Vladimir Putin against Black Lives Matter
Russia is not the Soviet Union. And Putin is not Stalin. He won’t — not even cynically — use Black Lives Matter to destabilize America.
In today’s press conference, Vladimir Putin came out against the Black Lives Matter movement and said he’d never allow such disturbances and violence against the state to happen in Russia — which is why his government has been cracking down on the opposition, who he said are trying to instigate a BLM-style violent movement.
“America just recently faced a very difficult situation after the murder of an African-American and the creation of the Black Lives Matter movement. I'm not going to comment on it right now, but I just want to say that what we saw — pogroms, violations of the law, and so on. We sympathize with the Americans and the American people. But we don't want this to happen on our territory. And we will do everything possible to prevent this from happening.
This is an interesting comment on a few different levels.
First off, I can’t help but recall that prominent American liberals blamed Russia for instigating the protests and violence that erupted in the wake of George Floyd’s murder. They blamed BLM on foreigners, as if black people were incapable of independent political action or anger without a malicious outside force guiding their actions. These people included Susan Rice, who went on CNN to speculate about it.
The second, and I think the funniest, part of Putin’s anti-BLM stance is that the Russian opposition that he accuses of trying to instigate a BLM-type movement against the Russian state and his ruling clique, well, they themselves are very much opposed to BLM. That’s right, Russia’s liberal opposition to Putin is rabidly anti-BLM. I repeat: They oppose BLM, just like Putin himself.
Confused? Yeah, well, Russian politics can be very confusing to outsiders. Evgenia and I talked about this at length in our very first episode almost a year ago — “Russians Against Politics.”
In this episode, Evgenia Kovda takes over and we talk about something that might come as a surprise to a lot of people. It’s the rabid pro-police reaction of most Russians in Russia (and abroad) to the Black Lives Matter protests taking place in America.
While CNN and the New York Times run segments that blame “the Russians” for using the protests to destabilize America, in Russia the exact opposite is taking place: The Russian government — and most of Russian society — is firmly against the protests. Russian society stands with the police. It stands in solidarity with America’s political establishment.
There are two main parts to the episode.
In the first hour, we get into the details of how these protests are depicted in the Russian media. What we see is that there is no real difference between the Kremlin and the liberal opposition. They’re both united in their hatred and condemnation.
But we really get warmed up and going in the second hour, when we try to figure out why Russian society is so united against these protests. It’s a complicated question. But on a bigger more conceptual level, we think it has to do with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the total negation of the October Revolution.
Give it a listen: Episode #1: Russians Against Politics.
Russia is not the Soviet Union. And Putin is not Stalin. He won’t — not even cynically — use Black Lives Matter to destabilize America.
—Yasha Levine
PS: As I say in the comments, by “BLM” I mean the grassroots uprising and the riots and protests that took place last summer, not the NGO complex that rose up around it. This kind of thing was not driven by cynical NGOs.
PPS: Evgenia also touches on this theme in her recent essay about Russian culture.
I wonder what Putin meant to communicate by using the word "pogrom". I took that word choice as an attempt to signal sympathy with BLM (while also perhaps attempting to signal sympathy with white supremacists by decrying the unrest). Just another politician speaking out of both sides of his mouth in a lame attempt to defend his treatment of Navalny etc. I wonder why didn't he just label Navalny "a nazi"? Or was Matt Stoller right the other day when he called Puting "a nazi"??
Hi Yasha,
Your take is fascinating as always. However, I think you are misunderstanding the political forces which have been propelling BLM. Check out the identity of the biggest funders of the BLM organisation, and some of the reporting on the role of agents provocateurs in the violence. I saw an interesting and persuasive presentation on the issue of agents provocateurs on the news programme ‘The Real News’ a while back, in particular. If the modes of operation set out in Stoner’s book on the cultural Cold War are any guide- as Ben Norton of the Greyzone clearly believes they are- it looks as though BLM may not be just grass roots at all, but being used as a political tool by the usual suspects for a new variation of their usual aims. It has been very striking to me how the ‘blue’ press has been silent about both the extent and incidence of violence against persons and property. By incidence I mean who suffered the losses, injuries, and deaths, in terms of economic and social groups. If we could see who the violence is hurting we could get a different perspective on who might oppose this type of thing and why. Rep Burgess has referenced this type of violence as a hindrance to blacks being able to work their way up into a decent middle class income and lifestyle. A modest aim, which many who have grown up in the prosperous middle classes might scorn, but which I do not scorn because I know how much it looks like an unattainable dream to much of the world’s population. If we look at the impact of BLM- I think it worth asking whose interests it is really serving. The big donors’ interests? Or those of the grass roots supporters?