And once again against nationalism. For those who dig deeper.

From the blog of Oleg Matveicheva — collection of excerpts from interviews and articles.

Oleg Matveychev — political strategist and former advisor to the Russian president on domestic policy.


— And how do you feel about nationalism?


OM: To what? To the Ukrainian? By Georgia? Latvian? Poor. Russian? We have so it turns out: foreign nationalism is bad, but its good! Let us be fundamental: nationalism is good or bad or whatever. I loathe nationalism of the Poles or the Georgians. You, as I see too. But, mind you, they will be just as disgusting Russian nationalism. And I do not want anything to Russian sickened anyone else. Even the Poles. Nationalism is the inheritance of the nations that failed obsessed with historical inferiority complex. Why do this to us? And the danger is that Russia is now in a crucial phase includes what may be called demarginalization nationalism. Science captures the slogan "Russia for the Russian" support up to 15% of the population and about 30 agree that Russian should be privileged nation in Russia. Meanwhile, it is clear nationalism — the only danger that can really blow up and destroy the country. If you could make anyone in Washington or Beijing, London or Addis Ababa was planning to destroy Russia in 2015 and went through a variety of options, he would not have dared to act with the same methods that were once the Soviet Union fell apart. No article on "Stalin's repressions" today will not help. The people of Russia got immunity demshizoidnoy propaganda. There is only one way to blast the situation, one way to use the old principle of "divide and rule" — speculation on national, religious and cultural differences.Those who wish to destroy Russia, to realize that he needed to ignite the Caucasus that he needed to stir Tatarstan, it is necessary to cause unrest in Tuva, Buryatia, Yakutia, it is necessary to provoke unrest among several dozens of ethnic diasporas in Moscow. Enough to bring the match, and the consequences can be the most monstrous. About political stability and economic growth do not have to speak. Not accidentally, the oldest Russian dissidents and haters, take the same Weller, now trying hard to incite the Russian Muslims. If a war breaks out, it will save both Europe and America. They have long been dreaming of war with the Muslim world with our hands "to the last Russian." In Russia fifteen million Muslims, and even on the borders of 150 million! They had a falling out with the Russian — and there is no Russian. All intelligence agencies of the world is clear. It is not clear just "Russian patriots" who strenuously shouting about "black domination", about the "Russian for Russian", and along with about Judeo-Masonic conspiracy. Nationalism is dangerous by the fact that it can not be solved with the help of contracts and conversations. Conversely, calls on the national theme is not subject to the "logic of consensus", where the parties depart from the original radical opinions, and the "logic of disaster" when the parties are extreme radicals, the stronger the longer stretches conversation. Any discussion of national, religious and cultural differences is bad in itself. It's like that to rub salt into the wound and pour the fire with gasoline. It does not matter what you say. Speaking for nationalism or against, for or against the Russian, for or against the Tartars. Every time sitting in front of TV screens, the viewer begins to think, "And who am I? I'm Russian? Or Tartar? Or someone else? And if I Tartar, what obligations it imposes on me? It is necessary to learn the language, it is necessary to go to the mosque to hate Russian? And the other "…. So, instead of having to think about the salary, a television series about a professional career, think about all of anything, he gets off on unnecessary for the government thought of their national identity. But the problem is that distract from the themes of nationalism no longer be possible. This specificity of the present moment, this should have thought before. It's too late. Nationalism in fashion. So what? Now turn on the logic: "If you can not stop, you have to lead?". If so, it may be the Kremlin and the president to become chief nationalists in the country? No, it is suicidal, but this is not required. The Kremlin can not afford it, so it can not and should not be in a multinational country and lead osedlyvat ideology of nationalism, even this destructive ideology and gaining strength. But it is important to put the necessary emphasis. Nationalism is really hostile and destructive ideology of the country, which is used by the enemies of Russia and who, out of stupidity, addicted to it too big "friends." Nationalism can not lead to anything else, as a retaliatory nationalism of other ethnicities, in the end it destroys the country. Thus, with the nationalists is useless to fight, telling them about the horrors of social upheaval in the case of run-ins with the aliens. They think, "We do not care anymore, and we will still win, but it will not be black." Many nationalists willing to fight aliens in person, and even to die for the Holy Russia, which makes the heroic tone of life and death, which are now meaningless. War can not be intimidated, social upheavals as well. So what to do? Frighten, but to frighten others. The scary thing is that in the end will disappear only benefit Russia in the world, will disappear is what everyone is proud to be an all imbibed with mother's milk — VALUE OF RUSSIA. At this sacrifice even the nationalists are not ready to go. Many nationalists habits are still the imperialists. They think there may be a "Russia for the Russian" in the same range as the current Russian, and it is not. We have to show that the current Russian is not some "natural value" and the value for which we pay a certain uzhimaniem rights of the titular nation, we bear the "burden of the white man." The main thing that needs to be done in the field of ideology is to divorce and contrast nationalism and imperialism and to rehabilitate Imperialism! The view that Russia should be a small country with a native-Russian population uzhatsya Rusistana to as "the empire we can not afford to 'marginal and unpopular even among nationalists. Everybody wants Russia "from edge to edge." And the edge — this is just a huge Yakutia, Tuva, Buryatia, the Caucasus and so on. the compact-resident national population. Nationalists poked in the face of statistics, they say, Russian in Russia and 80% is mono-ethnic state … Yes, but they are not in the Caucasus, and 80% in Tuva, etc. But no one agrees on what to give to those in Turkey or China, then that the problems now because they have only become worse. And the great country we cease to be. So the imperialists are almost all Russian. Among the non-Russian ethnic groups, pride of habitation in a large majority of the country is experiencing, with this pride more than his own national and ethnic pride. And if the country is making progress, much more. They say that when Gagarin flew into space Chechens in the villages ran out of the house, fetched his grandfather's gun and saluted, embraced, with Ru
ssian as brothers. In Yakutia, the whole ulus came to the passport office and asked to record them as "Russian." They were proud of the whole country. And Russian and non-Russian imperialists more than the nationalists. Imperialism no longer be thought of as a nation of oppression of others. Empire of the highest form of the state and society (Previous, lower forms — this tribal society, followed by the "national state" and above them are the Empire), as the empire now — it's voluntary (before — forced) association of nations to achieve common historic goals (survival, economic development, the implementation of which -that the mission and so on.). Russians call to the nation-state ("Russian-Russian for") or to the tribal system as do the nationalists in the Caucasus, Buryatia, Tuva, and so on. it means to call BACK THERE FROM HISTORY.  

— Why Russian so relate to each other? Take any city in our country, as something only a dolzhnostishke appears Azerbaijani, Chechen, Armenian, then right at all positions in the organization also created his relatives, friends and countrymen. They hold each other all over the world as one family … The same thing in the military, to areas once they are grouped. And we? Russian diaspora scattered around the world and at home we behave like strangers to each other … we do not intercede for one another, but they are worth to offend the same mountain. Is this bad?

Yes, it's bad. And there is nothing to emulate. The whole point of different identities. Small nations have a tough tribal identity, aimed at excluding all sorts of influences and mutations coming from the outside. They are very closely watching to ensure that their language is not clogged by foreign words, to ensure compliance with customs, and everywhere stand up for their culture, which zakonserivarovana as rigid rules. They usually lived and formed in a hostile environment in the risk of extinction. They sharpened sense of self-preservation. The Czechs lived under a wagging of the Germans, under the influence of Austro-Hungarians. Naturally, they will always be a very clear distinction between "self" from "foreign" and fight for it as "his". The only way they survive and by maneuvering between different other nations. Biologists tell, I do not know if it's true that if the world will be a nuclear war and nuclear winter, the only living creatures that remain — it's cockroaches. They are not affected no radiation. Their genotype is so rigidly formed and firmly shot down, that he is not subject to any mutations. That's the kind of the "cockroach identity" is not affected by mutations to survive in the most adverse conditions, and given you a sample of our behavior. It is certainly good, but the cockroach — primitive and I'd like to be a cockroach. It is better to die. Russian are "risky identity ', they go on all sorts of mutations, the risk of infection from which they may die. But what does not kill you — makes you stronger. Our identity does not exclude the influence, and incorporates them. For example, our language calmly accepts foreign words. Our culture is constantly updated. Russian is not afraid of the new, on the contrary, put on the inclusion of this new one. Initially, Russian defined not by tribal basis, but as a super-ethnos, including Slavic, Turkic and Finno-Ugric elements. "Russian" — the name of the possessive, the answer to the question, "whose are you?" That is, "who are paying tribute to? '. Paid tribute to the "Russ", that is a kind of Varangian elite, who called himself a "Russian." Therefore, all steel and Russian. Russian identity is not supposed to think of anything specific, there is no "blood" and "soil". Russian can be arbitrary. Actually, if so, and continued, then everything would be fine, so we would have continued to include the peoples and countries as before. There were even projects include "arm the white king" of Mongolia and parts of China … But in the 19th century, unfortunately, started the destructive processes that have destroyed more than one empire. When the Greeks began to oppose itself to the other, the Byzantine Empire fell apart. When the Germans began to consider themselves more noble than the Czechs, Slovaks, Hungarians, Austria-Hungary collapsed. We also started on the Great division, Ukrainians, Belarusians. And having a rigid frame of identity, some signs of "Russian-ness" (light brown hair, blue eyes, Orthodox, samovars and balalaika, and more. Etc. conservatives favorite things, by the way, came to us from Italy, Japan and so on.). These processes have begun to split, when the Old Believers would oppose Orthodoxy around its own distinctive version. We are now the Armenians would be proud of the specific features of their religion. But Nikon, who thought an empire, and wanted to become an Orthodox "pope" realized that our religion should not separate us from the Orthodox world, but in this case, Russia will be able to become the leader of this world. Then failed to start thinking in frame "their" and "foreign", including the identity of our triumph, we have not given yourself to become a "special nation," we have not given yourself off from the world and to oppose him. The same Peter the Great, he was not a primitive Westerner, like Yushchenko and Saakashvili those times he did not want to run into the challah Europe, he was so fond of Europe, he wanted Russia to become the center of Europe, which means we do not have in their kostnet features of national and disguised as Europe, to merge with it, then to prevail in it. We have triumphed in the time of Catherine. And then the centrifugal tendencies are increasingly gaining momentum. As I said, there were Great Russians, Little Russians …. Although the Russian philosopher Soloviev dreamed of unity, some vseedinoy identity, his project has come true, but with a strange sauce proletarian internationalism, which has helped restore a multinational empire. But in the Russian Empire became a distinct people, thus laying a bomb and a potential collapse. It is necessary to think so: no Russian and non-Russian. All-Russian people. At least potentially. As Augustine said, emphasizing the universality of Christianity and capitalizing on his vast missionary opportunities that "every soul from birth — Christian," and we have to assume that all people are born — Russian, even if they do not know it. Unit, said: "We clearly all the sharp Gallic sense and gloomy German genius." Russia under Ivan the Third was a country with millions of people, as if we did not multiply, become 200millionny people we might only through the inclusion of other nations, we drove to the millions, and the Germans and the French, Italians and so on. In the world there is only one country where the same bet on innovation, inclusion and potential in the treatment of their nation. This is America. We and the Americans are the ones who generally do not concern self-preservation, as some small folk of the nation, such as the Poles, we are not afraid of self-destruction and foreign influence, because reborn from the ashes. Anyone can become an American and a narrow-eyed, and Latino and black. So America and became sverhimperiey. But it is just as exposed to the bacillus of conservation. Now she can not cope with assimilation. Negros and Latinos see themselves as something other Chinese and Japanese — do not assimilate, and the Anglo-Saxons emphasize that they are true Americans. It will destroy them. If we gradually adjust themselves to the fact that in the world there is no us and them, and all — ours, the whole world will be ours. If we hold on to their various historical forms and preserve them in opposition to others, save
for mutations, we also will gain an impenetrable "cockroach identity," will survive, but it will not be a great historical people. We awake narodikom representing the value of folklore, fun, by and large only themselves. Solzhenitsyn — the man for me the criterion brighter Chubais, if he praises something, this is clearly what-you harm. In "Rebuilding Russia," it stands for the collapse of the USSR and against imperialism in general, because the "empire now we can not afford." Tsarist Russia was in force, with three times fewer people, and we happen to be able to do. America is in force, although it is the whole world wants to control and operate, and to us — do not need a Europe united in the European Union, and we have to uzhatsya to the borders of Muscovy, we happen to have a nation, we need to nationalism instead of imperialism … Who knows, you bastard in what place to heal! The only thing that can destroy the multi-ethnic country is nationalism, for the ideas of socialism and liberalism have no blood shed will not, but for the nation — easily. And it is this dangerous virus Solzhenitsyn offers to run. After all, the empire is not just an ambition, the empire is the highest form of the state, designed to combine the different peoples in the name of the overall mission, the shape of the state, standing above nationalisms and family-clan blood system of the state. Empire is a pure ideal state, and not terribly earth-as a nation-state. Actually, the hard-earth project states provided the Nazis with their slogan of "blood and soil ', the empire is the extreme opposite of fascism on the one hand and the little nationalism small non-historical nations on the other side. But this "prophet" does not understand, he says, give up the ambition and the will to live, as in Japan! Surely we can indeed put Japan in an example? Who among Russian would agree to become a Japanese, Norway, the Baltic states, Czech? But there is always live comfortable, cozy and "saving the people" will be ….. The fact that the dispute between Nikon and Avvakumom this is a dispute about how to be the great Russian empire, or be a small country folk. Nikon wanted our Christianity does not separate us from the rest of the world, and unite us with him, wanted Russia to become the leader of the Christian world, and not some special professed Christianity to be proud of along with other Atypical phenomena: balalaika, dolls … Our people are in contrast to the small nations and narodikov not aimed at "saving", such a goal worthy of pill bugs and cockroaches, which are so well adapted to the savings that survive even a nuclear holocaust. Our people used to sacrifice and take risks in the name of the great, which is why we, and not the Japanese were the first in space, we are not Balts destroyed Hitler, under which lay the whole of Europe in a rush "samosberezheniya", it is we, not Norwegians won Napoleon, it is we, not the Czechs conquered and mastered one-sixth of the Earth, which was not able to do any people in the world.


— Russia needs a new national idea …

 

National, that is a purely Russian idea, Russia is not needed. Instead of pushing for a place under the sun among other such nations and peoples need most to be the Sun, all jostling for a place in you. If you want to be a small country with its small national characteristics, then, of course, you can sit and cultivate their boots and samovars. If a country wants to be great, wants to make history, and I personally without it yourself and do not think of Russia, then we need a world-historical, not a national idea. Now in the history of the world is very convenient time on this. Remember, even 50-100 years ago the world went socialism and communism. It was a huge mass religions, exciting not only billions of masses, but the entire intellectual elite of mankind. Being left and meant to be an intellectual one and the same. In all revolutions have seen myself a sliver in the fire history. People have been meaning to life. And it was not a national movement. The current return from communism to neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism of a reaction, small and temporary. It is not comparable with those vortices that have emerged on the planet for another 50-100let ago. If we look back in history, we can see that communism was preceded by a strong liberal movement, an era of Enlightenment. With her new people, a new morality, a new politics and the economy. And before that, there were the wars of religion in the deaths of up to a quarter of the population of Europe! What is the scale!. Now nothing like this. No one knows where the story is going and why, no one has the feeling that God is with him, or the Truth. Arab, Christian fundamentalists are not in the bill. It is also just a reaction. Even the so-called "religion of consumption" does not work, will soon come to an end. So the people who dates the world a new MOD, a new virus, a new impetus to stories has the potential to lead the story. This is a new idea, a new sense of life, a new way of life possible. In any case, it should be approached and Indian yoga and broker on Wall stritt, and the Chinese peasant and gauchos from Bolivia, and French fashion designer and the elderly black man years … When they say that globalization is destroying the unique culture, people, religion and other identity is not exactly. She confronts them, and sometimes destroys. But just as well be said that it is them and generates a response. All kinds of fundamentalism and conservatism often take precedence over globalization. Moreover, they are experiencing a rebirth. And it's already gone so far that all the different parts of the Earth politician does not think of himself as anything other than insisting on their originality, fun and unique as opposed to globalization. All countries have failed to pragmatism and national self-interest. In all, in the words of Churchill now only permanent interests and no eternal values. It means the death of a meta-ideology (which would postmodern) the death of the great powers. It would seem that we should be happy, and I, for one, do not rejoice. We restrict the problem to our circle of friends. If someone you know has said that he is pure pragmatist, comes only from the fact that to his advantage in a relationship and always protects only its own interests. Perhaps we could take this as to his right, but … nothing more. It is unlikely that such a person would be different, it is unlikely he would have been interesting to us, he would hardly have captivated us. As a minimum. And if he has started to actively defend its identity, it would, perhaps, unpleasant, and can even be excluded from the dialogue. When Kakko someday Ukraine says proudly that she now follows its national interests, then .. it can and annoying, but at least as inspiring. We have something Tatars, so what? We have something British (blacks, Russian, Japanese) so what? When Russik nationalists shout about the great Russian, realize that these are no GREATNESS and they just do not get, because at least they are not interested in 50 nationalities living in Russia, not to mention the rest of the world. The great powers were built on great ideas. Communism appealed to all the world. Liberalism as well. great philosophy and art arose where there is no thought of the "German idea" or "French idea," but just the thought of all the human and inspired by all of humanity. I do not like and do not like globalism Arab extremists. And I am forced to choose between them. And it's not that they do not like me because of globalism is an American specificity, and for anti-globalization Arab. For globalism does not cost any specifics, while at the other extreme is bad infinity of these characteristics, none of which does not inspire me. The real danger of globalization in the disappearance of the
se specifics (we see that they only multiply), and in that hour we were stuck between their set and their empty abstract negation (in the market). We have lost a great, we lost everyone. Universal — that was a rarity, this is what is now the biggest demand. That "national" philosophy, which rises above its nationalism and give the world it would make a great general and his nation. You can not oppose nationalism — globalization. They are two sides of the same coin. Take any Ukraine, which become more Western in recent years and you'll see that both processes are running. On the one hand, it is included in a globalized world, opens the door to all McDonald's, on the other hand, there are dumplings and embroidery. Therefore, prodykt of Western influence — a very special person — the National Liberal. Ardent forger of his stories, telling about the fact that all the world has seen from the Ukrainians, and he — libertinianets in the economy, a fan of the USA and so on. In Russia, too, are there. .


— Since we were talking about philosophy, what prospects do you think is in Russian philosophy?


To answer, I should explain something. Modern Mediamir drives people into a false dilemma: either extra-national or national. In everyday life it is expressed in the presence of people who say "native land, where good," they are working on an abstract work, as abstract professionals who can perform the same function, anywhere, just to pay. They are sunbathing on the beach on vacation, which are the same in Egypt and Turkey, and even a little stare at the little touches them monuments of history. On the other hand, there are some nationalists who are willing to walk in sandals, drinking tea from a samovar, and despise all imported, only deal with what in any other place they have not been able to deal with and just dragged from the cities of the Golden Ring. In contrast to this philosophy as well pronounced. There are those who are engaged in logic, methodology of science, and so on. abstract and non-national problems, and there are those who are engaged in the so-called Russian philosophy, which is intertwined with the Orthodox Church, and which are not in demand anywhere except Russia. And there will be demand. Relatively speaking, some people do not rooted in any soil, others are rooted in his. My position is: not a "non-national or national" and vsenatsionalnoe. I can see the roots, and not just their own, but also Russian, in all cultures. In the German culture and Latin, Anglo-Saxon and African. For me the sacred stones of the Parthenon and Jerusalem, Constantinople and Paris, as well as the walls of Balaam and the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. And of course, I'd rather go to Lake Baikal, Kamchatka or the Russian North, than the 18th time in Turkey. They say there is "all inclusive", but in fact, "everything is possible" out of the equation these hotels is the whole world. And it is this world, the whole world — my homeland. Getting back to philosophy, I believe that Russian philosophy is as Russian philosophy should be a world-historical, not folklore and national. That is world-historical, and wanted to see her, and Pushkin, Dostoevsky, and the Bloc. And they raised the issue in his work universal scale.


— As it turned out, that killed the great empires, such as Rome, Byzantium, the Ottoman Empire and has not revived?. Why is that?


There are many answers to this question, but I am personally interested in such factors as language. There is such a thing — the opposite effect of neophytes to the speakers. Relatively speaking, they used to live in the Dnieper Sarmatians, the people of Iran. And for their language is characterized by a particular "G", which is "X". That is, it has been the focus of those for whom English was not the native Slavic. And then and southern Slavs became infected with the accent, and now with this accent saying. The same goes for grammar. It is simpler. Any black man who had come to London or the Baltic states will not make a distinction between the present and a present kontinius. What for? And so it is understood. Gradually, in the speech of entire social groups are washed times, the cases, words. Language is easier to be comfortable for immigrants pouring in, but the media has taught this new simplified language, they take it from the media, from the newspapers, they are difficult to read their own literature. On the one hand, we can rejoice, for example, that the English spread throughout the world, it is the language of international communication. But what is this language? It is learned several topics. Like, 'How well yu? ", The answer is:" I Am Fine, fenks. " Soon the language becomes a ritual gestures, emoticon, technical crafts. Greek Hellenism was destroyed. The Greeks have never become those great ancient Greeks, because in modern Greek can not think straight. It is impossible to think in Latin, English. Unfortunately, it seems, is in Russian. Another aspect of the process — the saturation of foreign language words, so that native speakers use the word now is functional, not hearing his "inner form" without hearing the root. The words are clear signs, they do not provoke contemplation, the performance of intentions, do not provoke the sense of transgression, metaphors, do not provoke thought. Just as the character entry, the type of mathematical. Thinking becomes a type of account. All imperial languages are aimed at the inclusion of new words rather than the exception (as languages of small nations). Russian — scary imperial language, it a fantastic amount of foreign borrowing, which Russian is not afraid. With each passing year more and more. That is, the empire — large crucibles peoples, primtivizirovali their language, that language itself spawned morons. That is, one can not be a moron if you thoughts on this language. And morons are therefore not able to maintain the empire. In this case, the difference between a moron and a moron is not visible at first glance. The Byzantine Greek and Greek Heraclitus times like those the Greeks. Or, for example, present the Americans, of course, can be called a moron, but like no other better … And, in fact, the better …. That's the theory. Russia would still be in a better position because all the 1000 years of its history ever existed and reproduced ancient Slavic, Old Church Slavonic, who knew all the people on the Psalms and the Gospels. And this constant source did not give the destructive forces take over. Now, many complain that the church service is not clear. I also think it's an outrage! So I suggest not to jump at the church on modern Russian and vice versa compulsory study of Old Church Slavonic and in vvseh schools from the first grade. This will give a stunning effect for the culture, the language, for the brain.

July 10, 2010


SQL - 16 | 0,551 сек. | 7 МБ