Paul
Goble
Staunton, February 16 – In the course
of an interview about what he sees as the wave of idiotism sweeping Russia
during its commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the end of World
War II in Europe, historian Lev Lurye observes that Vladimir Putin’s basic idea
is that he is entitled to do anything other leaders have done no matter how
bad.
Lurye, who has organized commemorations
of the victims of the Leningrad blockade for many years, says this is horrific
but argues that the best way to respond to it and other outrages is “not with
anger and despair but with laughter and irony” (mnews.world/ru/valu-idiotizma-nado-protivopostavlyat-ne-gnev-i-otchayanie-a-smeh-i-ironiyu-istorik-lev-lure-o-pobedobesii/).
Victory Day, the historian says, “is
really the only historic date which unifies us.” But it means different things
to different people and the effort by the Putin regime to impose a single
overriding meaning and to exclude all others is ultimately self-defeating as
are plans to include a reference to it in the constitution.
When he met with the constitutional
amendment commission, one of its members, Senator Pushkov, who is obviously interested
in currying favor with Putin, proposed doing that. Putin responded that this
was “a good idea,” but, Lurye argues, in this case, his words mean absolutely nothing.
An even more perverse aspect of
official celebrations is the insistence by some like SVR chief Sergey Naryshkin
that Poland was to blame for the start of World War II. Everyone is entitled to
his own opinion, but when officials spout such nonsense, one can only laugh at the
inexhaustible stupidity of the human race.
Lurye notes that he is the same age
as Putin and Naryshkin and even from the same region. Consequently, he says he
understands where such nonsense comes from.
When these men were much more junior in the 1970s, they read books by
people like Valentin Pikul, books that can only be described as “absolutely Black
Hundreds literature.”
From such works, they learned “certain
secrets” about Rasputin, “the Jewish-Masonic conspiracy,” and so on. And all this “exerted on them a very strong
influence. I think that the ideology of Patrushev, Ivanov, Naryshkin and in part
Putin was formed in their years as lieutenants and captains.”
Asked why the Kremlin’s “75.Victory”
website doesn’t have a reference to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the historian points
out that these people “can’t build a space center! Why should they be able to come
up with a portal?” Russians have taken notice, turned away, and the authorities
have become more bombastic in response.
He notes that Duma deputy Yampolsky
has called for introducing a legal prohition on comparing the USSR and the
Third Reich. Such a law may be passed. But “our motherland is significant in
that its laws are strict but they aren’t fulfilled.” When Putin and Naryshkin
were reading Pikul, Lurye says, he was reading the banned GULAG Archipelago by
Solzhenitsyn.
Lurye says that the more formal the
regime makes the commemoration of victory day, the less popular in both senses
of the word it will be. Indeed, that is already happening. What is striking is that those doing it are
ensuring that “we are living through for a second time one and the same
historic period,” that of late Brezhnevism.
But the reason that talk about
victory still plays so well is that it gives Russians the sense that they are “better
than others” because they won the war. Each
of them “can with pride look into the eyes of a Norwegian, a Pole, a Frenchman,
an Englishman, or a German as say ‘they are worse than me.’”
This is a means of distracting from
his own shortcomings and the acquisition of a certain false model” which only
causes more trouble.
In conclusion, Lurye speaks of the term
introduced by Father Georgy Mitrofanov in 2005, pobedobesiye, best translated
as excessive and hyperbolic commemorations of the 1945 victory. (For a
discussion, see pobedobesie.info/).
Unfortunately, the historian says, few use that term outside of Petersburg
where it was invented.
No comments:
Post a Comment