Russia’s president and national leader has again hit upon a fresh idea for society. In his opinion, the Bolsheviks picked up and creatively developed the basic principles of world religions – from adopting the Moral Code of the Builder of Communism to erecting a mausoleum for the chief communist of all times and peoples on the main square of Russia.
It is no secret that Russian society has long been debating on what to do with the mausoleum and Lenin’s body in it. Interestingly, in the early 1990s there were far more people who opposed, rather than supported, the burial of the body of Lenin. This ratio has changed now to the contrary. At the moment, according to the Public Opinion Foundation, more than 56 percent of the polled support and 28 percent oppose the idea of burying Lenin’s body. Moreover, the number of the former is growing slowly but steadily, and there are fewer and fewer undecided.
Tellingly, the just-appointed Minister of Culture, Vladimir Medinsky, known for his rather original interpretation of history and propensity to borrow major passages from the works of other authors without referring to the latter, has come out for burying Lenin’s body. But it is clear now that the culture minister failed, due to his hesitations, to discern the national leader’s line. For, some time before that, Vladimir Putin had voiced an opinion that is close to what Medinsky said. But this belongs to the past now. The Russian propaganda machine has taken one more step towards the well-known and time-tested Soviet past – towards its symbols, to be more exact.
As is known, Soviet power positioned itself, through the mouth of its leaders, as one that works for the benefit of the people. In real life, it did this via the Party’s armed units, such as Cheka – OGPU – NKVD – MGD – KGB. Publicly, this was done at congresses and conferences to a thunderous and standing ovation. Now that Putin has seen thousands-strong protest rallies at Bolotnaya Square, he apparently decided to strengthen ties with the people under his charge. To this end, it was decided to make authorized representatives a permanent, not just pre-election, institution. To quote the Kremlin’s press service, this institution “will be a permanent channel of feedback with society during the whole presidential term.” Putin has 550 representatives of this kind, including the well-known pop singers Stas Mikhailov, Stas Piekha, and Nadezhda Babkina, soccer players Andrei Arshavin, Igor Akinfeyev, and Aleksandr Kerzhakov. Also present are the pro-Kremlin political scientists Dmitry Orlov and Sergei Markov.
Addressing his authorized representatives, President Putin said that the Lenin mausoleum on Red Square continues traditions of the world religions that call for venerating the relics of saints. “Go to the Holy Mount Athos, and you will see the relics of saints. So, in this sense, the communists took over this tradition, and they did it skillfully to meet the requirements of that era,” the president said. He also opined that the communist ideology had borrowed many postulates from religion.
The latter claim is not new. The well-known dissident Vladimir Bukovsky was once diagnosed the Serbsky Institutes as having the proverbial “low-intensity schizophrenia” for, among other things, comparing the Moral Code of the Builder of Communism with the Christian commandments. I wonder if the present-day Russian psychiatrists are finding similar signs in their national leader.
In general, this attempt to unite the ununitable looks somewhat strange. Bolshevism and communism, as a doctrine, was openly hostile to any, and, first of all, Christian, religion. This is a random factor. Simply, Russia was predominantly a Christian country within the borders of that time. And the Bolsheviks cracked down, first of all, on the Christian clergy of all ranks. After a short-time flirtation, the same happened to Muslim, Buddhist, and other priests. In Mongolia, a very religious country, where 100 percent of the population professed Buddhism, the staunch followers of Soviet communists practically eliminated all lamas and other Buddhist clergymen. Only those who managed to flee to neighboring China survived. And the leader of Albania and a true Stalinist, Enver Hoxha, boasted of wiping out religion in his country.
And now the Russian president is telling the whole world that communists “did it skillfully to meet the requirements of that era.” What requirements? To kill those who dissent or who belong to a certain class, which is very loose criterion? The Soviet communists did such a good job of it that they can only be compared to such misanthropes as Hitler or Pol Pot.
If we digress from Putin’s pseudo-religious discourses, we should dwell on the political goals he pursues.
The Russian authorities were seriously unbalanced from top to bottom by wintertime protests. Nobody should be misguided by the fact that the number of demonstrators and protestors has somewhat dwindled. The protest mood still stays on, all the more so that the government is going to take such clearly unpopular measures as raising public utility rates, etc. Railway ticket prices have already gone up, and ministers are forcing people to believe that Gazprom is so much indebted that it cannot possibly be saved unless household gas charges are raised. The idea is to urgently find and perform an informational diversion and trigger a public debate on an abstract subject.
Another goal is to show the pro-communist electorate that the government reckons with it and will not allow an abrupt departure from the symbols of the past, while the national leader guarantees that their feelings will be respected.
It is rather doubtful that this tactic will be successfully employed. Firstly, it is not a proven fact that the removal of Lenin’s body is the No.1 problem for the elderly. The vast majority of them experience hardships, and they are much more concerned about daily wants.
Secondly, the response of the top Orthodox clergy is not so clear. They are certain to have integrated into the system of power and will never go into opposition. Nevertheless, the very basics are being encroached upon. It is too much to compare relics in a monastery, which are the case of a true burial, with what is going on around the body of an overt enemy and oppressor of church. It is no wonder that church fathers are keeping silent. And the problem here is not so much in the Russian Orthodox Church itself as in the reaction of its foreign branches. Although there was a formal unification, the foreign-based churches have preserved quite a considerable share of autonomy and deal with believers of a different mindset. This may raise some problems.
Thirdly, Russian nationalists categorically oppose what Putin said. In the opinion of a nationalist leader, Putin is running the risk of losing the support of many Orthodox and Cossack organizations. In the attempt to revive the imperial idea, the leadership will be playing a dangerous game if those who should, by definition, form its social basis are against it.
What we can see is an ideological crisis in the Russian system of government. The latter is trying to fill the ideological vacuum with the symbols of the past. Putin himself said this at the meeting: “Naturally, we must turn back to our roots but, undoubtedly, on a proper level.” It is through this prism that one should regard Putin’s initiative to restore the title “Hero of Labor.” The state proved to be unable to mobilize people for labor exploits without updating the title “Hero of Socialist Labor” and the accompanying order and medal. But will this help? Very doubtful indeed…
