Kamil Galeev Profile picture
Jun 19, 2022 21 tweets 7 min read Read on X
Some believe that the current escalation between Russia and the West is just a personal decision of Putin. Not quite. Watch this Yeltsin's speech in Beijing in 1999 before meeting Li Peng. Three weeks later Yeltsin abdicated, leaving the PM Putin as the acting President of Russia
Many in Russia presumed that "good" Yeltsin made a horrible mistake, accidentally appointing "bad" Putin as his successor. I don't believe that. Three last Yeltsin's PMs were all career intelligence officers. He was actively looking for such an heir and was vetting the candidates Image
Putin's track was kinda typical. Consider his predecessor Stepashin. The FSB Chief. Then Minister for Internal Affairs under Kirienko. Then the Prime Minister. It's a track very similar to Putin's except in the end the Tsar made a different choice. Poor Stepashin (on the right) Image
Would Stepashin be any different? Doubt. In this interview he basically admits that in 1991 when the KGB was under a risk of dissolution he preserved the state security intact

"State security should not be politicised"

Well, that's a political statement

kommersant.ru/doc/4850190 Image
Conclusion:

The problem is not in Putin. The problem is not in Yeltsin making a wrong choice (he knew perfectly well what choice he was doing). The problem is in Tsar's uncontested right to just appoint an heir at his own discretion

The Tsar's power is the real problem here Image
It's also wrong to paint Putin as some sort of dark & powerful personality who just submitted everyone to his will. Watch this interview upon his appointment President's Property Management Service in 1996. Humble, shy. Proud of his acquaintanceship with Chubais and Berezovsky
Putin's badass image is not based on his personality. It's based on his position. It's based on him being the Tsar in a political system that grants the unconstrained power to the Tsar Image
The foundation of Putin's power is the quasimonarchic political culture which is very common in Russia and absolutely dominant among the central political elite, the courtiers. This culture is well reflected in the language. Consider this famous quote by Matvienko Image
Or the answer of Miller, CEO of Gazprom to a journalist's question on whether his contract gonna be renewed:

"I am a Sovereign's [государев] человек. If I am offered to stay on my job, I'll stay" Image
Some would argue that Russian courtiers call Putin the "Sovereign" ironically. I'm not so sure. I'd argue that these casua and not well thought remarks reflect their real way of thinking. Sovereignty is an attribute of the the Sovereign who is the only source of power in Russia Image
The problem is not in Putin. The problem is in the quasi monarchic political structure of Russia. Therefore, this problem can not be solved by changing Putin to "someone better". It can be solved only by dismantling the system of imperial power entirely
Why is quasimonarchic culture so prevalent in Russia? Well, it all comes to leverage and incentives. Tsar's Court has leverage to obliterate anyone who raises a voce against them and they will use it. So others are incentivised to never object. That's why Russia is so obedient Image
The entire discussion about whether the Russians "support" or "not support" the regime is insane. First, it treats Russia as something homogeneous. Second, it is based on assumption that raising a voice against the regime is even an option. It is not Image
Yeah, theoretically supporting the regime or standing up against it are both free choices. In reality though there's a huge asymmetry here incentives-wise. You don't lose much by supporting the Kremlin or just shutting up. But if you stand up you can lose hella lot
That doesn't mean everyone will actually work hard for the regime. It just means that you won't see a public dissent of the elites because anyone who raises a voice will be selected out immediately. Any real dissent will go only in the form of silent sabotage
It's not gonna be open, idealistic and collective action that gonna destroy the Russian Federation. To the contrary, it gonna be the silent, pragmatic and individual actions by elites. Such as the growing economic protectionism of regions, breaking the national economic cohesion Image
Dismantling the Russian empire is a necessary prerequisite for enfranchising the Russian people. "Support" of the regime is not so much a support as learnt helplessness due to anyone objecting to the Tsar's Court being destroyed. Thus destruction of a Court is necessary
*Any* politician who takes Putin's place in Kremlin will act much like Putin. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Human beings of such integrity, selflessness and humility that won't be corrupted by the Tsar's power just don't exist Image
Tsar's power is based on the quasi-monarchic political culture in Russia. And the quasi-monarchic culture is based on anyone raising the voice against being crushed. The Tsar's Court has the leverage, others have an incentive to shut up. That's a vicious cycle. It must be broken
The only way to break it is for as may regions as possible breaking free, thus getting out of the reach of Kremlin. If you are independent, it becomes much harder for Kremlin to crush the dissent and silence other voices. That's a necessary prerequisite for enfranchisement
For some reason inconceivable to me, the potential dissolution of Russian Federation is being viewed purely through the ethnic lenses, as "minorities breaking away" and Russians staying under the agency-extirpating power of Kremlin. But Russians deserve agency, too. End of 🧵

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Kamil Galeev

Kamil Galeev Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @kamilkazani

Jul 1
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)

So, yes, living under the actual communism sucks
Read 5 tweets
Jun 28
Some thoughts on Zohran Mamdani’s victory

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 Image
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
Read 8 tweets
Jun 28
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.
Theory: X -> Y

Reality:

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
Read 6 tweets
Jun 26
Some thoughts on Zohran Mamdani's victory:

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
Read 12 tweets
Jun 21
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.Image
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 Image
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. Image
Read 4 tweets
Jun 19
On the impending war with Iran

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
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(