terça-feira, 17 de outubro de 2017

Russian Conservative Forum: Russia´s messianic tradition and conservative estrategy


          The picture above is the logo of the International Russian Conservative Forum, an event that brought together European political leaders in Russia in 2014 and 2015. At the center Our Lady carries Baby Jesus in her arms over the Bizantine symbol of the two-headed eagle. The eagle was adopted by the Grand Duke of Moscovy, Ivan III, and represents the union between spiritual and temporal power of Russia. The kingdom, which would become the Russian Empire during the reign of Ivan IV, the Terrible, atributted to itself the Bizantine Empire´s legacy. The Bizantines developed the harmony concept, the perfect marriage between Church and State, represented by the eagle´s two head united to the same body. At the proclamation and coronation of Ivan IV as czar in 1547, the rite openly declared that Russia was the "Third Rome", transforming the doctrine which circulated among Slavic kingdoms at least a century before as an element of the State power. And it was necessary that a "God-elected autocrat" to firmly govern his kingdom to fulfill it´s eschatological role. Russia was destined by God to protect and guide Christendom, which would have been betrayed by Rome´s heresy with the 1054 schism and defeated at Constantinople by the Muslims in 1453. God was source of his legitimicy, which would be susteined until the Revolution of 1917.

          To the feet of the two-headed eagle there are on one side the scepter, symbol of authority, and on the other the globe. The allusion in clear: Russia has the divine role not only to guide Christendom, but the whole world, the whole creation. Hence the figure of the sun background, the light, God, source of all things and under which all things submit. The sun holds and bless whole creation, having Russia the authority over the world as protector and guide of the Christendom. Lastly, Our lady, who is the main intercessor to God in Christianity and for whom the Russian Orhodox Christianity has particular and deep devotion, presents herself as the link between Russia represented by the eagle behind her and God who is in her arms in the Person of Jesus          

          The sinthesys of the picture is the world leadership by Russia, political and espiritual authority of the world, guided by God through the hands of Our Lady. 

          The International Russian Conservative Forum already has in his name it´s claim: to be Russian and international at the same time, highlighting the Russia´s role in leading a new world order built over the debris of the current order. When hosting an event of this, the country is assuming this role, following the example of the statement on the Forum´s mission:

"We see how many Euro-Atlantic countries really took the way of rejecting theirs roots, including Christian values which form the basis of Western civilization. Moral principles against any tradition identity - national, cultural, religious or even sexual. There is a policy that places a family and a homosexual union on the same level, [as if] faith in God or faith in Satan [were equivalent]. The excesses of the politically correct go so far that they are seriously discussing the creation of events aimed in propagating pedophilia. In many European countries people are ashamed or afraid to talk about their religious affiliation. The holidays can be cancelled or are presented as something embarrasing, hiding the essence of these holidays, their moral basis. And this model is trying to impose itself aggressively to everyone, the whole world. We are convinced that this is a straight path to degradation and primitivization, a deep demographic and moral crisis. What else can be evidence of a moral crisis if not the loss [of the population´s] capacity for self-reproduction [?]. An today almost all depeloped countries cannot grow even with the help of migration. Without the values established in Christianity and other world religions, without the moral norms that have been formed through thousands of years, people will inevitably lose human dingity. And we consider natural and correct to protect these values."* 

          Following this statement, the Forum´s website continues with a Vladimir Putin´s speech to the participants of the Valdai Club, in September 2013, where the President defends traditional values, says the State could be a partner in this defense and alerts to the threat of the loss of Western countries´ sovergnity. The Valdai Club is a think-thank linked to the Kremlin and turned to Russia´s foreign policy research, and every year it receives Putin´s participation.

(A meeting of the Forum in Saint Petersburg, Russia, March 21-22, 2015. This was the most publicized Forum´s photo by Western media.)

          The Forum´s mission is to create a new concept of human development in response to Western liberalism, integrate conservative political organizations and to strenghten comercial, cultural and spiritual ties historically established between Russia and Europe. Taken as a scientific congress, it´s target audience are Russian and foreign public, political and patriotic organizations, representatives of regional, national governents and universities, Russian scientists, experts in History, Sociology, Demography, Law, Economics, Finances and members of industry. The intention is to influence political and social organizations in Russia and abroad, as well as public figures from the areas mentioned above, writers and public personalities.

          The 2015 event took place on March 21-22th at Holiday Inn Hotel, in Saint Petersburg, and was organized by the Russian National Cultural Center - People´s House, organization dedicated in promoting Russian culture. The initiative came from Rodina party, of Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin. According to an official statement from the British government, members of right and far-right from Germany, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Spain, Greece, Italy, United Kingdom and Sweden has attended the meeting. There wasn´t, however, participation of politicians of the Russian government. Participants were mainly political parties and military and political leaders who align themselves with the Forum´s proposal, such as Ataka from Bulgaria, Golden Dawn from Greece, Fuerza Nuova from Italy and the European political organization Alliance for Peace and Freedom. (Freedom Party from Austria, which had signed a cooperation agreement with Putin´s United Russia and had confirmed it´s presence at the Forum decided at last minute not to go.) These parties have simpathy for Russia and the Kremlin´s leadership. Among the Forum´s participants there was also people of neo-Nazi and antissemitic profile.

          In the end of the meeting was published the Participant´s Resolution, that begins with the declaration of regret to the destruction of "tradition European values". The text presents seven points defended by the members: 1) the creation of a "free, multipolar, progressive world order" (main Forum´s objective), the defense of the countries´ sovereignty and conservatism as the best form of existing social activity; 2) promoting, through the parties and the European Parliament, Christian values and propagate them to the masses, improving relations with the West and the end of the "Cold War" promoted against Russia; 3) the creation of a collective security system in Europe outside NATO, which became a tool of a dictadorship, departure of US troops from the continent and rejection of interventions by Western forces in other countries; 4) Russia is the legitimate successor of the Soviet Union and Russian Empire and now it´s integral part of the European traditions and it´s extended family; 5) Europe and Russia have their own path and must be freed from the US power. The main example of this is the conflict in Ukraine, that Forum sees as an internal problem, but considers that part of it´s territory was artificially separeted from Russia, is inhabited by Russians and asks the West to stop supporting Kiev gonverment; 6) the condenation of the sanctions against Russia and that also undermines Europe, and the desire to estimulate trade between the two regions to turn them back again into the center of humanity´s progress; 7) finally, the most important task is to estimulate the population growth by returning population to traditional values, and also intervene more rapidly to improve people´s urban life and health. The Resolution ends by asking participant organizations to act in a coordinated way to achieve these goals.

          The document sometimes repetes that the Forum´s members are "conservatives" and in the objectives it´s clear the references to the Russia´s special role in the world (the Russia-Europe duality repeatedly mentionated reinforce this idea).

          The fact that the Forum use a logo of strong religious load doesn´t necessarely means the divinization of the event or it´s messianic pretension (the same could be said, for example, about the flag of my country, Brazil, whose Positivist motto "Ordem e Progresso" - Order and Progress - inscribed in it doens´t makes this country and active agent in promoting Positivist philosophy through world, which promisses a new age of peace and progress for mankind). However, it´s symbology and performance is inserted into Russia´s messianic tradition. As I´ve commented in other post in this blog, today´s Russia continues to reproduce this tradition aiming to create a new world order over the rubble of the actual one. Whether under tzars´ divine authority, under the divinization of the Party and Communist triunphalism or under eschatology of the present Eurasian Movement, Russian messianism remains alive in planetary political projects focused in the formation of a new humanity, a new world created in the image and likeness of it´s social planners

          The International Russian Conservative Forum is only one of the Kremlin´s various investiments to achive this goal. It´s strategy is revealed in the conservative and nationalist narrative where elements of revolutionary tradition (anti-conservative, therefore) are mixed up, such as fascists, neo-Nazis and right-wing extremist, whose common point isn´t exaclty in values, but pro-Russia and anti-US feeling. The ignorance of this event´s mission by the great majority of people shows that this isn´t a plan with peoples´ consent, muche less of divine one.

* Translated from Russian to Portuguese with Google Tradutor with adpatations by the author, and to English by the author.

** Published in Portuguese on October 13th, 2017.

sexta-feira, 13 de outubro de 2017

Fórum Conservador Russo: a tradição messiânica da Rússia e a estratégia conservadora


          A imagem acima é o logotipo do Fórum Conservador Russo Internacional, um evento que reuniu lideranças políticas europeias na Rússia em 2014 e 2015. Ao centro Nossa Senhora traz o Menino Jesus nos braços sobre o símbolo bizantino da águia bicéfala. A águia foi adotada pelo Grão-Duque de Moscóvia, Ivan III, e representa a união entre o poder espiritual e temporal da Rússia. O reino, que viria a se tornar Império Russo no reinado de Ivan IV, o Terrível, atribuía a si o legado do Império Bizantino. Os bizantinos desenvolveram o conceito de harmonia, o casamento perfeito entre Igreja e Estado, representada pelas duas cabeças da águia unidas a um mesmo corpo. Na proclamação e coroação de Ivan IV como czar em 1547, o rito declarou abertamente que a Rússia era a "Terceira Roma", transformando a doutrina que circulava entre os reinos eslavos pelo menos um século antes em elemento do poder de Estado. E era necessário que um "autocrata eleito por Deus" governasse com firmeza seu reino para que este cumprisse seu papel escatológico. A Rússia estava destinada por Deus a proteger e guiar a Cristandade, que teria sido traída pela heresia de Roma com o cisma de 1054 e derrotada em Constantinopla pelos muçulmanos em 1453. A única forma do czar cumprir tão grandiosa tarefa era ser divinamente inspirado. Deus era a fonte de sua legitimidade, que se sustentaria até a Revolução de 1917.

          Aos pés da águia bicéfala estão de um lado o cetro, símbolo de autoridade, e do outro o globo terrestre. A alusão é clara: a Rússia tem a função divina não apenas de guiar a Cristandade, mas o mundo todo, toda a criação. Daí a figura do sol ao fundo, a luz, Deus, fonte de todas as coisas e sob qual todas as coisas se submetem. O sol abraça e abençoa toda a criação, tendo a Rússia a autoridade sobre o mundo como protetora e guia da Cristandade. Por fim, Nossa Senhora, que é a principal intercessora junto à Deus no cristianismo e a quem o cristianismo ortodoxo russo possui particular e profunda devoção, apresenta-se como elo entre a Rússia que está representada pela a águia detrás dela e Deus que está em seus braços na Pessoa de Jesus.  

          A síntese da imagem é a liderança mundial pela Rússia, autoridade política e espiritual do mundo, guiada por Deus através das mãos de Nossa Senhora.

          O Fórum Conservador Russo Internacional já traz no nome sua pretensão: ser russo e internacional ao mesmo tempo, dando destaque ao papel da Rússia na liderança de uma nova ordem mundial construída sobre os escombros da atual. Ao sediar um evento deste tipo, o país está assumindo este papel, ao exemplo do que diz o comunicado sobre a missão do Fórum:

"Vemos quantos países euro-atlânticos realmente tomaram o caminho para rejeitar suas raízes, incluindo os valores cristãos que constituem a base da civilização ocidental. Princípios morais contrários a qualquer identidade tradicional - nacional, cultural, religiosa ou mesmo sexual. Existe uma política que coloca uma família e uma união homossexual no mesmo nível, [como se] a fé em Deus ou a fé em Satanás [fossem equivalentes]. Os excessos do politicamente correto vão tão longe que estão discutindo seriamente em criar eventos que visam propagar a pedofilia. As pessoas em muitos países europeus estão envergonhadas e com medo de falar sobre sua filiação religiosa. Os feriados podem ser cancelados ou são apresentados como algo vergonhoso, escondendo a essência desses feriados, sua base moral. E este modelo está tentando se impor agressivamente a todos, o mundo inteiro. Estamos convencidos de que este é um caminho direto para a degradação e a primitivização, uma profunda crise demográfica e moral. O que mais pode ser evidente de uma crise moral se não a perda da capacidade [da população] de auto-reprodução [?]. E hoje quase todos os países desenvolvidos não conseguem crescer mesmo com a ajuda da migração. Sem os valores estabelecidos no cristianismo e em outras religiões mundiais, sem as normais morais que foram formadas por milhares de anos, as pessoas inevitavelmente perderão a dignidade humana. E consideramos natural e corretos proteger esses valores." *

          Em seguida a esta declaração, o site do Fórum segue com um discurso de Vladimir Putin aos participantes do Clube Valdai, em setembro de 2013, onde o presidente defende os valores tradicionais, afirma que o Estado poderia ser um parceiro nesta defesa e alerta para a ameaça da perda de soberania dos países ocidentais. O Clube Valdai é um think thank vinculado ao Kremlin e voltado à pesquisa de política externa da Rússia, e todos os anos recebe a participação de Putin.


(Um dos eventos do Fórum em São Petersburgo, Rússia, 21-22 de março de 2015. Esta foi a foto do Fórum mais divulgada pela imprensa ocidental.)

          O Fórum tem como missão criar um novo conceito de desenvolvimento humano em resposta ao liberalismo do Ocidente, integrar as organizações políticas conservadoras e fortalecer os vínculos comerciais, culturais e espirituais estabelecidos historicamente entre a Rússia e a Europa. Tomado como um congresso científico, seu público-alvo são as organizações públicas, políticas e patriotas russas e estrangeiras, representantes dos governos regionais, nacional e de universidades, cientistas russos, especialistas em História, Sociologia, Demografia, Direito, Economia, Finanças e membros da indústria. A intenção é influenciar organizações políticas e sociais da Rússia e do exterior, além de figuras públicas das áreas citadas anteriormente, escritores e personalidades públicas.

          O evento de 2015 ocorreu entre os dias 21 e 22 de março no Hotel Holiday Inn, em São Petersburgo, e foi organizado pelo Centro Cultural Nacional Russo - Casa do Povo, organização voltada à promoção da cultura russa. A iniciativa veio do partido Rodina, do vice-primeiro-ministro russo Dmitry Rogozin. Segundo um comunicado oficial do governo britânico, participaram membros da direita e da extrema-direita da Alemanha, Bélgica, Bulgária, Dinamarca, Espanha, Grécia, Itália, Reino Unido e Suécia. Não houve, porém, a participação de políticos do governo russo. Os participantes são principalmente partidos políticos e lideranças políticas e militares que se alinham à proposta do Fórum, como os partidos Ataka da Bulgária, Golden Dawn da Grécia, Fuerza Nuova da Itália e a organização política europeia Aliança pela Paz e Liberdade. (O Partido da Liberdade da Áustria, que havia firmado um acordo de cooperação com o Rússia Unida, partido de Putin, e havia confirmado a presença no Fórum, decidiu de última hora não ir.) Estes partidos possuem simpatia à Rússia e à liderança do Kremlin. Dentre os participantes do Fórum havia também pessoas de perfil neo-nazista e antissemita.

          Ao final do encontro foi divulgada a Resolução dos Participantes, que inicia com a declaração de lamento à destruição dos "valores morais europeus". O texto apresenta sete pontos defendidos pelo membros: 1) a criação uma "nova ordem livre, multipolar e progressista" (principal objetivo do Fórum), a defesa a soberania dos países e o conservadorismo como a melhor forma de atividade social existente; 2) a promoção, através dos partidos e do Parlamento Europeu, dos valores cristãos e propagá-los às massas, a melhora das relações com o Ocidente e o fim da "Guerra Fria" promovida contra a Rússia; 3) a criação um sistema de segurança coletivo na Europa alheio à OTAN, que se transformou em instrumento de uma ditadura, a saída das tropas americanas do continente e a rejeição das intervenções das forças ocidentais em outros países; 4) a Rússia é sucessora legítima da União Soviética e do Império Russo e agora é parte integral das tradições europeias e de sua família estendida; 5) Europa e Rússia possuem um caminho próprio e devem ser libertos do poder americano. O principal exemplo disto é o conflito da Ucrânia, que vê como um problema interno, mas considera que parte de seu território foi artificialmente separado da Rússia, é habitado por russos e pede que o Ocidente pare de apoiar o governo de Kiev; 6) a condenação das sanções contra a Rússia e que prejudicam também a Europa, e o desejo de estimular o comércio entre as duas regiões para transformá-las novamente no centro de progresso da humanidade; 7) por fim, a tarefa mais importante é estimular o crescimento demográfico através do retorno da população aos valores tradicionais, e também intervir mais rapidamente para melhorar a vida urbana e a saúde das pessoas. A Resolução encerra pedindo que as organizações participantes ajam de forma coordenada para atingir estes objetivos.

          O documento repete algumas vezes que os membros do Fórum são "conservadores" e nos objetivos ficam evidentes as referências ao papel especial da Rússia no mundo (a dualidade Rússia-Europa mencionada repetidamente reforça esta ideia).

          O fato do Fórum utilizar um logotipo de forte carga religiosa não significa necessariamente a divinização do evento nem sua pretensão messiânica (o mesmo poderia ser dito, por exemplo, da bandeira do Brasil, cujo lema positivista "Ordem em Progresso" nela inscrito não faz deste país um agente ativo na promoção da filosofia positivista pelo mundo, que promete uma nova era de paz e progresso para a humanidade). Porém, sua simbologia e atuação inserem-se na tradição messiânica da Rússia. A exemplo do que comentei em uma outra postagem neste blog, a Rússia de hoje continua a reproduzir esta tradição com o objetivo de criar uma nova ordem mundial sob os escombros da atual. Seja sob a autoridade divina dos czares, seja sob a divinização do Partido e do triunfalismo comunista, seja sob a escatologia do atual Movimento Eurasiano, o messianismo russo mantém vivo em projetos políticos planetários voltados à formação de uma nova humanidade, um novo mundo criado à imagem e semelhança de seus planejadores sociais.

          O Fórum Conservador Russo Internacional é apenas uma das diversas investidas do Kremlin para alcançar este objetivo. Sua estratégia é revelada na narrativa conservadora e nacionalista onde se misturam elementos de tradição revolucionária (anti-conservadora, portanto), como fascistas, neo-nazistas e extremistas de direita, cujo ponto em comum não está tanto nos valores, mas no sentimento pró-Rússia e anti-EUA. O desconhecimento da missão deste evento pela grande maioria das pessoas mostra que este não é um plano com consentimento dos povos, muito menos de consentimento divino.

* Traduzido do russo pelo Google Tradutor e adaptado pelo autor.

sábado, 7 de outubro de 2017

The language as link of a nation: Russia and the Russian world.

(T-shirt with Byzantine symbol of the two-headed eagle, the Russia´s map with the national flag and the country´s name written in Russian: unifying symbols of the nation.)

          Last July 20th, Russian president Vladimir Putin made a pronouncement at the Presidential Council on Inter-Ethnical Issues in Yoshkar-Ola, capital of the small republic of Mari El, about the inter-ethnic relations in the country. The republic has about 700 thousand people, being around 47% of Russians and 43% of the mari ethnic group, whose descendentes belongs to the Finno-Ugric people originating from the Northern and Eastern Europe and that have interaction with Russian ethnicity.         

(Putin at the Presidential Council on Inter-Ethnical Issues meeting, in Yoshkar-Ola, July 20th, 2017.)

          According to the US analyst Paul A. Golbe, expert on ethnic and religious issues of Eurasia, in his speech Putin stated that all ethnic non-Russians should learn the Russian language, while ethnic Russians shouldn´t be forced to learn the language of the republics in which they live and which are culturally characterized by the predominant ethnic group. Goble takes a critical stance on this speech stating it applies two-and-a-half measures with regard to the ethnic status of the groups that make up Russia, privileging ethnic Russians to the detriment of other ethnic groups and stimulating the national passions of both sides.

          Golbe transcripts the Putin´s commentary, who says: “Russian language forus is the state language, the language of inter-ethnic communication, and it cannot be replaced by anything else. It is the natural spiritual skeleton of all our multi-national country. Everyone msut know it … The languages of the peoples of Russia are also an inalienable aspect of the unique culture of the peoples of Russia.” The speech is clear: Russia has a peculiar, unique culture whose multinational unity is woven by the language, the center, the main structure of it´s culture. According to Putin, the non-Russians languages are not property of the State as the Russian language is, but belong to their respective peoples. The Constitution guarantees their study, but voluntarily and not mandatory like the mother tongue. “To force someone to study a language which is not his native tongue is impermissible”, said the President. The exception is the Russian, mandatory in all whole country.

          According to Golbe, Putin treated non-Russians cultures from the perspective of turism and public events, so that the Russians could get to know another cultures, noting that the development and popularization of these regions are of extremely importace given that Russia "is unique in the multiplicity of it´s nature and national traditions". It turns out that the President made reference only to the extraterritorial national communities, municipalities and regional officials, but not to the ethnic groups which have their own republics with their own laws according to their culture. In Golbe´s view, this is a "silence that spoke more loudly" given  the importance of these regions in the formation and structure of the country.

          The emphasys in the peculiarity of the Russian culture is a recurrent narrative in Putin´s speeches, who usually evokes espiritual and civilizational issues when he addresses this theme. It clear in his speech of the July 20th that the Russian culture is the link that unites the multiethnic nation, a prevailing culture.

(São Paulo, the largest city of Brazil and the Americas, with 11 million inhabitants, the scene of Svetlana Ruseishvili´s research: the researcher considered as Russians the people in the city based on the linguistic unity.)

          This Putin´s view can be better understood by distinguishing the role of each national group within Russia, historically constructed as a multinational empire. In her PhD thesis in Sociology at the University of São Paulo Ser russo em São Paulo ("To be Russian in São Paulo"), Russian-born Svetlana Ruseishvili, based in Brazil, seeks to answer the question: "What is to be Russian?" to mark her field approach. Ruseishvili reminds us that Russia must be understood according to the imperialistic nature of it´s state, where the ethnical and civic dimensios of being Russian aren´t totally separeted (all ethnic Russians are Russian citizens, as well as all non-ethnic Russian who lives within the country´s border).

          Ruseishvili explains that as the Empire expanded from the 16th century onwards, various ethnic groups were incorporated into it´s domain, creating different citizens categories according to their ethnic identity. The assimilation obeyed geographical and cultural criteria, and the people "with little degree of citizenship" received a inferior administritve and political status. The author says:        
"The concern of an Empire in organizing it´s conquered territories in a segregated way, giving to some greater cultural and political weight than to others, created a conception of ethnical belonging as an inherent attribute of each individual, being imutable and inherited." (p. 179)
          The sociologist uses the idea of common language to explain the so-called "Russian world". Understanding the Russian world through the ideia of common language, the term acquires a conception that is similar to that of the Russian Academy, conceptualized as:
"...a transnational cultural space whose main element is the Russian language. With no doubt, the ideological dimension of this concept cannot be ignored: the Russian world is first and foremost a world of Russian colonization, with it´s history of 'russificiation' of the new territories as the main strategy of cultural assimilation." (p. 182)
          And she continues:
"However, the result of these policies has become a conception of ethnic nationality based primarily on linguistic belonging. In this way, the Russian language, a language difficult for non-native speakers, has become the univeral common denominator for a multilingual and multinational country like Russia. Paraphrasing Elias, the Russian language effectively changed in an institution that allows to speak of the existence of a national habitus in Russia" (p. 182) 
          Before this part, Ruseishvili reproduces passages written by the German sociologist Norbert Elias, for whom the national counscience, the personality of a people, "cristallize in institutions that have the responsability of ensuring" that several different people acquire the same national habitus. For him, the common language is the "most immediate" example of this habitus

          It was on the basis on the common usage of the anguage which the Russian sociologist defined who the Russians and their descendents are in São Paulo. The language "is the central element of understanding of what I have called here 'to be Russian'". This is the delimiting factor of this social group´s bounderies capable of giving it internal cohesion and that allows people of different ethnicities to present themselves as Russians without exposing their original identity. In this way, Ruseishvili delimited her field research where, in addition to ethnic Russians, she approached Jews, Ukrainians, Bessarabians and Lithuanians all as Russians.
  
          For Russians, therefore, the Russian language is the national habitus and element of the culture that manifest itsefl more directly in national institutions. In this case, the school would be the main vehicle and disseminator of the language. Goble doesn´t speak about the school in Putin´s speech, but this can be implied given it´s role as propagator of the civic and national values. For the Portuguese historian Fernando Catroga, in the book "Between God and Ceasers", the school is responsible for instilling civic values in people:
"In appealing to the needing of education to provide a common moral and social education, it demanded the sharing of common values and ideas about the world and life (...), worldliness that the action of the political power (...) would have to become hegemonic in order to 'create' rationalistic and patriotic citizens. What, as we saw, didn´t exempt the socializing role, if not from a civil religion (...), at least some kind of 'secular' or 'civic religion'" (p. 302-303)
(View of the Kremlin: in Russia the state has strong presence within society, including as promoter of the Russian culture throughout the centuries, like the mother tongue.)

               The Catroga´s quotation occurs within his analysis of the Church-State relationship in an historical perspective to highlight the school´s role in propagation of values. This is particularly relevant in Russia because of the strong state´s role in social life, where even the church was under it´s direct influence. For centuries the political authority was above the religious authorities with several moments of tension. The church was submissive to political power not only during the Soviet period, as Ruseishvili relates, but throughout all period since the reign of Peter, the Great. According to the British historianl Benedict H. Sumner, in 1721 the emperor abolished the Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church and replaced it by an administrative board, the Holy Synod. The emperor Alexander I went further: in 1824 he appointed a chief prosecutor (in practice a minister of state) to lead the Synod. This situations lasted until the Russian Revolution in 1917. With the restauration of the Patriarchate in 1918, however, came it´s submition to a body directly linked to the CPSU and the massive anti-religious persecution, particularly in 1929 and 1937. Today, even though Church and State are oficially separeted, in practice there´s a relation of dependence and mutual support: the church is tied to the ctate and depends on it for it´s revival and maintenance (the reconstruction of churches and monasteries detroyed during the Soviet period was supported and financed by the Kremlin and the new oligarchs); on the other hand the state seeks support and legitimacy in the church as way of uniting the country and exalting nation sentiment.

               From this we can conclude that the Russian state isn´t only an administrator of the public affairs, but above all a structure which seeks to embrace the whole of society and, therefore, to define the role and values that it must bear. Looking at the country´s history described by Sumner, as the Russian state expands, it also expands it´s activities within various domains of public life, particularly since the Peter the Great administration. In Russia, State and society walk thogether or, to be more exact, the State walks above the society and even the Church.   

          When Golbe says that Putin didn´t make reference to non-Russian republics, but only the nations without their own territory, it´s implied that the priority of the Russian language over all others goes beyond the school and embrace the entire state apparatus. This doesn´t means that these groups don´t have their own state apparatus capable of propagating the mother tongue, but rather that these languages are of secundary importance to the national project of promotion of the Russia´s mother tongue.             

          I don´t intend here to qualify what Putin said, but to conclude this brief analysis by stating that for what we call Russia, the Russian ethnicity doens´t prevail over the others only in number (equivalent to 82% of the country´s population), but also formally through official promotion of their mother tongue. In this way, the state acts to promote national and territorial unity through a specific culture, but without necessarily depreciate other cultures, since there´s no legally prohibition of teaching the language of the non-Russian ethnicity.

(Map of the ethnic group of the former USSR: the mother tongue generally goes along to the corresponding ethnic groups. The Russian language - whose ethnic group appears in red - is the most widespread in the region, and goes beyond the ethnic and national borders of present-day Russia.)

          Meanwhile the evocation of the "Russian world" along with ethnic and linguistic contours as a vector of the Moscow´s foreign policy is a concern for neighbours like Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, which have military presence of Russia, as well as for other countries of the former USSR, which witness the "multiplication" of Russian citizens by granting citizenship to it´s inhabitants. In this way the Russian world enlarges legally and Moscow starts to claim the right over these populations. But this already is another problem.

* Published in Portuguese on July 24th, 2017.