Sergey Radchenko Profile picture
Mar 30 11 tweets 2 min read Read on X
The Russian Orthodox Church holds the 25th congress of the "Russian world." They adopt a policy document: [in Russian]. I nearly spilled my coffee reading it. About every sentence is pure gold, but the gist is this:patriarchia.ru/db/text/611618…
1. Russia needs to increase its population to 600 million people. This is to be achieved through government propaganda of "traditional values," criminalization of abortions, and writing off mortgages for families who have more than 2 children.
2. Russia needs to stop non-Russian migration from Central Asia, and needs instead to attract "millions" of highly qualified cadres, presumably from the West or from among Russian expatriates, who will come because they share "traditional values" and are keen to integrate.
3. Russia needs to move away from modern cities and instead build individual houses with land in the countryside. 80% of the Russian population should live in such houses (the document does not mention the problem of outdoor plumbing, however).
4. Western science - especially social science - should be scrutinized and rejected in favor of traditional Russian values.
5. Ukraine should be annexed.
6. Borders of the Russian world do not coincide with Russia's actual borders.
Anyway, I put nos. 5 & 6 at the end, because though outrageous these come down to straightforward imperialism. The other points, though, are ideological through-and-through: de-modernization, de-urbanization, the creation, basically, of a Pol Pot-like rural utopia.
I chuckled at this. Russia is to be turned into the Gardariki of the 21st century. Gardariki was a medieval old Norse term for the lands of Rus'. Image
Here we go, a map, stolen from Wikipedia. Image
A f**** Taliban. The good news is that this has been tried before and we know it doesn't work. The bad news is that these pathetic clowns are desperate to try it again.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Sergey Radchenko

Sergey Radchenko 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 @DrRadchenko

Mar 17
Some takeaways from the Russian election.

1) This election is a sham.

This, of course, should be obvious, but it's important to restate this basic fact. What makes it a sham is *not* whether it actually reflects the views of Russian voters (on this more below), but whether it was conducted in accordance with accepted criteria for a free and fair election, which fundamentally entails the making of a real choice between alternative candidates. There are of course other criteria, like equal access to airtime, the use (or not) of administrative resources, or voter intimidation, etc - the so-called "even playing field."

The second reason why this election is a sham is that the numbers produced by the Central Election Commission cannot be verified, and there is every reason to believe that they can be manipulated any way the regime wants.

So, once again, this election was fraudulent by definition.
2) Putin is genuinely popular among the Russian electorate.

Even if this election were not a sham but were in fact conducted freely and fairly, there is a good chance that Putin would still have won. Of course, he would not have secured the preposterously high margin. But polls indicate significant support for Putin - not just now, when polling has become more problematic - but going back years.
Also, you'd have to recall that on those occasions when Russia held generally free and fair elections - for example, in December 1993 (which was one of the very few occasions in modern times when such a thing actually happened in Russia), Russians gave their votes to the fascists (1st place) and the Communists (3rd place). Putin has tapped into that same electorate.
Read 7 tweets
Feb 28
An interesting piece drawing on leaked documents that show Russia training to use battlefield nuclear weapons against potential adversaries, including China. A few caveats:
1) It's not surprising that Russia has military plans to use tactical nukes against potential adversaries. By contrast, it would be hugely surprising if Russia did not have such military plans: what's the use of these weapons then? This has always been the case.
2) The idea that these should be used early in the conflict to inflict a shock on the other side ("escalate to de-escalate") is not very surprising, and confirms what we have long known about Russia's nuclear doctrine. The decision to use tactical nukes would still be a political decision.
Read 6 tweets
Feb 22
Seeing bits and pieces of Medvedev's new extensive interview. The transcript is here: [in Russian]. I certainly found it interesting. Not because I think this "blood-thirsty clown" (Medvedev's term) necessarily defines policy but because he channels certain sentiments that we would be foolish to ignore.tass.ru/interviews/200…
For example, he very clearly articulates claims to Kyiv and Odesa, among other places, which should serve as a wake-up call for all those calling for negotiations with the Kremlin. He calls for the (I assume, physical) elimination of the Ukrainian leadership, and proposes to ship a part of the Ukrainian population to the Siberian Gulag. Worth keeping in mind.
He spends a lot of time dwelling on the projects of a civil war in the US, and says relations with the West will remain very bad for the foreseeable future. He proposes to spit on the graves of those (former) Russians who (like me) call for Russia's defeat in this war.
Read 6 tweets
Feb 9
I've been asked whether Putin's "documents" presented to Tucker Carlson are genuine. Let me explain. First of all, we don't know what is in the folder. In general, Putin tends to give out "genuine" documents, usually taken of context. Mostly very well known.
In this case, we may assume that the folder contains copies of Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky's letters to the tsar, like his 1648 letter asking of the Tsar's protection.
This is not some secret letter we never knew about until Putin disclosed it from the a lost-lost archive. You can read about it on Wikipedia. Here's a copy - enjoy. This is not the issue. Image
Read 6 tweets
Feb 9
Tucker Carlson's Putin interview (also available here, where Putin is not dubbed: ) covers a lot of familiar ground. There are a couple of interesting nuances, and I'll mention what they are below. Carlson's ignorance of facts shows throughout. Ignorance is, of course, a benign interpretation of his unwillingness to contradict Putin's falsifications.kremlin.ru/events/preside…
The historical part is made up of Putin's conventional fare about Russia's historical claims to its "primordial" territories (i.e. all of Ukraine). He goes a little further than his usual self in blaming Poland for standing up to Hitler in that it failed to "negotiate". He says the Poles "forces" Hitler to begin WWII.Image
Btw, this is highly ironic, because the immediate comparison that comes to mind is Ukraine being invaded by Russia because it failed to peacefully surrender its territory. I guess Putin is beyond irony at this point.
Read 13 tweets
Feb 3
I am sometimes asked what lessons the early Cold War holds for the present. Since I've written I big book on the Cold War that's about to hit the shelves, let me distill a few lessons with full awareness, of course, that history never repeats though often rhymes. amazon.co.uk/Run-World-Krem…
Lesson 1. The Cold War was not an unfortunate misunderstanding. Moscow had concrete plans for the postwar. To sum up their thinking, they planned to dominate continental Europe. The British would balance off-shore. The Americans would stay put in their hemisphere.
Norman Naimark (and others) rightly argued that Stalin did not have blueprints to make Europe "Communist." But he literally *had* blueprints to assure Soviet domination of Europe. The failure to attain these goals had everything to do with the US response to Soviet expansionism.
Read 16 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!

:(