The Post Soviet Space: Paradigm Shift and Social Control

The following is an excerpt (my translation) from a forum by Dmitry Djangirov pertaining to the current political and social climate in Russia, Ukraine and, more broadly, the West.

The processes that we’re seeing in the post-Soviet space are now widespread on a global scale. They are occurring in different forms and in various stages all across the world. Naturally, in places like Russia and the Ukraine they are occurring at an accelerated pace secondary to the shock and deconstruction of late 80s and early 90s. If we are to focus our attention on the “governing elite”, as we inevitably end up doing, then from our vantage point, we can observe that the elite are now in a situation where they are uncertain of how to proceed. With this, we see that the ruling class has lost their competency, as it were. They are losing grip of their omnipotent and omniscient force that once firmly dictated the trajectory of the world.

With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, which saw the elimination of Socialism, we saw rejection of modernism. It is important to note here that modernism exists in three distinct socio-economic modes: capitalism, in the purest sense of the word; fascism, where capital is tied to national interests; and socialism, where capital is nonexistent. All three forms are sacred proponents of progress, including the fascist and socialistic-communist myths of progress. Within these modes, science has replaced religion, in the positive sense, as science is believed to eventually reach a point where all answers pertaining to life and matter will be answered; our knowledge is limitless; and that ultimately all of human civilization must be relentlessly endeavoring toward technical and social progress.

Ukraine, just like the rest of the post-Soviet space, existed for a long time in the form of socialism. With the abandonment of socialism, the post-Soviet space saw the abandonment of modernism, including its constituents—belief in scientific and technical progress, industrialization, et cetera. I will jump forward here and note that there is a slight difference with Russia, as the ruling elite’s imperialist mindset is focused on the military-industrial complex which, given its focus on scientific and technical progress, naturally exists in the realm of modernism. To return to the topic of Ukraine, however, it is vital to note that the technical and scientific progress which the country benefits from (i.e., internet, computers, cars, programmers) is less a function of modernism, and more a function of globalism.

The question then becomes, are the oligarchs, who occupy noticeable ranks in Forbes, considered capitalists? The answer is no. They are not part of the capitalist system. They are segments of the Feudal system, because if we are to look at your average Ahkmetov, and subtract all privileges and preferences that he receives because of the budget, tariffs, loss write-offs, and everything else, then we see that he does not meet the capitalist criteria, which is to produce goods and services. Their actions destroy the production of goods and services, raw and technical, while their income is the result of a unilateral redistribution of wealth garnered by its citizens. It is not the bureaucratic–capitalistic apparatus that works for the oligarchs, but the oligarchs who are considered the junior partners of the governmental bureau-capitalist system. Together, they appropriate the net worth of those goods and services produced by their citizens. Oligarchs are not individuals who are considered experts at navigating capitalist relations, nor are they masters at creating additional value. They are adept at the human-relations necessary to coordinate with the bureau-capitalist system. There are those oligarchs who are unsinkable, seen in countries like Russia and Ukraine, and then there are those self-proclaimed capitalists, who encounter issues such as suicide, bankruptcy, and sanctions. These same oligarchs do not understand that by detaching themselves from government, they are removing themselves from the well that nourishes them, as they lack the certain competency required to survive and flourish in the capitalist system, where goods and services must be provided.

The religious revival seen today is a symptom of the desire to escape the current modernist paradigm, since the individual believes, perhaps subconsciously, that upon reaching a dead-end, the rational solution is to move backward in order to find an exit.