Paul Goble
Staunton,
August 28 – Many have been upset that the share of Russians who support the
slogan “Russia for the Russians” has almost doubled over the last year, Mikhail
Vinogradov, the president of the Petersburg Politics Foundation, says. But
there isn’t any harm in this, unlike slogans suggesting that “Russia is only
for the Russians.”
“The
share of ethnic Russians among the citizens of the country forms more than 75
percent (in 1992, they made up 81 percent of the total), and it would be
strange if Russia were not for the Russians.”
But Vinogradov performs a useful service by responding to the four major
“counter-arguments” to his position (blog.newsru.com/article/28aug2018/lozung).
First,
many have misused this slogan to suggest more than the words themselves
indicate; but their inadequacy and lack of understanding has “no more sense
than those who declare today’s Russian flag, the flag of Vlasov.”
Second,
this slogan, he continues, is said to “offend the feelings of all non-Russians
in Russia who are at the edge of genocide.”
But that position would only make sense if all those who shout “Russia
for the Russians” were in fact prepared to wipe out all the non-Russians. That
is demonstrably not the case.
Third,
ethnic nationalism is a dangerous thing – “it led to the disintegration of the
USSR” – and, therefore, should not be encouraged by tolerance for such
slogans.
And
fourth, Vinogradov says, “Russians have no moral right to speak about their
interests in a multi-national country. This was logical for the Soviet Union”
where at the end the Russians formed “about 50 percent” of the population, but
it isn’t now given that Russia is “more ethnically homogeneous.”
It
is more to the point, the analyst suggests, to speak about “the unmotivated
fear of Russians relative to their own statehood and – more broadly – to their
status as a historical subject.”
Vinogradov’s argument, however, risks normalizing a term in
which others will invest more negative meanings. Indeed, if the slogan “Russia
for the Russians” is accepted by Russians, many non-Russians will view that as yet
another threat to their position in the society and the state -- and at least some of them will draw the
conclusions the non-Russians did in 1991.
No comments:
Post a Comment