notice that in reality the vote was about choosing a file “Red” or the Orthodox project, and the second – in its anti-Western, anti-Vatican version. To interpret, who wins is a different question, it seems to me that it is “Red”. But in any case, this is a problem that will still have to be solved in the near future (this year, most likely), so Sobyanin, who could represent completely different elite projects and groups, has not just rushed in, but has tried to do it. change this choice. It will most likely not work.
Copyright © 2021. All rights reserved.