Russky Mir
Chandrabhan .
P&L, D2C, Channel & Product strategy, Growth Manager, Emerging Markets, Consumer goods, IOT, Sports, Behavioural Economist
One book that left most profound impact on my young mind was 'Why nations fail' by James Robinson. I still marvel at the lucidity with which such a serious topic is narrated. The simplicity of story must not take away form the deep thought and distilled wisdom contained. This wisdom can come handy in troubled times of today. Some may think of the Russia-Ukraine war but I am thinking more in terms of failure of America inspired and led (for some decades) new world order that came into being post WWII in 1945.
The birth of institutions i.e., United nations, World bank, IMF and a rules based order ("so called" in current climate), led to the longest peace (77 years) Europe and west had seen after centuries of bloodletting. In a way it was a cul de sac (end result) of 'Balance of power' principle. When I look at this with the benefit of hindsight, I see that Enlightenment age was nothing more than 'retreat' from the 'God' question for the west. After centuries of bloodletting west withdrew from this theological question and result was industrial age, everyone busy making money. The enlightenment preferred peace to ceaseless religious war. For peace, it was ready to pay the price of sweeping divisive religious questions under the carpet. Therefore "enlightenment" did the opposite of what the name suggests - it put the West into an "intellectual slumber."
9/11 forced the West to return to fundamental religious questions. Peter Thiel in his 'Straussian moment' argues both capitalism and the enlightenment shut out such questions over the last 500 years. Capitalism wants "violent debates about truth...eliminated" as they're not conducive to making money. Locke says that it is in humanity’s nature to know nothing about the nature of humanity, Schmitt responds that is equally a part of the human condition to be divided by such questions and to be forced to take sides.
In the West there's confusion on "why there should be a civilizational war at all." The West prefers to view the conflict as some miscreants resisting the legitimate project of liberal democracy, and skirts around entertaining the "larger meaning to the struggle". But one side's indifference to a civilizational war doesn't mean it won't be fought. As Leo Strauss wrote, in a conflict one side's actions “will depend to a certain extent on what the enemy—possibly an absolutely unscrupulous and savage enemy—forces it to do.”
Similarly west has got so enamoured of its own PR that it has forgotten that 'separation of church and state' is a purely western European phenomenon. It started believing its own stories that any interference by religion ( in money making and statecraft) will lead to bloodshed. They forgot an important European Nation, another matter that western Europe doesn't consider Slavs as Europeans enough.
Does the word 'Russky mir', or Russian World, mean something to you? It epitomizes an expansionist and messianic Russian foreign policy, the perverse intersection of the interests of the Russian state and the Russian Orthodox Church. Little noted is that the term actually means something quite different for each party. For the state it is a tool for expanding Russia's cultural and political influence, while for the Russian Orthodox Church it is a spiritual concept, a reminder that through the baptism of Rus, God consecrated these people to the task of building a Holy Rus.
Church is the most important institution in Russky Mir.
Russia's relations with the West go through cycles that reflect its notion of honor.3 By honor he means the basic moral principles that are popularly cited within a culture as the reason for its existence, and that inform its purpose when interacting with other nations. Over the past two centuries, in pursuit of its honor, Russia has cooperated with its European neighbors, when they have acknowledged it as part of the West; responded defensively, when they have excluded Russia; and assertively, when they have been overtly hostile to Russia's sense of honor.
Now think of President Putin's speeches in past 9 years and the points he made in 2018 again about the dangers of American unilateralism. The point he made couple of days back as well about 'Cancel culture', Woke politics etc. His speech at the 2013 Valdai Club meeting, he did not explicitly say what values Russia stood for, what its sense of honor demanded. It was at this meeting that Putin first laid out his vision of Russia's mission as an Orthodox power in the 21st century.
He began speech by noting that the world has become a place where decency is in increasingly short supply. Countries must therefore do everything in their power to preserve their own identities and values, for "without spiritual, cultural and national self-definition . . . . one cannot succeed globally." Russia's case the long-term national interest revolves around three constants:
Recommended by LinkedIn
All three of these involve, to a greater or lesser extent, the defense of Orthodox Christianity, of the Russian Orthodox Church, and of Orthodox Christians around the world. Now think of Ukraine, a nation of Eastern slavs, spiritual heartland of Kievan-Russ, breaking the Eastern orthodox church, moving westward.
Western social studies ( I hate to call them sciences) insist that modernization would render traditional cultural and religious values irrelevant. The modern alternative, which pioneer political scientists Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba labelled "civic culture," gravitates toward cultural homogeneity and secularism. These qualities lead to political stability and economic progress. The pattern is exemplified by Anglo-American societies which, they conclude, form the optimal model for a modern society. Fukuyama's end of history almost declaring modern democracy as epitome of human endeavour and answering of civilisational question is just a manifestation.
With the rise of China and collapse of USSR leads me to think that secularism or democracy may not be the only ways for human progress. In Putin's mind, reincorporating Eastern Christianity into Western civilisation reveals Russia as a vital part of Western civilisation, and requires that Russia be part of any discussion of western values which West denies. Thus the attempts to undermine the unity of the Russky mir by weening away Ukraine and bombing Serbia (earlier) will be widely viewed as an attack on core values, not just in Russia but throughout the Russian World. Economic, political, cultural, and other sanctions will intensify this effect and sharply undermine intellectual and emotional sympathies for the West within this community.
Demonisation of Russian people as a whole i.e., sizing assets, confiscating wallets in online platforms, putting sanctions, calls to throw out students will create newer set of enemies for future. The only permanent solution is for the Ukrainian government to admit the pluricultural nature of Ukrainian society and, in effect, recognize Ukraine as part of the Russky mir. From the Church's perspective, this is the only way to achieve reconciliation among the Ukrainian people and harmony within the Russky mir.
As I said, Church is the state in Russky Mir, make it part of the west values.
Soon enough West has to wake up to the reality of Islam and States with majority muslim population are entwined too. 9/11 settled that question but west have not come to terms with it.
Credits:
Prof Andrei Tsygankov's interviews/Books
Peter Theil : Straussian moment