Through the idiotic cruelty of this totally unnecessary war, you’d be forgiven for asking - What The Hell is wrong with russians anwyays? We in the west can’t undertand them in their deviousness, brutality and indifference to empathy and justice.
The simple platitudes are all there. Russians lie, they steal, they invade, they lack empathy, they are drunk, hyper macho chest-thumping meatheads, they kill their own, they are politcally meek and accepting of suffering, to the point where cruelty even to themselves is a badge of honor. Or if you fancy yourself as a high minded Russian siloviki, falling prey to others is something that happens to someone else who wasn’t clever enough to stay out of the crosshairs of the local warlord du jour. A fatalism that fighting against power is useless, and that you are best to be apolitical, shrug your shoulders and avoid trouble at all costs. Or find your own path to profit from the corruption and control. In short - it is better to accept the brutality of centralized power, because it’s better than the alternative, as defined by various traumatic times in Russia’s existence. Denialism, machismo and crap leadership is a terrible mixture.
This is a long watch, but concise and worth a listen if you’re interested in moving past the basic platitudes about the Russians being dumb, cruel, brutal. Even more high minded concepts as being expansionist and paranoid about their borders doesn’t fully explain things, but it’s all part of the receipe. Beevor goes into very serious yet consumable study of the timeline & roots of Russian brutality. A few choice phrases jumped out, including the romanticization of ruthlessness, conspcious cruelty, and the unapologetic expansionism, described as the ‘anxious billionaire’ who always wants more money, more land, more than he has now, lest it all crumble somehow. Certainly paints a picture of why Russia has never, ever, been content to stay within it’s vast boundaries and not invade it’s neighbors eventually. Conquest is necessary and virtuous - scaled up from the simple notion that power abused is power used.
It’s also not sufficient to just say Russian brutality is because of the Mongols’ subjugation, but it was insightful to be reminded that Russia was under Mongol control as long as America has even existed. It ain’t everything, but it ain’t nothing either.
So - Why the reliable brutality? Why the capacity for suffering and depravity? Why the indifference-to-glee of the suffering of others? Why the idiotic meat wave tactics? Why the political cruelty, even in peace time? Why the relentless rush to dominate? Why the romantic glorification of death and bone-crushing even the slightest opposition? Why are you entirely justified to kill for the vanity and glory of the Tsar? Don’t your neighbors have a right to exist and propser?
Well - in a word - No. But that’s a function of power - real or perceived. It’s at least an ethos, one supposes. A bitter one, but - it does seem part of the Russian self-image. They have a right to steal, kill, lie, be corrosive and mischevious ALWAYS, and that brutality is always useful. Russia Stronk. The self-image that we COULD just roll from Poland to Portugal if we wanted. Diplomacy is a trick of the weak to keep down the strong, and that when we do choose to flex our power, you will squeal like pigs for a while, then accept your fate. Yes, our life sucks - but - as long as someone else is worse off, then that’s (somehow) a win for me. Caring for others is fruitless and stupid - so get yours, and screw the other guy, before he screws you.
The clumsy theory I’d come to is that Russia’s organizing principle, at the micro and macro, is “Do As I Say Or I’ll Kill You”. This exists at the local level where local bullies demand money from anyone weaker than them, neighborhood goons extort others in low level mafia style, bosses steal from employees, businesses and government officials steal from contracts and companies, and at the strategic political level, the Leader steals from the world inasmuch as his strength, opportunity and audaciousness allows.
And that it is hard to understand them in terms of power, truth and justice for the same reasons. The point of power IS to use it. And “theft” is expected at whatever your station in life. There’s a classic phrase in Russian that ‘the man who DOESN’T steal, steals from his family’. In other words - you should steal, because if you don’t, someone else will. Russians sneer at the feckless pussies in the west, and might say that they adhere to an Old Order of the universe - that the true reality of the world is that life feeds on life, nature is cruel and if you don’t accept that role as an abuser, you end up a victim. Or that cruelty is requried to keep a nation of dissimilar frontiers together - the colonies must be kept in meek, cowed compliance for the good of Moscow and St. Petersburg. Again, it is a simple concept - cruel, exploitative and unfair - but it IS at least an idea even the dumbest people understand.
Every Russian system of governance over the last 1,000 years has centralized power, kept institutions weak and retained the ability to brutalize anyone in your way in pursuit of your goals. Hence - “Do As I Say Or I’ll Kill You” as the state motto. Keep the power centers concentrated, the serfs disorganized, improverished and humbled - because then they’re easier to control. Nothing has truly changed - Russia never had a Magna Carta or Reformation. The base organizing principle has never evolved past the implicit threat of violence, at all levels.
As a result, the vast majority of Russians are themselves descended from people who didn’t stand up to the local overlord and say “hey, you can’t take our food, money and people! this isn’t right”. Those people ended up with their heads on a pole at the edge of town to serve as a warning. So - evolutionary theory gives you a population descended into a meek, accepting, politically neutered class for which the prospect of demanding rights and justice is the same as suicide. Or at least - if you do have subversive thoughts - you’re able to keep them to yourself until a time is right for revolution, and there is a decent chance of keeping your head in the coming fight.
Perhaps it’s a 1500 year project of abuse, so warped by the sustained cruelty that any fundamental change cannot happen. Unless there is a complete shattering of the self-image as an unapologetic, collective beast that must feed on others, or the same will inevitably happen to them. Why do they invade? Because they must. For control. Why do they accept terrible, abused lives? Well…what’s the alternative? Why do they lie? Because what’s the upside in telling the truth? All that really matters is desire and power, and if you don’t pursue both, someone else will, and you’ll end up on the wrong side of things. It’s a tragic mindset - and frankly I don’t see any way it will ever chage as long as there is a Russia.
The Ottoman Empire might be the best example - it behaved very much like Russia does, including invading Europe and absurd levels of ruthless power grabs interally and externally. It took over 300 years for the Ottoman empire to collapse into a stable rump state of Turkey, while it’s most restless colonies in the Middle East are still afflicted by instability, violence and weak institutions to this day. If you were hoping for a happy ending, I’m sorry. The best I could offer is that maybe Russia is 100 years into a 150 to 200 year collapse, simliar to the Ottomans. They certainly do seem like they’re in fatal decline, having lost power projection and allies in the former Soviet States, Syria, Iran, Ukraine, Hamas, Hezbollah, Armenia etc. Expect their leaders of dwindling quality to become MORE hysterical about the state disintegration rather than to enact real reforms that would actually attract allies, investment and positive evolution.
Anyways - congrats if you read this far. Love your thoughts always, and eager for interesting discussion
I wonder how many new countries we’d get if Russia were broken up into smaller regions based on ethnic groups that Russia has been subjugating until now.
The problem there is that ethnic Russians have done a good job emigrating to these regions and maintaining healthy minorities or outright majorities. It’s not so simple to say “Dagestan, Chechnya & Yakuita will go because they have a distict culture” - there are ethnic russians everywhere in their country, and it’s not a great idea to break up a Federation along clean ethnic lines. That’s how you get the mass ethnic cleansing and devastating migration related crises like with the Partition of India and the breakup of Yugoslavia. During those types of ethno-political crises, bandits and opportunists will commit any number of crimes to try an exploit migrants. There are always EXPLOSIONS of crime when those sort of border-redrawing events happen. What you could count on is probably 6-10 new countries - total guess - but also LOTS and LOTS of criminality and suffering.
china would reclaim norther manchuria for starters, and would likely take siberia for resources. seems alot of the ethnic russians look ethnically chinese(not han)
Depends if you mean literally or in practical/economic terms. Xi has been very clever by letting the idiot Putin launch his own regional revenge project first. China wins no matter the outcome of the Ukrainian conflict, though I doubt they will roll tanks and troops across the border into Russia unlelss some sort of regional instability happens in a post-Putin scramble that jeapordizes China’s access to water, minerals and other material from Siberia. Russians do seem to understand the threat that China poses to their Far East.
If China can offer Siberia and the Far East better security and stability terms than the Russian Federation can over the long haul, then their influence there will certainly increase. Without losing any soldiers, machines or dipomatic capital, Xi has already become the undisputed senior partner in the Russia:China relationship, they can demand almost anything from Russia who will be unable to refuse going forward. The northern plain of China is notoriously short of fresh water, for example. They can now insist to Russia that the vast water supplies in the sparsely populated Russian far east should be shared with them as a cost of their “friendship”. Ergo - expect more dam building and water diversion projects from Siberia into northern China. That is a historic win for Xi, without costing him anything at all. Also - tied to China’s grand Island Chain strategy, they can consider the North Pacific as an extension of their operating space for the first time in their entire 4000+ year history.
Seems likely that this started out as a quid pro quo between Russia and China - You invade Ukraine first to reconcile your own ‘historical grievances’ invasion, and we will use that outcome to extract concessions for ours in Taiwan. Would Xi have preferred a Russian victory? Hard to say. A weak Russian partner also serves his purposes on many levels. If Russia crushed Ukraine, he could use that for leverage to try and get some bloodless concessions out of Taiwan for fear of getting the same treatment. But a Russian defeat, as seems increasingly likely, also has it’s uses.