Russia is unique (and better)

Those who follow the dialectical development of Russia’s amour propre will be aware of the high regard in which the world is ordered to hold her.

Thus we’ve known since the 16^th century that Russia is the ‘third Rome’, combining the high culture of the first one with the religiosity and spirituality of the second.

That makes her immeasurably superior to the decadent West with its materialism, weak-kneed democracy, atheism, corruption, aggressiveness and overall tendency towards homosexuality.

Such despicable traits are especially blatant among the Anglo-Saxons, who personify every Western vice without offering any compensating virtues. At the moment, the worst Anglo-Saxons are to be found in the US, but Britain is almost as bad, though mercifully not as strong.

We’ve known how vile Britain is since the late 18^th century, when the Russian general Alexander Suvorov summed up the situation with two voluminous Russian words: anglichanka gadit (loosely translated, it means “that English dame always craps on us”). That terse and prescient verdict was passed 60 years before the faecal floodgates were flung wide-open in the Crimea, where a small Anglo-French expeditionary force thrashed the mighty Russian army.

But fine, I get it. Russia is superior to the West, especially its Anglophone part, in every respect. But specifically, what puts Russia on such a high moral and spiritual ground? What exactly makes her unique?

You want specifics, you rotten, decadent, corrupt, materialistic, homosexual Anglo-Saxon viper? Russia’s Ministry of Culture is happy to oblige.

To leave no room for equivocation, that august body has published a new directive, “The foundations of the state policy for the preservation and strengthening of Russia’s spiritual and moral values”.

There you can find exhaustive answers to your mocking questions, chapter and verse. But first the directive issues a word of caution:

“Our traditional values are being threatened by the activities of extremist and terrorist organisations, the USA and her allies, transnational corporations, foreign non-commercial organisations.”

This reminds me of one of those universal advertising headlines that can introduce a plug for any product whatsoever: “What we are not makes us what we are” In theology, this method of identification is called apophatic. In sociology, it’s called inadequate.

Never mind proceeding from the negative. Tell us in unequivocally positive terms what traditional values flourishing within Russia have rotted away in the putrid swamp stinking up the air beyond her western border?

If you thought the Ministry Of Culture would be stymied by such interrogation, you have another think coming. So here goes:

“Such traditional values include: life, dignity, human rights and liberties, patriotism, civic virtues, serving the motherland and feeling responsible for her destiny, high moral ideals, strong family, creative work, priority of the spiritual over the material, humanism, mercy, justice, collectivism, mutual assistance and respect, historical memory and continuity, the unity of all the peoples of Russia.”

I hope this has put you to shame. For the Ministry of Culture specifically talks about preserving such traditional values, rather than developing them. That means those values are already robust and abundant in Russia at present, with only “the USA and her allies” threatening their future out of sheer envy and malice.

While accepting that self-assessment unreservedly, one may still ask for clarification. For example, isn’t there a wee bit of conflict between ‘human rights and liberties’ and ‘collectivism’?

Collectivism, after all, implies pooling personal liberties together, which laudable process has historically led to their diminution. (If you wish to research this subject, the key words to tap into Google are COLLECTIVISATION OF AGRICULTURE, COLLECTIVE FARMS, GOLODOMOR, ARTIFICIAL FAMINE and MASS MURDER).

And since the ‘priority of the spiritual over the material’ is a fact of life, where does it leave ‘creative work’? Does this mean the Russians should work creatively only in such fields as theology, philosophy and high culture, while ignoring creativity and indeed work in vulgar material areas?

These, however, are minor points. Since the Ministry of Culture issued this statement on the official government website, every word there must be true to life. Hence all we can do is thank that body for explaining what Russia is – and what we aren’t.