You are here:   anti-Westernism > The Russian Enigma: Is The Bear Turning East?
 

As the Soviet Union disintegrated there was bound to be an ideological vacuum. It was relatively easy to reintegrate the Orthodox church in the new Russian ideology. The church were permitted to exist under Communism, admittedly under strict controls. Leading church dignitaries up to the very top were KGB informers. Independent priests were persecuted, sometimes arrested and sent to the Gulag. Under Boris Yeltsin much more freedom was granted to the church, which gave unconditional support to the government. This was widened further under Vladimir Putin. The church shared the governmental anti-Westernism and its conservative ideological orientation. Patriarch Kyrill accused Western European elites of being anti-Christian and anti-religious. As Father Vsevolod, head of the synodal department, declared in January, the Western models of society had become increasingly marginal for the rest of the world, incapable of coping with the challenges of the modern world. He envisaged growing resistance against the West based on a coalition of the Orthodox church, China, Africa and the rest of mankind. What form of resistance he left open — partly, apparently, spiritual partly military. This "spiritual response" of the church impressed Solzhenitsyn and others but they were not entirely convinced: how quickly the church had turned from being a tool of the KGB to an independent force.

There were certain bones of contention between state and church. The Orthodox church wanted supervision and control over all religions, not just the Pravoslav, but this the secular authorities could not give them. In recent years preparations have been made to reintroduce military chaplains in the Russian armed forces and even mobile churches. But this raised problems: would other religions, for instance Islam, be given similar privileges? Why should there be no mobile mosques? The number of Muslim recruits amounts, according to estimates, to 25 per cent in certain regions (the Caucasus, the lower Volga region, perhaps even in Moscow).

Under Patriarch Aleksei II (1990-2008) and his successor Kirill no serious conflicts developed but there were some curious mishaps, perhaps the inevitable result of less intervention by the organs of state security. There was the curious case of the priest Vyacheslav Polosin, who headed the parliamentary committee dealing with religious affairs. He converted to Islam and has devoted much of his time and energy in the years since to attacking the Rothschilds and George Soros who, he claimed, were the real forces behind the Arab Spring, which he thought an exceedingly nefarious phenomenon.

Another scandal was caused by a leading but controversial Moscow cleric who claimed that within the church a powerful homosexual lobby was active. But if there was indeed such a lobby it seems not to have been very effective since it failed to prevent anti-gay legislation in 2013. Putin and former President Medvedev as well as the Moscow mayor have paid respect to the Orthodox church by attending services on various occasions, notably at Easter. But such gestures were not sufficient to prevent widespread riots with a religious-ethnic background in southern Moscow, especially in Biryulyovo, a neighbourhood of markets, in 2013.

Not all supporters of the Russian extreme Right are practising Christians. There has also been a certain influence of neo-paganism, especially among neo-fascist groups and also in the teaching of Aleksander Dugin, perhaps the most influential single theoretician in these circles. But the church has history on its side and an organisation dating back many centuries. Hence the neo-paganists have been cautious not to stress their Orthodox deviations.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
MunsuDC
April 10th, 2014
11:04 AM
Unbelievably low level of analysis, maybe that's normal for the West now. Facts are also misinterpreted. But let's point out just one thing: "more than 60 per cent of Russian citizens believe that the US is the greatest danger to world peace — three times as many as in Iran and most Arab countries. True, when asked in which country they would like to live if it were not Russia, an overwhelming majority of Russians opt for the US. But such contradictions" – what is contradictory? US is the dominant force of the era, the most aggressive one and the most prosperous. Unlike Iran or other countries the West hypocritically makes out to be "a threat", US has both the reason for world-wide agression and the power to back it up, and without any conspiracy theory we see americans intervening everywhere. It's certainly better to live inside such empire than be its target, even the dumbest people can understand this much. But the pretentious Western journalists cannot, huh?

AxelNyblaeus
March 27th, 2014
10:03 AM
These things are beginning to look more like wishful thinking than actual attempts to analyze Russia. Inconsistencies abound (Russia will be a "junior partner" with China, whereas its role in a relationship with the IMF, Europe and the US would be what, dominant? Even equal?). The lack of economic insight on the traditionalist Right is the only point where it is weaker than the West, which has no faith in itself, no actual population (it is deemed replaceable) and no sense of future or meaning. Also, how could one describe tha Arab spring as anything else than a horrible waste of human life?

Eugene_B
March 24th, 2014
3:03 PM
Toooo many lies.

IA
March 24th, 2014
2:03 PM
Not a bad article but obtuse. No need to belabor obscure reasons why Russians fear the modern liberal West. They are reacting the same way millions of westerners are (with alarm) to what is increasingly perceived as morally degenerate and cultural/spiritual, and ultimately, economic suicide.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.