Paul
Goble
Staunton, November 19 – Contrary to
many opponents of the Kremlin, Russian President Vladimir Putin has a vision
for the future and is not in a weak position, Grani commentator Irina Pavlova
says, because his “Russian fundamentalism” now “unites the authorities, the
elite, the people and [even] the opposition.
In an essay posted online today,
Pavlova, one of the most thoughtful observers of the Moscow political scene,
says that she cannot understand “the hopes” of people like Andrey Piontkovsky
and those who share his views that the Kremlin will soon face “mass civil
disobedience” and “the split of the elites” (http://grani.ru/opinion/m.208834.html).
How
could that happen anytime soon, she asks with obvious regret, “when even the
protest movement [that does exist in the Russian Federation] shows itself to be
atomized to the extreme” and when no one goes into the streets to protest the
increasingly repressive actions of Putin and his regime?
A sober consideration of the facts,
Pavlova argues, requires that one acknowledge that “over the last decade, ‘the
Soviet paradigm’ in mass consciousness not only has not been destroyed but has
not been subject to pressure.” Instead, the people of the country “were and
remain a state people, completely dependent on the powers that be.”
More than that, she continues, “today
as a result of the aggressive propaganda of anti-Westernism and great power
chauvinism, this ‘soviet paradign’ has taken the form of Russian great power
chauvinism which one can with complete justification call Russian
fundamentalism.”
This doctrine views the ethnic
Russian people as “the bearer of a special ‘cultural code, a special morality
and a special feeling of justice.” Moreover, it rejects the “spiritually
lacking West as a model of social development. It views Russia as “an empire
and a great power. And it is convinced
of its own “special historical mission.”
Russian fundamentalism unites
everyone, including the “extra-systemic” opposition, Pavlova says. And thus it
is now appropriate to say that “Russian fundamentalism” has not been imposed on
the people but rather represents “a conscious choice of the people” despite
their access to far more information than their forefathers had in Soviet
times.
This paradigm is “a powerful weapon
in the hands of the Russian authorities,” and its acceptance by nearly everyone
is why talk about a split in the elite or mass disobedience is so
disingenuous. The powers that be have a
policy for the future; it just isn’t the liberal one that some would like.
the
Mercury Club, they would quickly recognize this reality, Pavlova Says. That club has existed for ten years, and the
speech Primakov gave to it in January of this year laid out exactly what Putin
has done since (www.rg.ru/2012/01/16/primakov.html).
Primakov called Putin “the optimal
figure” for the position of Russian president. He called for an anti-corruption
drive directed at all ranks. And he said
that the organizers of anti-Kremlin meetings were seeking to “attract under
anti-government banners those who justly or unjustly are dissatisfied with the
existing orders” in the country.
So much for the idea that Primakov and
those like him will provoke a split in the elite, the Grani commentator says. “To the unaided eye, it is clear that
precisely [his recommendations] are now being carried into life” by Vladimir
Putin.
It is clear, she says, that the Putin
regime, “having chosen the Stalinist model of development for the country,
hopes that it will be able to impose it without ‘excesses’” because it has
learned the lessons of the past. It has “well
studied the West” and is quite capable of using “for its own goals” not only
Western technical specialists but Western intellectuals.”
With striking “virtuosity,” the Putin
government has mastered the art of ‘the clash of opinions,’ so much so that it
comes out on top every time in the eyes of the overwhelming majority of the population.” And it has “learned to channel
dissatisfaction” so much so that even predictions of the regime’s collapse are “a
kind of narcotic for the dissatisfied.”
No comments:
Post a Comment