In the German debate on the Russian anti-Putin camp, the problematic aspects of this milieu are often ignored. The Russian perspective continues to be prioritized other those of the colonized.
One cannot agree more with what you have written, it is actually quite obviously true.
Let me offer one more reason of this ‘romanticization’ of Russia. Russian culture is indeed very interesting for Western audience because it is similar enough to be (on the surface at least) understandable, while at the same time it is different enough to be interesting and ‘oriental’. Indeed, Russia is Byzantine via Orthodox Christianity and Mongolian/Chinese via Golden Horde. So, one finds it interesting enough while sufficiently understandable. Russia, as a country, has often used this argument of its ‘great culture’. And of course, when we don’t understand somebody’s approach, when we don’t find rationale behind it - we are likely to classify as ‘oh, it is so romantic’. In fact, there is little romantic in Russia’s approach - it is all very much down to basic values. The problem is that Russian values are indeed very different to the Western liberal values - this is the reason, why Russians are ‘misunderstood’ and therefore ‘romanticized’. And this approach is easily transferred upon entire Russian society.
Pair it with desire for easy labelling, good or bad, Hollywood-style approach. Putin is bad so - logically - his enemies must be good. Obvious and easy, little space for nuance.
Thank you for this clear writing and for explaining the ‘prioritization’ of Russian perspectives so well. The irony is that other colonized people should recognize this, but we/they in Asia, Africa, Latin America are incapable of seeing this. I have my theories as to why…
Thank you! I wold like to hear your theory. I have been thinking about this a lot. Have you heard about RUTA? It’s a new scholarly network, I was among the co-founders and we would like to get such a global conversation about colonialism going. https://ruta-association.org/
Ok, will get back soon with my thoughts. And no, I did not know about RUTA. Just checked it out online. Thank you for letting me know. Not my field (in my day job), but very interested and curious as about such topics — including what you are currently working on.
This criticism is mostly valid and OK from the eastern European perspective, since even if some things may prove to be exaggerated, it is generally a good idea to overcriticize the politicians rather than praise them.
But I think the problem with western scholars is that you sometimes use some concepts that were developed in completely different cultural context and are not easily transferrable elsewhere. At least not without clarification.
It’s a nice move to try and sell the concept of ‘russian colonialism’ to the western audience, since they do not seem to care about any tragedy unless you use the well-recognized optics and buzzwords. That’s what Maksym Eristavi does and that’s what I like about him - he uses the optics to raise awareness of the fact that Russia has a long history of imperialist thinking.
But it is to be remembered that russian colonialism has a different history, a different dynamics than the one that was recognized and heavily criticized in the anglo-saxon and francophone intellectual communities. Same applies to japanese colonialism, chinese colonialism, ottoman colonialism etc. It must be reminded from time to time that the premise of various imperialist ideologies may differ. Different tactics are used, different beliefs are held, and sometimes different goals are achieved. The anglo-saxon approach to colonialism was built on a very different set of ‘values’ (in an anthropological sense) than russian one. It was ‘scientific’, based on the notions of social Darwinism of Spencer and so-called dialectics of Enlightenment. China is fixated on its internal security and social integrity, and Russia was mostly reactive to the western trends and politics, at least since the Romanovs. Reactive as in ‘always chasing its western complex’ not as in ‘being under constant threat from the west’. In my opinion they have developed a unique mixture - instead of justifying their barbarism with ‘white man’s burden’, they usually claim to be freeing people from oppression, giving them new opportunities. And they always say something like ‘other nations would enslave you, we are setting you free and uplifting you’.
Of course all they do is make you a human resource in the end (as cheap workforce or as military asset to save the white Muscovites from dying), but only if you come from the nearby territories that could be annexed. For the nations of South America or Africa they have a different face: a compassionate ally that wants nothing in return for its help with your struggle. And there will be favors in the future, but not today. They really contributed to anti-colonial movement of the 20th century, because this was the product they were selling abroad. And it was reactive to the western policy - if the West had a different history and was known as the advocate of suppressed nations, Russia would be claiming that this is the policy of the weak, that the Global South countries should be uplifted and modernized as soon as possible. They would even create their own Spencerist ideology just to counter the West they both adored and feared. Russia was playing this game of deception at least since few centuries. Always under the inferiority complex, trying to impress the outsiders, and on the other hand trying to appear as better from them. In every sense. Bear in mind that if today’s West was homophobic like in the 50s, Russians would sponsor pro-LGBT movements these days.
And this did not begin with the Soviets. It was well established since The Great Game. You’re a historian so you know it better than me.
I think this is why Navalny and others also have no other option than to play the ball. The Russian mindset of an average white Muscovite is entrenched in these ideas. “The West has to respect us”, “we are better westerners than the West”, “why do they hate us?”, “they should fear us” - all these contradictory statements can be said just by one white Moscow oblast resident. it’s futile to tell them about the contradictions: they will just reject what you say. Believe me, I’ve been there multiple times. They can engage in a philosophical debate about god or justice with you, they can present a Dostoyevsky-like arguments, but not when it comes to their national fears and aspirations. They refuse to think. It is too painful to confront with the truth if you feel humiliated all the time. You think you are the victim and all your aggressive actions are justified. “I remeber the 90’s” - they would scream. “I remember people begging for food” - they would say. “Were you the one begging for food?” - you will ask. And they would give you the look that says “it doesn’t matter, you would not understand, you are just like the rest of them, trying to rob us of our dignity”. In fact, it does not matter whether someone was really a victim of the capitalist transformation or its beneficiary. They will never say anything else to the westerner. They think it’s better if you feel guilty about them if you can’t ‘respect’ them. Even if you come from countries like Poland, that have experienced literally the same painful transformation, the Russians will say you are just the imperialist's puppet.
And it is not because they really believe themselves to be anti-imperialist. They are just hurt by the fact that not everything is about them. They do not care if others also suffer, because they think they have suffered more and sometimes even believe that you have built something on their suffering. Analogies to typical American Karens are obvious, but they are mixed with this particular eastern fatalism and sense of disillusion. So you cannot tell the Russians they are entitled in any way or that they behave like imperialists sometimes and should look at the damage they caused to others. You can’t even tell them the elites and oligarchs are evil. They will instantly feel attacked - yeah, first you come for the oligarchs, and then for us, the ordinary people who happen to have some goods stolen from Ukraine in our houses. And what next? You will come to humiliate us all, YOU UNGRATEFUL PIG, DON’T YOU REMEBER WE HAVE FREED YOU FROM THE GERMANS???
So that’s why you can’t really talk about Ukraine in your public speeches if you try to gain any popular support in Russia. It would mean that there is someone out there who suffers more than you and you are partially to blame. You don’t even have to say it explicitly for the crowd to assume you think so. Because if you care so much for Russia, why do you speak of the others? “You talk about sympathy? Don’t we deserve sympathy? We didn’t want this war. It’s good that it’s out there because now they fear us and they tried to attack us before, but we didn’t want this war. But since it’s there we cannot show weakness! They will exploit it! We can make peace but we won’t be humiliated by the yanks like the Japanese were! And if we gained some territory we should keep it just in case!”.
We won’t probably know if Navalny and other figures do really possess this mindset unless they come into the position of power. But being outspoken about the fate of Ukrainians is a political suicide in Russia. Of course I don’t trust any politician and now I can’t bring myself to trust any Russian at all, but from neutral point of view it cannot easily be assessed whether these people share the same values as their target voters group or do they just need to play ball and avoid any suspicion. Because I know for sure that even if your goal was to dismantle Russian imperialism and undo the wrongdoings, you would be smart not to advertise it. When Gorbachev did it, he was literally imprisoned by the reactionaries in his villa and the brainwashed military was prepared to shoot at civilians in Moscow.
As for the reason Navalny went back to Russia: it’s another part of this game. He didn’t want to be a martyr - Russian history is full of martyrs and no political capital was gained on this martyrdom. He needed to be there because otherwise no Russian would respect him. It is believed among these Mongol descendants that you have to stand your ground no matter the costs, you have to take the risks. Otherwise you are a pariah. You do not count. If you show strength, people may even give you way - just like they gave it to Prighozyn during his theatrical coup attempt. And there is the question of Russian political elite. You may suspect some of them are anti-Putin or are eager to abandon him if opportunities arise. You may suspect some would ally with you. But they will not talk to you. They will not give you any sign of readiness. This culture has a tradition of not showing affection in politics and of hiding your true intentions to the end. So unless you actually take a raid on Moscow, you may not know who is exactly with you. Unless you return to the country you will not know if you would be killed or if your return will cause some commotion and awaken the rouge factions, giving you the opportunity.
I know it sounds crazy. But anything related to cultural issues may sound crazy until it’s understood in its own terms. Don’t try to look at Russia through the western lens - it is of no use.
It would be interesting to know how much of the ‘good Russia, bad regime’ rhetoric of Navalny and the other opposition figures is tactical and how much is heartfelt. If there’s a degree of playing down the blame of ordinary Russians in order to preserve the possibility of building popular support amongst them - that might have some justification. It would still be a inadequate stance but less troubling than a truly emotional nationalism that simply seeks to replace Putin with a more modern face, and eventually implement a less crude version of domination.
…rusha is a GENETIC GARBAGE, it’s not derogatory it’s what happens when throughout the whole history of the country and last century they literally exterminated all intelligent and free thinking people generation to generation and only people left who oppressed them or those who kept their mouth shut in order to survive, that country always was full of criminals, not much to lose there, we used to say if someone got locked up, they got from a “big prison” to a “small” one, major problem of putin’s country that it HAS NO HUMAN RESOURCES to build society that makes sense for the rest of the world, its all gone with all those republics, which they were milking all through the soviet years, to become their own sovereign entities, which infuriated putin, a country of people who never ever think of their future because everyone knows nothings good is coming tomorrow, dreadful place in and out, Ukraine on the other hand is different, but it’s three times smaller population then rusha and its loses are very unequal not by quantity, but by quality of loses with future potential to rebuild their country, any war is a horrible thing, specially for the nation that did not want it, but have to face it and spend precious resources not on making their people live better, but for the simple task to survive, FUCK putin ! …GLORY TO UKRAINE 🇺🇦 !
Hi,
Warme Gruesse aus Warschau.
One cannot agree more with what you have written, it is actually quite obviously true.
Let me offer one more reason of this ‘romanticization’ of Russia. Russian culture is indeed very interesting for Western audience because it is similar enough to be (on the surface at least) understandable, while at the same time it is different enough to be interesting and ‘oriental’. Indeed, Russia is Byzantine via Orthodox Christianity and Mongolian/Chinese via Golden Horde. So, one finds it interesting enough while sufficiently understandable. Russia, as a country, has often used this argument of its ‘great culture’. And of course, when we don’t understand somebody’s approach, when we don’t find rationale behind it - we are likely to classify as ‘oh, it is so romantic’. In fact, there is little romantic in Russia’s approach - it is all very much down to basic values. The problem is that Russian values are indeed very different to the Western liberal values - this is the reason, why Russians are ‘misunderstood’ and therefore ‘romanticized’. And this approach is easily transferred upon entire Russian society.
Pair it with desire for easy labelling, good or bad, Hollywood-style approach. Putin is bad so - logically - his enemies must be good. Obvious and easy, little space for nuance.
Exactly. Very important article.
many thanks for your feedback!
👏👏👏
Thank you so much for your feedback! Means a lot to me.
Thank you for an amazing essay, Franziska! I wish more people had the clarity and understanding you do.
Thank you for this clear writing and for explaining the ‘prioritization’ of Russian perspectives so well. The irony is that other colonized people should recognize this, but we/they in Asia, Africa, Latin America are incapable of seeing this. I have my theories as to why…
Thank you! I wold like to hear your theory. I have been thinking about this a lot. Have you heard about RUTA? It’s a new scholarly network, I was among the co-founders and we would like to get such a global conversation about colonialism going. https://ruta-association.org/
Ok, will get back soon with my thoughts. And no, I did not know about RUTA. Just checked it out online. Thank you for letting me know. Not my field (in my day job), but very interested and curious as about such topics — including what you are currently working on.
Dislike of the West, as start. Much more with factors such as Palestine
This criticism is mostly valid and OK from the eastern European perspective, since even if some things may prove to be exaggerated, it is generally a good idea to overcriticize the politicians rather than praise them.
But I think the problem with western scholars is that you sometimes use some concepts that were developed in completely different cultural context and are not easily transferrable elsewhere. At least not without clarification.
It’s a nice move to try and sell the concept of ‘russian colonialism’ to the western audience, since they do not seem to care about any tragedy unless you use the well-recognized optics and buzzwords. That’s what Maksym Eristavi does and that’s what I like about him - he uses the optics to raise awareness of the fact that Russia has a long history of imperialist thinking.
But it is to be remembered that russian colonialism has a different history, a different dynamics than the one that was recognized and heavily criticized in the anglo-saxon and francophone intellectual communities. Same applies to japanese colonialism, chinese colonialism, ottoman colonialism etc. It must be reminded from time to time that the premise of various imperialist ideologies may differ. Different tactics are used, different beliefs are held, and sometimes different goals are achieved. The anglo-saxon approach to colonialism was built on a very different set of ‘values’ (in an anthropological sense) than russian one. It was ‘scientific’, based on the notions of social Darwinism of Spencer and so-called dialectics of Enlightenment. China is fixated on its internal security and social integrity, and Russia was mostly reactive to the western trends and politics, at least since the Romanovs. Reactive as in ‘always chasing its western complex’ not as in ‘being under constant threat from the west’. In my opinion they have developed a unique mixture - instead of justifying their barbarism with ‘white man’s burden’, they usually claim to be freeing people from oppression, giving them new opportunities. And they always say something like ‘other nations would enslave you, we are setting you free and uplifting you’.
Of course all they do is make you a human resource in the end (as cheap workforce or as military asset to save the white Muscovites from dying), but only if you come from the nearby territories that could be annexed. For the nations of South America or Africa they have a different face: a compassionate ally that wants nothing in return for its help with your struggle. And there will be favors in the future, but not today. They really contributed to anti-colonial movement of the 20th century, because this was the product they were selling abroad. And it was reactive to the western policy - if the West had a different history and was known as the advocate of suppressed nations, Russia would be claiming that this is the policy of the weak, that the Global South countries should be uplifted and modernized as soon as possible. They would even create their own Spencerist ideology just to counter the West they both adored and feared. Russia was playing this game of deception at least since few centuries. Always under the inferiority complex, trying to impress the outsiders, and on the other hand trying to appear as better from them. In every sense. Bear in mind that if today’s West was homophobic like in the 50s, Russians would sponsor pro-LGBT movements these days.
And this did not begin with the Soviets. It was well established since The Great Game. You’re a historian so you know it better than me.
I think this is why Navalny and others also have no other option than to play the ball. The Russian mindset of an average white Muscovite is entrenched in these ideas. “The West has to respect us”, “we are better westerners than the West”, “why do they hate us?”, “they should fear us” - all these contradictory statements can be said just by one white Moscow oblast resident. it’s futile to tell them about the contradictions: they will just reject what you say. Believe me, I’ve been there multiple times. They can engage in a philosophical debate about god or justice with you, they can present a Dostoyevsky-like arguments, but not when it comes to their national fears and aspirations. They refuse to think. It is too painful to confront with the truth if you feel humiliated all the time. You think you are the victim and all your aggressive actions are justified. “I remeber the 90’s” - they would scream. “I remember people begging for food” - they would say. “Were you the one begging for food?” - you will ask. And they would give you the look that says “it doesn’t matter, you would not understand, you are just like the rest of them, trying to rob us of our dignity”. In fact, it does not matter whether someone was really a victim of the capitalist transformation or its beneficiary. They will never say anything else to the westerner. They think it’s better if you feel guilty about them if you can’t ‘respect’ them. Even if you come from countries like Poland, that have experienced literally the same painful transformation, the Russians will say you are just the imperialist's puppet.
And it is not because they really believe themselves to be anti-imperialist. They are just hurt by the fact that not everything is about them. They do not care if others also suffer, because they think they have suffered more and sometimes even believe that you have built something on their suffering. Analogies to typical American Karens are obvious, but they are mixed with this particular eastern fatalism and sense of disillusion. So you cannot tell the Russians they are entitled in any way or that they behave like imperialists sometimes and should look at the damage they caused to others. You can’t even tell them the elites and oligarchs are evil. They will instantly feel attacked - yeah, first you come for the oligarchs, and then for us, the ordinary people who happen to have some goods stolen from Ukraine in our houses. And what next? You will come to humiliate us all, YOU UNGRATEFUL PIG, DON’T YOU REMEBER WE HAVE FREED YOU FROM THE GERMANS???
So that’s why you can’t really talk about Ukraine in your public speeches if you try to gain any popular support in Russia. It would mean that there is someone out there who suffers more than you and you are partially to blame. You don’t even have to say it explicitly for the crowd to assume you think so. Because if you care so much for Russia, why do you speak of the others? “You talk about sympathy? Don’t we deserve sympathy? We didn’t want this war. It’s good that it’s out there because now they fear us and they tried to attack us before, but we didn’t want this war. But since it’s there we cannot show weakness! They will exploit it! We can make peace but we won’t be humiliated by the yanks like the Japanese were! And if we gained some territory we should keep it just in case!”.
We won’t probably know if Navalny and other figures do really possess this mindset unless they come into the position of power. But being outspoken about the fate of Ukrainians is a political suicide in Russia. Of course I don’t trust any politician and now I can’t bring myself to trust any Russian at all, but from neutral point of view it cannot easily be assessed whether these people share the same values as their target voters group or do they just need to play ball and avoid any suspicion. Because I know for sure that even if your goal was to dismantle Russian imperialism and undo the wrongdoings, you would be smart not to advertise it. When Gorbachev did it, he was literally imprisoned by the reactionaries in his villa and the brainwashed military was prepared to shoot at civilians in Moscow.
As for the reason Navalny went back to Russia: it’s another part of this game. He didn’t want to be a martyr - Russian history is full of martyrs and no political capital was gained on this martyrdom. He needed to be there because otherwise no Russian would respect him. It is believed among these Mongol descendants that you have to stand your ground no matter the costs, you have to take the risks. Otherwise you are a pariah. You do not count. If you show strength, people may even give you way - just like they gave it to Prighozyn during his theatrical coup attempt. And there is the question of Russian political elite. You may suspect some of them are anti-Putin or are eager to abandon him if opportunities arise. You may suspect some would ally with you. But they will not talk to you. They will not give you any sign of readiness. This culture has a tradition of not showing affection in politics and of hiding your true intentions to the end. So unless you actually take a raid on Moscow, you may not know who is exactly with you. Unless you return to the country you will not know if you would be killed or if your return will cause some commotion and awaken the rouge factions, giving you the opportunity.
I know it sounds crazy. But anything related to cultural issues may sound crazy until it’s understood in its own terms. Don’t try to look at Russia through the western lens - it is of no use.
It would be interesting to know how much of the ‘good Russia, bad regime’ rhetoric of Navalny and the other opposition figures is tactical and how much is heartfelt. If there’s a degree of playing down the blame of ordinary Russians in order to preserve the possibility of building popular support amongst them - that might have some justification. It would still be a inadequate stance but less troubling than a truly emotional nationalism that simply seeks to replace Putin with a more modern face, and eventually implement a less crude version of domination.
We'll never know whether Navalny's opinions were tactical or truly heartfelt because he was killed in a Russian prison.
But yes, do go on.
…rusha is a GENETIC GARBAGE, it’s not derogatory it’s what happens when throughout the whole history of the country and last century they literally exterminated all intelligent and free thinking people generation to generation and only people left who oppressed them or those who kept their mouth shut in order to survive, that country always was full of criminals, not much to lose there, we used to say if someone got locked up, they got from a “big prison” to a “small” one, major problem of putin’s country that it HAS NO HUMAN RESOURCES to build society that makes sense for the rest of the world, its all gone with all those republics, which they were milking all through the soviet years, to become their own sovereign entities, which infuriated putin, a country of people who never ever think of their future because everyone knows nothings good is coming tomorrow, dreadful place in and out, Ukraine on the other hand is different, but it’s three times smaller population then rusha and its loses are very unequal not by quantity, but by quality of loses with future potential to rebuild their country, any war is a horrible thing, specially for the nation that did not want it, but have to face it and spend precious resources not on making their people live better, but for the simple task to survive, FUCK putin ! …GLORY TO UKRAINE 🇺🇦 !