Paul
Goble
Staunton, June 3 – Russian leaders
like Vladimir Putin routinely denounce others as Russophobes, but most of those
they target do not hate or fear the Russian people, Sergey Kornyev says. In fact, the real Russophobes are those in
the Kremlin itself who seek to impose a single “Muscovite” definition of
Russians by suppressing their diversity.
On the AfterEmpire portal, the
commentator suggests that this isn’t always obvious because the Kremlin likes
to talk about Russia as “not ‘simply a country’ but a whole unique civilization,”
something that appears to elevate them above a mere nationality to a status
equivalent to that of Europe or Islam (afterempire.info/2017/06/02/postmoscow/).
But that notion,
which forms the basis of “Russian fundamentalism in all its forms,” should mean
that the Kremlin would accept the diversity within Russia’s population which is
the basis and source of strength of all civilizations. But that is exactly what the rulers in Moscow
have not, cannot and will not do, at least within Russia.
“Moscovite ideologues love to talk about
multi-polarity ‘at the world level,’ but as soon as the conversation shifts to
Russia, they fall silent,” Kornyev says. They are unwilling to grant to Russia
this diversity which they insist is an attribute of a civilization which they
insist it forms.
The Kremlin and its adepts
acknowledge diversity within Russia only in terms of the ethnicities they
recognize, but they insist that each of these, at least when it suits them, is “an
indivisible atom.” And they apply that
model to ethnic Russians as well insisting that there is a single Russian
culture and it is one that Moscow has the exclusive right to define.
That means that the 70 regions of
the country with predominantly ethnic Russian populations are left in “the role
of cultural colonies of Moscow” and have fewer rights to define who and what
they are and want than do many smaller nations who at least on paper are
granted the right to their own cultural identity.
It is a good thing that such peoples
have that right, Kornyev says; but “why do the 1.5 million residents of Ryazan
oblast not have the right” that a few thousand Evenks do? And why should they accept Moscow’s insistence
that there is “only one variant of Russianness and one variant of Russian
culture” and that this is what they get from Moscow?
In reality, if one views Russia as a
civilization, he continues, then “any ethnic Russian region is capable by its
level of uniqueness and self-consciousness to rise to the level of countries
and regions of Europe. Any of them can acquire their own face and their own
voice.” And they should be allowed to do
so.
“Instead of one Russian culture and
lifestyle, there could exist a powerful and complex system of 70 Russian
cultures, 70 Russian national lifestyles, and 70 Russian identities.” Historically, they existed, but they were
suppressed by Moscow’s military conquest and political repression.
It is often forgotten that “Moscow
fought with Ryazan over several centuries, longer and in a bloodier fashion
than with Chechnya and emptied this land more completely than did the Tatars.” Novgorod was destroyed as were so many other
centers not by their own peoples but by Muscovy.
The unification of Russia “from the
Baltic to the Pacific” was not “’the natural product of the Russian soul,’ but
the result of an extremely harsh centuries-long policy of the central
authorities.” These powers justified their actions by saying that this was the
only way to prevent Russia from being absorbed by others.
Muscovite “conquistadors” behaved
like their Spanish counterparts in Latin America, but their actions raise the
question: “Are such ‘defenders’ who behaved more harshly to their own than the
enemies really needed?” It is possible
that Moscow did prevent parts of the country from falling under one kind of
alien rule but only by imposing another kind, its own.
The outcome of this story is “before
our eyes,” Kornyev says. “Instead of a multi-polar system rich in
possibilities, we have a common faceless space which has lost the will to life
and is continuing to degrade.” Only by restoring the complexity and diversity
within the Russian people is there a better way forward.
“In order to return human dignity to
themselves, Russians living in various regions must acquire their own face and
build their, where they live a full and vital milieu,” the commentator says. “In
each region, this will be done in its own way. Such a project is capable of
giving rise to a multitude of new spheres of vital energy.”
Tragically, at least at present, the
Russophobes in the Kremlin are doing everything they can to prevent this.
No comments:
Post a Comment