10 ms·

This is still relevant today. As Kennan points out, Marxism was a mere "moral fig leaf" covering the nakedness of "insecure nationalism". The fig leaf seems t

This is still relevant today. As Kennan points out, Marxism was a mere "moral fig leaf" covering the nakedness of "insecure nationalism". The fig leaf seems to have been replaced in the era of Putin by a sort of generalized disdain for the west, and for western ideas like democracy and liberalism (in the sense of the word used in Europe, not the US). But nothing ever really changes for the Russian state. Putin's Russia can be described and understood in the same terms as Soviet Russia and Czarist Russia before it. I'll end by pointing out, again, as Kennan does, that I'm referring to the Russian state, rather than its long suffering people, who are some of the most warm hearted and genuine folks I've ever met.

idlewords 10y ago
You can draw parallels between autocratic periods in Russian history, but then you lose everything that's interesting and end up with a kind of cartoon. Even in Soviet times, when the ruling class was tied into the straitjacket of Marxist ideology, there were large shifts in foreign policy and attitude towards the outside world as different factions assumed power. Russia has a complicated relationship with the West that is not well served by a simplistic reading of its history.
- woodandsteel 10y ago
  I think you are correct in that for a long time many in Russia looked to the West for culture and even political ideas. Unfortunately, Soviet communism's explicit goal was to overthrow liberalism, and Putin is hardly any more friendly.
  - onetwotree 10y ago
    It goes back and forth. There's a constant tension in Russia's history between the West and "East", used in this context to mean an essentially anti-western turn.
- onetwotree 10y ago
  I'm not really advocating a simplistic reading of Russia's history. There are broad themes that are very important to understanding it, and these are generally constant. Among them is the tension between looking inward and outward, which does, as you mention, swing back and forth over time. Another important theme is, of course, that the Enlightenment never made it out of the Hermitage.
fierycatnet 10y ago
Kennan was also pretty critical of American foreign policy towards Russia in the 90's.

idlewords 10y ago

You can draw parallels between autocratic periods in Russian history, but then you lose everything that's interesting and end up with a kind of cartoon. Even in Soviet times, when the ruling class was tied into the straitjacket of Marxist ideology, there were large shifts in foreign policy and attitude towards the outside world as different factions assumed power. Russia has a complicated relationship with the West that is not well served by a simplistic reading of its history.

woodandsteel 10y ago
I think you are correct in that for a long time many in Russia looked to the West for culture and even political ideas. Unfortunately, Soviet communism's explicit goal was to overthrow liberalism, and Putin is hardly any more friendly.
- onetwotree 10y ago
  It goes back and forth. There's a constant tension in Russia's history between the West and "East", used in this context to mean an essentially anti-western turn.
onetwotree 10y ago
I'm not really advocating a simplistic reading of Russia's history. There are broad themes that are very important to understanding it, and these are generally constant. Among them is the tension between looking inward and outward, which does, as you mention, swing back and forth over time. Another important theme is, of course, that the Enlightenment never made it out of the Hermitage.

fierycatnet 10y ago

Kennan was also pretty critical of American foreign policy towards Russia in the 90's.