This video, titled How to Kill a God, was my introduction to a fascinating topic called Color Revolution Theory. As LazerPig easily shows, lots of people subscribe to this theory, or at least argue for it online. Like most conspiracy theories it comes in weak and strong forms. The strong form amounts to believing that all revolutions – and most other politics as well, but definitely all revolutions – are launched by manipulative cabals who trick foolish people into serving as their shock troops with promises of a rosy future. Communist revolutions, of course, were launched by the worldwide Jewish conspiracy. Anti-Russian revolutions, from Hungary in 1956 to Ukraine in 2014, were all launched by the CIA. The Arab Spring was equally a CIA creation. It is the recent anti-Soviet, anti-Russian revolts that most people refer to as "Color Revolutions," and here is the real meat of the argument. There was no groundswell of opposition to Russian domination, no hatred of communism, no longing for freedom, none of that foolishness; it was all just the CIA pulling the strings, carrying forward their long-term plan to humiliate and weaken Russia.
Note the key claim: in this view of the world, ordinary people do not really have dreams or desires or any kind of politics that makes sense. They are sheep easily led by clever conspirators to do whatever those consiprators want. The only real actors in history are small, highly organized, dedicated groups operating mainly in secret.
According to the version of the theory espoused by pro-Russian trolls, CIA manipulation is a multi-layered process. It begins with encouraging people to "protest," to get used to attacking tradition, insulting their leaders, marching with signs, and shouting slogans. People have to be convinced that they have opinions, since they actually do not, and that by taking some kind of "action" they may achieve something. LazerPig finds several pro-Russian commentators spewing venom at the whole notion of "protest," at the gall of people who think they should throw over their societies and everything they were raised to believe in the pursuit of some nebulous goal like "freedom." Then comes the penetration of society by international NGOs who claim to be for Human Rights but are really preparing the ground for the revolution. It moves on from there to organizing political groups and then to ever-increasing violence, until one day the people actually kill their rightful rulers and the CIA is fully in charge.
As I said, LazerPig has no trouble showing that many people argue for this view, including some with close ties to the Russian state. But the explanatory power of the theory depends on a claim that is plausible but unprovable: that Vladimir Putin is a great believer. To LazerPig and those whose work he has followed, Putin's actions in power can be explained by assuming that he deeply believes 1) that people really have no politics, and 2) that, therefore, they only do things like participate in revolutions – or vote, or fight in wars – because they have been manipulated into it.
Putin is famously dismissive of non-Russian nationalism. To him, the nationalism of Lithuanians, Poles, or Ukrainians is not in any way authentic, it is just something foisted on them by the CIA. And, therefore, it ought to be just as easy to manipulate them out of it.
This is key; Putin doesn't just believe that the CIA manipulates people, he thinks that he can do it, too. Why does Putin's regime intervene in Western politics? Because they think it works. They think that by spreading lots of memes and giving a few million dollars to the right radical groups they can shift elections. After all, if the CIA can summon Latvian nationalism into existence, why not? And if a particular effort fails – for example Russian support of the movements for Scottish and Catalan independence – that doesn't invalidate the theory, it just means the CIA outfoxed them that time.
To LazerPig, this explains the bizarre opening of Putin's war on Ukraine. Various statements made by Putin and others imply that he did not think most Ukrainians would oppose him. He thought, in this view, that his penetration of Ukrainian society via propaganda, bribery, blackmail, and so on had neutralized Ukrainian nationalism. Which, remember, is not anything real or deeply felt, just a creation of the CIA. Putin, says Lazerpig, really did not think anyone would die for Ukrainian independence.
It's a fascinating theory, and it does seem to explain much about Putin's behavior. Do you suppose it's true?
4 comments:
1/2
Putin has made no secret about his beliefs, and where he gets them. He routinely credits Ivan Ilyin as one of the pillars of his worldview.
Curiously, Ilyin seems to be little known in the West. Perhaps it's actually no great wonder, as he was best known for his staunchly Anti-Communist stance (which made him largely irrelevant when the Soviets won), and for his flirtations with the Nazis (which made him even more irrelevant when they lost).
Ilyin's philosophical stance is complex, esoteric, and downright crazy, so it's a bit hard to sum up succinctly... but let's try.
Firstly, Ilyin was an ultra-nationalist who literally believed that Russia should dominate the entire world. He was absolutely convinced of the physical, mental, cultural, spiritual, and moral superiority of Russians over all other peoples - and that the only reason they didn't ALREADY rule the world is because they had been robbed of their ostensible birthright by jealous lesser peoples, in particular (who else?) the Jews. This is more or less the classic Fascist delusion, hence why Ilyin was attracted to Nazism (although the Nazis were not very attracted to Ilyin).
Secondly, Ilyin was an ultra-religious zealot who literally believed that Russia had been chosen by God to dominate the entire world, via their God-given superiority over all other peoples.
Russian philosophy during his lifetime already had a long track record of grappling with the issue of "Russian Backwardness" - the technological, governmental, and cultural differences between the rich industrialized West, and the still largely medieval feudal system of Russia itself. Some believed that Russia was long overdue to "Westernize", while others believed that to do so would be to destroy the pride and soul of Russia as a nation, people, and culture. It's more or less the exact same problem the Japanese grappled with in much the same time period.
2/2
Ilyin, predictably, was someone who denounced the West as decadent, immoral, and weak, and opposed to adopting Western manners or technologies. In fact, he insisted that "Russian Backwardness" wasn't the right term for the differences between East and West - he instead framed the difference as "Russian Innocence".
In Ilyin's view, the Godly way to live was in the "traditional" way - with the masses being subservient to the church, who were in turn subservient to an absolute autocrat (such as the Tsar), who would rule unquestioned because they were chosen by God and thus bore Divine Right to rule. Ilyin blamed people straying from this system as the root of all the evils in the world, and argued that while the West and the rest of Christendom had become corrupt and lost their way, Russia alone remained pure and faithful to God's will.
Ilyin therefor claimed that Russia was uniquely and intrinsically "innocent", and used this supposed innocence to champion the Russian people rising up and taking dominion over the entire earth, by any means necessary, in order to restore the world to Godliness. Ilyin saw no contradiction between this supposed innocence and the idea of conquering the world and forcibly converting it by the sword. He fervently believed that Russia's "innocence" and fidelity to "the old true ways" meant they could never be blamed for any evil whatsoever - nothing they ever did could ever be questioned or condemned, for it would be done in service to God.
If all sounds rather disturbing and insane, it's because it is.
And if it sounds uncomfortably familiar, it's because Ilyin's insanity is one of the major sources of inspiration for Putin and his cronies. Putin literally wants to be a Tsar; he wants unquestioning loyalty and obedience from the masses; he wants to conquer and destroy The West, for they have strayed from God and become wicked and godless profligates, deserving only of scorn...
...and most important of all, he wants Russia and Russians to be superior to all other peoples, favored by God, and eternally "innocent" of all wrongdoing.
As for "Color Revolution Theory", and Putin viewing the world through it or not... it's certainly extremely plausible, given his Ilyinic vantage point.
The idea that ordinary people have no opinions of their own, and have to be manipulated either by greater forces than themselves, fits very neatly in the Ilyin's zealous worldview. This is a man whose family were aristocrats who claimed descent from the Rurikids; a man who despised the common people, and who worshiped at the feet of the Tsars; a man who believed that the inherent moral imperative of the universe was for the masses to unthinkingly obey God's will, as conveyed to them by the Church, and by God's chosen monarch (and his loyal aristocratic vassals, of course).
The framing of all major events as either the manipulations of the West or the counter-manipulations of Russia is highly reminiscent of the Christ / Anti-Christ dichotomy. "The CIA" are agents of the devil waging a secret war against the righteous, while the FSB / Putin / etc are the noble defenders of virtue and truth who bravely fight to keep the tides of darkness at bay. The masses are then largely ignorant of this hidden conflict - and even if they weren't, they are but mere pawns to be maneuvered by forces greater than themselves.
Does Putin literally believe that the CIA are agents of the devil, working to corrupt and destroy the last bastion of righteousness in the form of Godly and "innocent" Russia?
I'm not sure it matters, because even if he doesn't actually believe it, he PRETENDS to believe it - or, at least, to believe in a worldview that is 100% compatible with it.
He is either a true believer, or a cynical charlatan, but in both cases the outcome is the same - he wants to be an autocratic conqueror, and he justifies it with Ilyin's mad rantings about Tsars and God and Russian superiority and the perfidy of 'The West'.
Yeah, the big weakness of LazerPig's view is that in other contexts Putin has been downright mystical about Russian nationalism.
Post a Comment