Thread by @kamilkazani

What you should know about @navalny?

1. Far right politician, promoter of hate propaganda
2. Never disowned his extremist agenda or assumed responsibility for it. When being called out, he lied and smeared his critics
3. Enjoyed thorough whitewashing by Moscow & Western media🧵

@navalny started his independent political career in 2007, co-founding an ethnonationalist "Narod" movement and launching the Radio of the Thousand Hills style propaganda. Remember this video, we'll need it later to judge integrity of:

a) @navalny
b) journalists whitewashing him

For context:

The 2000s were an era of the mass nationalist violence in Russia. The golden age of "White trains" with nationalist gangs entering the public transport and attacking those who didn't look sufficiently white. The far right wave was real and @navalny aimed to ride it

This 2011 video illustrates how @navalny resorts to lies and smear, when facing the (factually correct) criticism. Remember the cockroaches video? He:

1) denies its existence
2) compares a prof who called him out with Putin's propagandists
3) jokingly demands him being demoted

Notice that a prof did not express any opinion at all. He just pointed out to a verifiable fact - the cockroach video produced by @navalny. Still, Navalny refuses to take any responsibility. He lies, denying a verifiable fact. After that he resorts to smear against his critic

Let's zoom in @albats-@navalny dialogue:

A: [I was told] you called the Gastarbeiters cockroaches in the Internet. Yes or no? (laughs)
N: First, no. Second, if this question was asked by Kurginyan or Soloviev or one of their kind... It's a question of the same nature. Nonsense

A: So you are sure that in no video clip, nowhere...
N: If professors are using such sources of information, we'll demote them from tenure
A: You can't do that. In the US tenure is a lifetime job
N: With our mass actions we can do anything

That's a joke ofc. But a telling one

@navalny's logic:

1. Someone points out to a verifiable fact. In this case, Navalny's own video
2. He must be a Putinist propagandist like Kurginyan/Soloviev. Otherwise, why would he be doing that?
3. Demote him via mass action (joke ofc, @navalny knows he can't do anything)

This is a major counterargument against the "reformed @navalny" narrative. Yes, a man can change. But that requires integrity and willingness to assume responsibility for your actions. How probable it is that a persistent and passionate liar could change for the better?

@navalny enjoyed thorough whitewashing by the reputable Moscow & Western media. Consider this "good and balanced" article published in the New Yorker & recommended by @christogrozev

@mashagessen describes the cockroach video as an "argument for gun rights"

Systemic whitewashing

- Ok. Perhaps @navalny published some unfortunate videos spreading ethnic hatred and closely bordering the incitement to violence. But wasn't that incidental?

- Not quite. Review of @navalny's publications including those in his personal blog suggests it's a consistent worldview

In 2007 @navalny was kicked out of a liberal Yabloko party for his nationalist activities. His own blogpost comments may provide some context for this decision:

"Judging from your surname you are a Ukrainian. You have no place in YABLOKO"

Source:
navalny.livejournal.com/43277.html?thr…

More of @navalny's self-portrait. There are many more, too numerous to post here. If you are interested, you can check his livejournal

Source:

navalny.livejournal.com/142157.html?th…

During the Russian-Georgian war of 2008, @navalny called for deporting all Georgian citizens from Russia. He regretted Russia could not just "launch a cruise missile on the rodents' HQ"

["Rodents" (грызуны) sound similar to "Georgians" (грузины)]

Source
navalny.livejournal.com/274456.html

Source

navalny.livejournal.com/280013.html

@navalny's geopolitics. That's how he justified aggression against Georgia. Interestingly enough, Navalny's anti-Georgian rhetorics is surprisingly similar to Putin's anti-Ukrainian one. In particular, he described Saakashvili as "Hitler"/"Georgiahitler"

navalny.livejournal.com/277835.html

@navalny never disowned his old agenda. In this 2013 Facebook post he apologised for using an ethnic slur against Georgians, but confirmed that everything else he wrote back then is still on the table. His position didn't change

Source
facebook.com/navalny/posts/…

No other politician personified Russian hopes for the better future. Whose hopes you may ask? Well, hopes of the:

1) Moscow media establishment
2) Russian ultranationalists

Consider the Sputnik and Pogrom, the most popular Russian far right platform of the recent decades

You never heard about Sputnik and Pogrom? The most influential Russian ultranationalist media? Well, that's understandable. Russian internal discourse is systematically misrepresented by the media and academia. If you don't speak and read in Russian, you're probably being lied to

Sputnik and Pogrom had a mixed attitude towards @navalny. They criticised him when seeing him as unprincipled & opportunistic. At the same time, they repeatedly endorsed him as their only hope for the positive change. They did not see any alternative, much like the Western media

And @navalny endorsed their endorsements. See his retweet of a Sputnik and Pogrom birthday greetings from the 2013

If there's a moment when Navalny disowned his old platform, I am failing to see it

Source: Navalny's own Twitter

https://twitter.com/navalny/status/342346646492942336?lang=en

2016. When asked about "rodents", @Navalny tried to switch to the theme of corruption. Only when pressured again, he apologised for his "non-politically correct" anti-Georgian slur. Still, he claimed that his overall position "has not changed" since then

2017. When preparing for debates with Strelkov, @navalny listed the most serious Russian problems in his view. That looks exactly like his old platform minus trash talk. This is his old agenda, just in a more "respectable" form, without ethnic slurs and incitement for violence

Let's sum up:

1. @Navalny's remarks are not incidental. They reflect consistent ultranationalist vision
2. There's no sign of him being "reformed". While occasionally apologising for slurs, he claims his views haven't changed
3. He stopped trashtalking, that's how he changed

4. As there's no evidence of being "reformed", there's no indication he can be "reformed" in the future. Change is possible, but that requires integrity and readiness to assume responsibility for one's actions. What I see is a passionate denial of verifiable facts

5. "Reformed Navalny" narrative is constructed by first Moscow and then Western media establishment who have been whitewashing him since day one. How come? Well, the latter draw their opinions about Russian from the former. That's their main if not only source of "facts"

6. In their quest to whitewash @navalny Moscow and then Western media had to distort facts on a massive scale. They failed to call him out on his verifiable lies like @albats. They misrepresented the navalnist propaganda to present it in more favourable view like @mashagessen

7. Extremely biased and distorting presentation of @navalny by the Western media should not surprise us. They generally form their opinions based on "facts" selected and interpretations provided by the Moscow cultural establishment. I liked the "perspective laundering" formula

FAQ

Q: @Navalny may be shitty for the Russian minorities. But he would respect international borders. That's enough
A: He has repeatedly confirmed that his perspective on the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008 and creation of pro-Russian puppet states there has NOT changed

Q: The videos and livejournal posts are from the late 2000s. A lot of time has passed since then
A: He has repeatedly confirmed that his views have NOT changed. He never disowned his old views or platform. He stopped trashtalking and using the ethnic slurs. But that's it

Q: Can't a person change over the time?
A: Change is possible. But that requires integrity and readiness to assume the responsibility. I don't see anything that could indicate @navalny has these qualities. Denial doesn't suffice

@navalny Q: Ok, but at least he'll be a democrat, unlike Putin
A: His reaction when facing a 100% factually correct criticism is very showing. He denies it, smears a critic accusing him of acting as a propagandist and calls for demoting him. That's how he behaves *before* taking power

Q: I don't see any other solution
A: If you see a "solution" in handing the absolute power to an unrepented ultranationalist and imperialist, liar and slanderer, you must revise your set of assumptions. You probably borrowed your assumptions from the Moscow cultural establishment

Q: We must stop this war right now. @navalny will do it
A: Russia has lost this round of the war. Any, almost any Putin's successor would end hostilities [for now]. Putin would love to do it too, he just can't. Objectively speaking, Russia needs a truce to restock & regroup

Q: What about the anti-corruption fight?
A: You'll be surprised to learn how Putin started his Kremlin career and then consolidated power over Russia. Beware of "anticorruption fighters"

The end of 🧵

Selected sources:

1. "Navalny the Dentist" video. Yes, these are the excerpts from the Happy Tree Friends

2. The "cockroaches" video

Pretty much everyone in Russia will recognise the tune. It's from a super popular "In the world of the animals" TV Program. Provides some context for @navalny's "for guns rights argument" (according to the @NewYorker article)

3. A "good and balanced" @mashagessen's article, recommended by @christogrozev. A great example of "perspective laundering" in my view. Perspective of the Moscow cultural establishment forms the mainstream Western narrative

newyorker.com/news/our-colum…

4. A 2011 interview with @navalny

52:57 When facing a factually correct criticism (his own video), Navalny resorts to lies and smear, denying an easily verifiable fact. You can see how the host @albats fails (or chooses not to) call him out

5. 2016 interview

After being pressured twice, @navalny apologised for the "rodents" remark, but claimed that his position on the Russian-Georgian war hasn't changed. He tried to avoid this topic, switching to "corruption", but the host did not allow him

6. And of course @navalny's own blog. That's an endless discussion as there's too much to cover in this thread. If you are really interested, you can start reading here for example

navalny.livejournal.com/282477.html