Invasion of Ukraine revolutionised the Russian symbolics introducing a new, previously unknown symbol Z. What does Z even mean? Neither Russians, nor foreigners have any idea. It is clearly a forced meme. And I have a guess on who forced it🧵
The choice of Z-letter looks weird. First, it doesn't look like anything Russian or Soviet propaganda used before, making it hard to understand. Second, it's not a Cyrillic, but a foreign looking Latin letter. Which makes its choice as a symbol for the "patriotic" war problematic
Unlike most European alphabets which are based on Latin, Russian alphabet evolved from the Greek, which makes it harder for Westerners to understand. Some of the Russian letters look alike their Western analogues - A, E, K, O, C, T. But Russian "З" (ze) looks nothing like "Z"
In pretty much all of official propaganda slogans are written with normal Cyrillic letters. And only two letters - В and З are written in Latin as V and Z. Paradoxically, using this Latin letters instead of normal Cyrillic ones manifests loyalism and support of the war in Ukraine
Changing Russian З and В letters to Latin Z and V, you shows your loyalism. Other letters don't have to be changed. That's why names of pro-Kremlin Telegram channels and chats now look as a weird mix of Cyrillic and Latin. If it was all in Cyrillic, it would be viewed as neutral
From these two pro-war symbols Z and V the former is viewed as more "radical". That's how you track the gradual disillusionment in this war. Take this channel. It used to be called "Империя курильщика|Z". Very radical. Then radical Z changed to a moderate V. Now he deleted even V
What does Z mean? Nobody quite understands. Some try to explain it as the first letter of the phrase "За победу" (For victory). But why do you need to replace a normal Russian З to a weird Latin Z which has almost no recognisable allusions to the Russian culture or narrative?
So far I haven't found good explanations of what does Z mean. These analyses for example don't look sufficient. One points out to Z being a dynamic letter easy to paint. That's not wrong. Another calls it "dangerous". That's not wrong either. Still, it doesn't explain anything
Russians are just as puzzled by Z as Westerners. Watch Russian state TV trying to Zsplain to its audience. They admit that the choice of Latin letters Z and V is a "secret that preoccupies everyone". They admit it's a problem and try to link them to the ancient Cyrillic letters
We have a problematic symbol. It's completely ununderstandable and previously unknown. It's also Latin which makes it problematic in the context of a patriotic war against the West. And ofc it's forced down everyone's throats by the power of the state. Prisoners have no choice
Mortally ill children from a hospice are made to form a Z-letter. When I posted this story the first time many considered it unbelievable, so I'll post a source. Unfortunately you can't judge news from Russia based on your "common sense". That doesn't work kommersant.ru/doc/5249130
Regions and city administrations launched Z-actions all over the country. One typical move was lighting their windows in a way to form a Z-letter. Here you see a regional parliament of Arkhangelsk lighting its windows to form a Z-letter doing it. That's very typical behavior
Governor of the Kemerovo region in Siberia declared that the region which is often called "Кузбасс" will be now styled as "КуZбасс" in all its official materials. Like the Donbass, Kuzbass is a major coal mining region, hence the "bass", short form of bassein
Забайкалье region to the east of the Baikal lake now styles itself as Zабайкалье in all official materials. As a general rule, regional elites show extreme compliance with the Z-propaganda, indicating that it is all a coordinated policy, and coordinated by Kremlin
So what does Z mean? Nobody quite understands. Westerners don't and honestly speaking Russians don't either. So let's ask another question - where does it come from? Some argue that initially Z,V and others were simply signs on Russian vehicles and then were chosen as symbols
Sounds fair. And yet, the question remains - chosen by whom? The argument about Russian "people" or even "journalists" choosing it sounds very weak. No one who ever lived in Russia would believe in such BS. Russia doesn't allow *any* initiative from the bottom
Consider a Russian nationalist Kholmogorov. He applied for a permit for a demonstration *in support* of the Russian army in Ukraine. Prosecutors issued him a warning which can very easily turn into a legal prosecution. No initiative from the bottom is allowed in the modern Russia
It's insane to assume that in such a centralised, bottom-down country as Russia which extirpates any agency among its subjects, punishing them for every unsolicited activity however loyalist, such a massive campaign as Z could come from the bottom. Nope. It must come from the top
Nazism is now strongly associated with esotericism. That's not wrong. And yet, judging from primary sources it wasn't Hitler who pushed this agenda. It was primarily Himmler, who forced mysticism and occultism down everyone's throats with only a grudging agreement of Hitler
Let's revise what we know of Z-symbol:
1) it's foreign 2) it's ununderstandable 3) it has no references in the Russian culture and tradition *
* The only exception I'm aware of is Brodsky's poem "A letter to General Z, criticising the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968
What can we assume about the person who chose and forced Z as the symbol of invasion?
1) creative and unafraid to experiment with ideology and symbolics 2) markedly high-brow. He probably views himself as a big intellectual 3) has strong propensity to occultism and esotericism
Even more importantly, Z-author must be a personal "friend" (= member of the closest circle) of Putin. Since all the authority in Russia is personified in the Tsar, the person who pushed Z must have a direct access to and influence on the Tsar
Finally, a quick and most importantly *creative* compliance of regional elites indicates that Z-enforcer is directly involved into the domestic policy-making. Governors don't just comply (that's easy). They also understand what he wants. That's much more difficult to execute
We don't have enough evidence to determine who is the author of Z-symbol. But we know just enough to make an educated guess. Most probably, it's the Russian Czar for Domestic Policy, a person who teaches, selects and guides Russian governors. So, Sergey Kirienko. End of 🧵
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The primary weakness of this argument is that being true, historically speaking, it is just false in the context of American politics where the “communism” label has been so over-used (and misapplied) that it lost all of its former power:
“We want X”
“No, that is communism”
“We want communism”
Basically, when you use a label like “communism” as a deus ex machina winning you every argument, you simultaneously re-define its meaning. And when you use it to beat off every popular socio economic demand (e.g. universal healthcare), you re-define communism as a synthesis of all the popular socio economic demands
Historical communism = forced industrial development in a poor, predominantly agrarian country, funded through expropriation of the peasantry
(With the most disastrous economic and humanitarian consequences)
Many are trying to explain his success with some accidental factors such as his “personal charisma”, Cuomo's weakness etc
Still, I think there may be some fundamental factors here. A longue durée shift, and a very profound one
1. Public outrage does not work anymore
If you look at Zohran, he is calm, constructive, and rarely raises his voice. I think one thing that Mamdani - but almost no one else in the American political space is getting - is that the public is getting tired of the outrage
Outrage, anger, righteous indignation have all been the primary drivers of American politics for quite a while
For a while, this tactics worked
Indeed, when everyone around is polite, and soft (and insincere), freaking out was a smart thing to do. It could help you get noticed
People don’t really understand causal links. We pretend we do (“X results in Y”). But we actually don’t. Most explanations (= descriptions of causal structures) are fake.
There may be no connection between X and Y at all. The cause is just misattributed.
Or, perhaps, X does indeed result in Y. but only under a certain (and unknown!) set of conditions that remains totally and utterly opaque to us. So, X->Y is only a part of the equation
And so on
I like to think of a hypothetical Stone Age farmer who started farming, and it worked amazingly, and his entire community adopted his lifestyle, and many generations followed it and prospered and multiplied, until all suddenly wiped out in a new ice age
1. Normative Islamophobia that used to define the public discourse being the most acceptable form of racial & ethnic bigotry in the West, is receding. It is not so much dying as rather - failing to replicate. It is not that the old people change their views as that the young do not absorb their prejudice any longer.
In fact, I incline to think it has been failing to replicate for a while, it is just that we have not been paying attention
Again, the change of vibe does not happen at once. The Muslim scare may still find (some) audience among the more rigid elderly, who are not going to change their views. But for the youth, it is starting to sound as archaic as the Catholic scare of know nothings
Out of date
2. What is particularly interesting regarding Mamdani's victory, is his support base. It would not be much of an exaggeration to say that its core is comprised of the young (and predominantly white) middle classes, with a nearly equal representation of men and women
What does Musk vs Trump affair teach us about the general patterns of human history? Well, first of all it shows that the ancient historians were right. They grasped something about nature of politics that our contemporaries simply can’t.
Let me give you an example. The Arab conquest of Spain
According to a popular medieval/early modern interpretation, its primary cause was the lust of Visigoth king Roderic. Aroused by the beautiful daughter of his vassal and ally, count Julian, he took advantage of her
Disgruntled, humiliated Julian allied himself with the Arabs and opens them the gates of Spain.
Entire kingdom lost, all because the head of state caused a personal injury to someone important.
One thing you need to understand about wars is that very few engage into the long, protracted warfare on purpose. Almost every war of attrition was planned and designed as a short victorious blitzkrieg
And then everything went wrong
Consider the Russian war in Ukraine. It was not planned as a war. It was not thought of as a war. It was planned as a (swift!) regime change allowing to score a few points in the Russian domestic politics. And then everything went wrong
It would not be an exaggeration to say that planning a short victorious war optimised for the purposes of domestic politics is how you *usually* end up in a deadlock. That is the most common scenario of how it happens, practically speaking