Vladimir Putin became the hero of a documentary film by Oliver stone, who hopes to draw a straight line with the American people. The question “why Putin” has the same meaning as the question, why Zvyagintsev chose family, not loving your child when there are so many loving. Art explores the equally right and wrong, Jew and Greek, slave and free, and wrong even more often. In addition to stone’s Putin — loving, trying to love.
For Putin, an interview with stone is one way to reach out to ordinary Americans with whom communication block elite. Version of the Soviet era about the workers of the capitalist countries who would like to be friends with first country of victorious socialism, but the bourgeoisie will not let me, reincarnated in the timely submission that the peoples of the West are much less hostile to Russia than its elite. Both generally true, but both are wrong in measuring the temperature of people’s feelings: people are not more friendly and more indifferent, but the intelligentsia, then what is now charged polar: spit — kiss, on the one hand, Oliver stone, on the other — Senator McCain.
Putin, Oliver stone took the film interviews from Chavez, Morales, Lula da Silva and other left-wing fighters against Washington in Latin America — fans of Marx and Castro. From the Old world that seems capricious. From Europe many of them look irresponsible anti-American populist with dictatorial tendencies, but if to take wider, will be in the same row as Havel and Walesa, the fighters for democracy and national sovereignty, against dictatorships imposed by a powerful neighbor.
Putting Putin in a number of dissidents-the winners, the stone gives him the kind of recognition that he has long been looking for: you call me dictator, and I a dissenter, a rebel, a liberator, just need to look wider, your eyes. A real world dictatorship is the American democracy, liberal on the inside, but authoritarian on the outside, this propaganda is not RT and not the Iranian news Agency FARS (who reads the news Agency FARS), and the whole set of English-language media; not the modest Russian money, the crumbs which fall to foreign friends, and the Almighty, and endless American. In these harsh conditions not so surprising that the rebel disguises, cunning, requires discipline in the ranks, the punishment of traitors and the observance of democratic centralism.
Such a view of things there is a reasonable basis: the title of the disturber and violator of the world order is not distributed to countries as far from the United States political system and those who are not able to maintain the order and minimally decent level of living. At first many of the opponents of the West lose him friendly Eastern monarchy and the far East (and before and Latin American) dictatorship, the second — most countries in Africa, or even India. It is distributed to those who make important policy decisions without consulting. And especially to those who require to went to him for advice, dangerously multiplying the number of global centres of decision-making.
Rejected the immunity of the Western security system without getting in the West, a positive answer to the main Russian question “do You respect me?” in the form of equal participation in world Affairs, a visa-free regime, the withdrawal of tacit restrictions on Russian investments in Western economies, the abolition of missile defense and refusal to expand NATO, Vladimir Putin is gradually drawn into a rebellion against the establishment of the world and moved to the Western side of antielitist in which he saw his natural allies in the struggle for justice. When the world utilitaria power began to rise and claim to power, it looked as if they rise up and claim Alliance with Putin and almost because of him.
However, investing in world antielitism, President Putin himself was a victim. This is outside of the country it revolutionary, but in Russia, the elite, against which the world his rebel allies. Even without intra-elite nomination in his history itself seventeen-year stay in power makes the policy of the head of establishment independently of the more or less intense, going to the people. Almost heading from the point of view of Western intellectuals, the fight against the global establishment, at home, he increasingly feels the same pressure as the Western elite. The rebel seeks the storm outside, and gets in. And now Navalny out with the youth antilichamen rebellion, and the same young occupiers of wall street, which puts the example of peers RT, literally under the same slogans occupy Tverskaya street.
The main opponent of Putin in the last months is a model antielitist Alexei Navalny, elusive, like Putin himself, from a classic pair of definitions of “right — left”, “internationalist — cosmopolitan”, “liberal — conservative”. But his “corruption” and “corrupt” (of course, we have multiple and real) — a synonym for the elite and a symbol of the “unfair system” as for the invaders wall street all currently appropriated notorious one percent of the rich.
The hole is from the future
The fact of the international dissidence Russia is quite real. America offers the world a monastery, linovitsky dystopia: discard subjectivity, sofikitis will listen to Dean and be happy. The problem with the content of the Russian rebellion. At its core though the draught blows and flickers the void as the facade of the Palace on the stage of the classical theatre, no rooms, no stairs, no, in General, residents.
Rebellion against in order not to be subject to someone else’s good deeds for the right of choice — an ancient and noble story. But, as often happens with revolutions, it is “against”, but there is no clarity in the “vision of the future”, which is now trying to put special departments of the Russian government.
If you try to transmit in a nutshell, what is Putin’s project, including the collective world of Putin — is a stopping time, not moments, and best of all at once. To delay and prevent the onset of peace children from three parents, families of two or more persons of either sex, the Google of lenses, projecting the image directly onto the retina, steak grown from stem cells, women bishops and ravines (became a priestess!), brain connectivity with satellite Internet on Wi-Fi, socialized state sovereignty, mutual Lancaster learning and other more or less fictional surprises of the future.
In this sense, Putin is really revolutionary project. There is no contradiction. The future is fraught with a new inequality: some time to navigate, others are not. When the economy, technology, politics, culture are beginning to overtake the social structures the revolutionaries are coming, and in response to public fears promise to ride a restive future in favor of the people, all to return to a comfortable state of justice and equality. It is necessary to return the old one and break in and capture, assign, process new to it is not us, and we did.
Any revolution combines progressive experiments with conservative results. The Bolshevik restored communal land ownership and absolutism, Maoist China and Cambodia drove the city to the village; Mexican 1810 began with the dissatisfaction with the prohibition of the Jesuits and their schools; the Hungarian 1848 against Habsburg attempts to impose equality of the Hungarian nobility with whatever class, give the traditional Hungarian freedom only for the noble; the Polish “Solidarity”, as Russian Novocherkassk, came out of the 1979 revolt against the liberalization of prices; left-wing Burmese officers decided that the people will be happy in the village, and for decades, delayed industrialization; the Iranian Islamic revolution was against Bazaar supermarket; the Soviet perestroika was a lot of longing for the Silver age and the passage of the Emperor through the fire; the “Arab spring” relied on religious experiences, Eastern European movement to the West on nationalistic feelings, and that and another — not the cutting edge of modernity. Recent revolutions — brickset, the election trump, the rapid rise of Macron to bypass the parties, and the national youth call Bulk too.
In Russia suffer from the isolation of the ruling bureaucracy, which has ceased to reliably transmit signals up and down and live for yourself. But for many Americans, the separation of the top from the people is a passion of his own establishment obscure global mission.
We are living in a time when the vanguard of humanity has gone too far, and suspected of treason. Tensions arose between the leaders and the rest of the development, and there are policies that offer ways this tension is resolved in favor of the majority: stop those who ran forward were forced to report back the furniture as they were. Ethnically motivated acquisition of territory, which was the last straw in the West’s attitude to Russia, and it’s also a return to the thorough European antiquity, and the ban on him is doubtful novelty.
The contents of the Russian revolt is not unique: once we do not take in leaders of our time — drop a line from it and become a Troll. In a similar sentiment long dwells Iran and the Arab world, now they are joined by Turkey and India, Poland, Hungary, America and Britain. Let us have good old England, brick factories and Smoking chimneys, and yellow Thames water is a symbol of economic power, Europe of the XIX century, where sovereign great powers agree with each other. Return of the old Europe, not Muslims, Arabs, without the poles — as you like. Russia mother of Russian cities, Kiev. And inside — back of the elite control over the people.
Resistance and expansion
Response to the global revolt of Russia seem exaggerated. Announced that Russia is simultaneously conducts subversive activities from the Philippines to America, and nothing bad in the world happens without her. From the outside it looks ridiculous, Russia has no such resources. But what if it was? If she was the most powerful army in the world, the largest economy, most advanced technology, half the world would speak her language and was paying her currency, she would be held more modest than the US now? Would require equality and a multi-polar world? Recognize someone else’s subjectivity? What conclusions can be draw from her current behavior? And what would she have offered the world, becoming super-strong?
At the heart of these fears lies the true intuition. What is the danger of local projects for the return of the past? They quickly turn into global projects. The government, which is building socialism in a single area understands that we need a world revolution. At least in some critically a significant number of countries. Because if he is wrong, the world will overtake him and be crushed, as it happened.
A conservative nationalist, a supporter of racial theory, the bearer of the ideas of religious and class superiority are interested in that the principles on which he builds his state, would spread to other. The one who wants to return to good old Germany with the artisans instead of soulless conveyor, France, borders of Russia with the great public construction projects is questionable privateers intuitively understand that by returning, they will begin to lag. So to keep up, it is better to conquer the rest of the world. Hence the inevitable pull any revolutionary expansion.
Any world dissident, global revolutionary, especially in the early stages, always and even expansionist. After all, if it will preserve or fail the experiment in a separate area, others will overtake, and the loss will be difficult to hide. Even the current relatively peaceful Russian revolt led to the attempt to create a conservative international.
Opponents of our dissent confuses not only by its fact, but the inevitable expansion (revolutionary a revolutionary party). Here is an amazing talk about the fact that Russia is the main enemy of the liberal world order, the threat, worse (forbidden) ISIS and all the rest of it. Although the ISIS — an extreme form of the same rebellion, the same craving for internationalization, so where is there to be a lot scarier.
Russia’s role as a dissident-an expansionist, who, like every revolutionary, ready for great risks and inconveniences, and it is strong, grasped her critics right. The wickedness of these interpretations at this stage that Putin may have been not so much the main threat to the liberal world order as the personification of rebellion. However, now this role was taken over by President trump.
The system was not ready for such a crash program when the country leading the world order, in turn, is headed by an opponent of the order. Hence the desire to replace trump Putin, whose practical danger has always been limited by the modest possibilities of his country, and now his symbolic role undermined by overly long tenure, and emerged on the horizon of the transitional period.
At the main entrance
“Putin has no equal in experience among the world leaders,” says Oliver stone in an interview about his film. The question of how Putin looks at trump, Macron, Boris Johnson, I often say, like a master for beginners with experience. However, long stay in power starts to work against the image of the President-rebel. Good rebel, which outlasted the power of any of the kings. The eternal revolutionary, as the eternal student, always a little ridiculous.
In fact, Putin and revolutionary and dissident Russia is a misunderstanding. Donald trump by birth and citizenship — a member of the prestigious closed club, just like Theresa may or Emmanuel macron. The desire to shake the sleepy club a Kingdom, raise the dusty blinds, wash the Windows, drive managers to him naturally. Russia, by contrast, wants membership in the club, but with those of the dusty curtains, the bald lackeys and leisurely old by the cylinder. This fight is not for the new order of things, and for their own adherence to the old.
The current dissidence Russia, rather the form than the content, a derivative of its comparative weakness. Similarly, the program of the conservative rebellion, declared by the leadership, is not so much a deep conviction, as the design in reverse. If global Yevtushenko was against the collective farms, Putin could be as it is now, after the US withdrawal from the TRANS-Pacific partnership and the Paris climate agreement, protectionist China suddenly finds himself the guardian of the global economy and goes instead of trump in Davos.
The revolutionary character of Putin and Russia is a shell, the operator of negation of negation. Not the wind raging over the forest, not from the mountains ran streams. It is directed not to reject the establishment and to become them.