How Russia went wrong, as told from the inside

I know many Russians and have to admit that some are blaming the Jews for Communism indeed. Haven’t seen a single Stalin-lover so far. I suspect most of the latter belongs to the older groups. As for nostalgy about Soviet Union it is very different than that you are talking about and rarely connected to Communism. From my experience the people missing it are mostly immigrants from the Stans, both Russians who were persecuted and moved and Stan’s nationals who like it best in Russia. Another group are retired former military and government employees.

You've forged the spectrum of opinions existing in Russia into one and put it inside a single person's mind. No wonder this Russian looks totally schizophrenic. I could do the same with an American. Imagine a hybrid of an Arizona's hillbilly and a New-York's LGBTQ activist.

I seriously think that you need more research to get what features the Russians value in the different governments they've had.

Freelance Warrior, we take for granted American fixtures like regional diversity. Red States. Blue States. The Bible-thumping uncle married to the hippie aunt.

Consider this observation by a Spanish diplomat on his visit to Russia:

A Spanish diplomat once said to me: “What a strange country you have! I traveled from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok, everyone speaks the same language, the same plays are in the theater, the same topics are in newspapers and on television. We have regional diversity, different languages, different groups, it’s all brewing, debating, boiling, and you have everything monotonous. “

And this is a fact. At us regional differences are more important, than social group, than differences on incomes or by formation, on valuable installations. And after the monopoly on the media was established, the previous fixed differences between the groups - depending on education, age and other - were completely erased. Today there is no difference between a professor and a peasant.

~ Lev Gudkov, one of Russia’s most respected sociologist and pollsters.

Excuse the rough internet translation. The original article is in Russian.
https://newizv.ru/article/general/20-11-2017/lev-gudkov-u-nyneshnego-obschestva-net-predstavleniya-o-buduschem

Freelance Warrior. You say, “I seriously think that you need more research to get what features the Russians value in the different governments they’ve had.”

Yes, and I’m sure back in Nazi times, you’ll find Germans who can list off pro’s and con’s of their government too. DOesn’t change the fact that the country had to reject and denounce Nazism outright in order to move forward. To repent.

NorseViking, you will find young people, who were born after the USSR collapsed are also nostalgic for the Soviet Union based on the romanticized reminisces of relatives.

I think this excerpt below better describes modern-day Russian consciousness with a few exceptions of course. George Orwell called it “doublethink.”

doublethink - the acceptance of or mental capacity to accept contrary opinions or beliefs at the same time, especially as a result of political indoctrination

In today’s Russia it is a coping mechanism by which to proceed with life under an increasingly repressive regime. Putin’s regime itself can be summed up as one big doublethink experiment, as the entire State is predicated upon the tension of contradictory beliefs.

This is why the anniversary of 1917 Revolution is such touchy subject! One one hand Putin is a descendant of the Bolshevik legacy. On the other hand, he wants to rule like a tsar and discourage any echo of revolution or protest to stir among the people.

As was said in an earlier post, it’s not uncommon to see both an icon of Jesus and a portrait of Stalin side by side in a Russian home.
Lev Gudkov describes:

“Of course, he does not want to change his ideas. For very different reasons. On the one hand, he has his own set of illusions and expectations. On the other hand, there is an underlying fear, self-censorship, and some things he simply taboo and does not perceive, blocks them. This all comes, conditionally speaking, in the collective subconscious, and this also determines the choice of the source of the desired information, and the choice of authority, if there are authorities, and submission to the opinion of the majority. Therefore, mass consciousness is fundamentally contradictory, stereotyped, and in our case also has what Orwell called doublethink - the simultaneous preservation of the importance of completely opposite installations. But if unravel, we see that each of these educated components that are incompatible from the point of view of a specialist or person simply responds to different normative expectations or demands from others. All this remained to us as a legacy from the Soviet Union and the experience of collective adaptation to a repressive state.”

Whoever this Spanish diplomat was he must have been smoking pot during all the trip. Or that Mr. Gudkov, whose name I've learned from you inspite of being a Russian national writing this from Russia. The Tatar autonomous republic is the same as a central Russian province? Really? What about Chechnya? Senior folks share the same values with those born in the 70s or 80s? Don't think so. The liberal intelligentsia advocate the same as the discharged military people or the emerged businesspeople? Come on, you must be kidding!

While the literary Russian language may not have drastic regional differences, it has them, especially in pronounciation. But, if we get to the country we'll have a hell lot of dialects, which differ even grammatically, like having the definite article or using perfect participles.

But the original point wasn't about this: all the opinions that exist in Russia, are of different people. You pretend that a single person may have contradictory views at the same time. In fact, he or she may not. This person is just pressing for a side which he thinks important and is ignoring the others.

To understand a people you need to grasp their values which may be very different from what you've previously thought they were. Russia isn't a poor version of America, or a gone version of it. It's a different country which has been developing in its own conditions, confronting the challenges that a Western European country has never had. Knowing Russian you could learn that, even free of charge, just out of several historical videos on Youtube. Actually, grasping the country takes a whole career from a foreigner, not spending a year inside.

Before I go into more detail: please read my prior posts on the thread regarding complexity of Russian population makeup esp with regard to Muslims from republics within the Federation plus Central Asia.

Gudkov’s point is that for the Putin regime to have lasted this long and to keep going - at least the veneer of mass conformism (Soviet holdover) was necessary and was voluntary plus enforced act on the part of the Russian population *as a whole* in the name of stability. Putin has been very mindful about regional governor appointments...like Kadyrov and giving economic perks to Chechnya. To keep people happy and divisions at bay.

Its a phenomenon that doesn’t find comparison in US because here debate and division is enshrined in the system.

I agree with you regarding diversity. I live in Los Angeles - itself a tapestry, and am surrounded daily (especially to practice Russian) by immigrants from former Soviet states as varied as Azerbaijan, lotttts of Armenians, and Georgia etc...

But also different generations of ethnic Russians and Ukrainians.

Putin’s attempts to suppress native languages in regions like Tatarstan have received some pushback. Among a host of other things.

People may be divided in private and at the kitchen tables...but open dissent is repressed and to thrive and get on with life, you have to conform.

Simple as that.

American communists would not have permitted a de-Bolshevikisation of Russia.

regarding complexity of Russian population makeup esp with regard to Muslims from republics within the Federation plus Central Asia.

Russia indeed has Muslim population who are native residents around Volga and in North Caucasus. There are also migrant workers. There are known facts. What is especially bad in this? This situation isn't much different from the Western Europe.

Gudkov’s point is that for the Putin regime to have lasted this long and to keep going - at least the veneer of mass conformism (Soviet holdover) was necessary and was voluntary plus enforced act on the part of the Russian population *as a whole* in the name of stability.

He's right at this point, but the thing is that's only one reason and not a main reason. The mainest is that Putin has accepted the dysfunctional state of Russia which was the fault of liberal failures: Gorbachev, Yeltsyn, Gaidar, etc and made it... a peaceful liveable country. A one where business disputes are settled in court, not by a shoot-out. That's the main reason why Putin has has public support.

Putin has been very mindful about regional governor appointments...like Kadyrov and giving economic perks to Chechnya.

And what is bad in this?

Putin’s attempts to suppress native languages in regions like Tatarstan have received some pushback. Among a host of other things

That's simply untrue. The issue was mandatory native languages courses in some schools in Tatarstan. The devil is in the detail.

People may be divided in private and at the kitchen tables...but open dissent is repressed and to thrive and get on with life, you have to conform.

Are you forgetting something? Like social networks, "The Echo of Moscow" radio station, "Rain" TV channel, and a bunch of newspapers, like the "Novye Izvestia" you have sited? The fact that the aforementioned Mr. Gudkov has a job in an state university, so he's the government employee is also remarkable.

DOesn’t change the fact that the country had to reject and denounce Nazism outright in order to move forward.

That's just because that they lost a war and had to repent at the gunpoint. They didn't need it to move forward. They were damn advanced at that time: leaders in technology, science and work ethics. They've been such before their defeat - since the second half of the XIX century, and they still are.

Believing Mr. Kovalev's evaluative statements on Russia (he's not very generous with facts and logics) is like believing those on America by Edward Said, Richard Falk or Noam Chomsky).

This garbage is the one to be thrown into a paper bin before reading.