Using Putinism as a rhetorical wedge; or, how to take revenge on Tailgunner Joe

[Stirnerian]

Holá.

I am an opportunist, and I have not the slightest qualm with being called such. To head any criticism from this direction off at the pass, I fully embrace the term, as I think we cannot afford to be any less than ruthlessly pragmatic.

One argument I've found to be extremely effective in arguments with conservatives - including my own family - is to basically turn McCarthyism on its head. A particular example ought to suffice:

My grandmother is a vituperative racist and homophobe, and voices her opinion at every given opportunity. She is also old enough to remember the Second Red Scare, and has an animus against Russia for this reason. Her views are shaped less by anti-Communism - in truth she knows hardly anything about the Cold War at all - and more by a xenophobic Russophobia predicated on a vague sense of ethnic conflict.

I could take the time to try to dispel this particular form of false consciousness, but it would be a wasted effort: she would still vocalize - and vote - her more immediate prejudices. For a long time I was at a loss, until I hit upon the Putin argument.

Putin is of course a notorious homophobe, and I more or less went full McCarthy on her, showing her articles on-line about the laws the Russian regime enacted towards that effect. I further showed her the page on Wikipedia regarding Aleksandr Dugin's The Foundations Of Geopolitics[/url] and highlighted the section in which it mentions that one of Dugin's strategies for undermining the United States is to use white racism to fracture it politically.

This was about two months ago, and it more or less shut her up on domestic politics. I no longer have to hear (as if I voted for the man) about Obama being some kind of black radical, because she is terrified of giving some kind of aid or succor to Vladimir Putin.

This might very well be irrelevant to your revolutionary practice; at best I made her slightly more sympathetic to American reformism - I certainly did not radicalize the woman; neither did I try to.

But, as I said, I'm not above using one form of stupidity to combat another. I wonder if this approach would not work on a larger scale? I am quite surprised the Democratic reformists have not adopted it already, accusing social conservatives of being quietly pro-Putin (on the other hand, the Democrats are doubtless terrified of uttering anything so strong as that). And while it puts me in the uncomfortable position of implicitly relying on a patriotism I reject for my argument, it works.

Any ideas?

[Rafiq]

Foundations of Geopolitics by Dugin is absolutely brilliant in its almost perfect formal characterization of Russian (or Putinist) ideological sentiments as a world force of reaction and barbarism, strengthening itself from the explosion of ethic and religious passions. Even if there is no conspiracy (there is not), how can it be argued that this is a mere fantasy? Across Europe Russia has been fostering anti-EU sentiments, from UKIP to Greece. Interestingly, a recent Pravda article attacked what it designated as the "globalist" Left and blamed the recent Syriza concessions solely on its insistence to stay in the Eurozone.

As said, Russia has re assumed its traditional role as a force of reaction globally. It is time the Left grows up and does away with its muddied anti-Americanism. Our opposition to the US and the EU must be contingent upon a pre-supposition of its civic achievements. Reason dictates the spirit of Communism hindered, abused and nearly impossible from the conditions of Putinism - which can only be articulated as politics construed national, ethnic lines with class as a mere facet. We ought to treasure what little absence of this is left in our corrupt, decaying civic democracies.

[Dire Helix]

As said, Russia has re assumed its traditional role as a force of reaction globally. It is time the Left grows up and does away with its muddied anti-Americanism. Our opposition to the US and the EU must be contingent upon a pre-supposition of its civic achievements. Reason dictates the spirit of Communism hindered, abused and nearly impossible from the conditions of Putinism - which can only be articulated as politics construed national, ethnic lines with class as a mere facet. We ought to treasure what little absence of this is left in our corrupt, decaying civic democracies.
*slow clap*

Quite a speech, concise and straight to the point. For a moment there, I thought I was in 1914, almost. Goes a little over board with naked chauvinism, but when civic achievements are at stake, we must be pragmatic and resolute.

On a serious note, looks like someone's sanity is finally slipping away from them. Hegel, Lacan and that shit-brained clown Zizek are known to have this effect on one's clarity of mind and reason when consumed in excessive quantities.

[Stirnerian]

... Huh.

At any rate, my point, if I had much of one, is that it seems that quite a few (to be honest, probably most) American workers have no idea that Putin isn't just the second coming of Joseph Stalin, and simply assume a direct continuity of ideology with the Soviet Union. Consequently, if Putin supports it, it Must Be Bad.

And that, if you're not worried about fudging things a little (I'm hardly well-read on Eurasianism), this can be exploited by pointing out the reactionary social policies of that regime.

After all, you don't want to be a Russian dupe, do you?

Yeah, I know, this basically means exploiting national chauvinism. It worked for Abraham Lincoln.

[Rafiq]

*slow clap*

Quite a speech, concise and straight to the point. For a moment there, I thought I was in 1914, almost. Goes a little over board with naked chauvinism, but when civic achievements are at stake, we must be pragmatic and resolute.

As though what I say is incontextual? As though much of the Left isn't brimming with pro-Putinist filth in the name of anti-imperialism and mass confusion? As though the Russian state isn't opportunistically trying to attract the Left and reaction in Europe in breaking up the EU? In your mind, recognizing the necessity of opposing the reaction as a presumption for opposing the EU technocrats and US state isn't of dire necessity? The point isn't to redirect criticism of our liberal democracies to Putin, the point is to oppose our liberal democracies while recognizing Russia's state interests as reactionary. In other words: not to fall into the trap of opposing them as reactionaries.

Though of course to those who make pretenses to such fiery rhetoric of a time long passed, as reactionaries, this can only be articulated as an actual call for military (not ideological, in the edifice of the movement) defense of the west against Russia. Any idiot can see that the mere spark of such a conflict would already mean the mutation of civic democracy to barbarism, any idiot can see that those in power do away with the achievements of liberalism themselves already with unimpeded technocracy. Military conflict with Russia would be the victory of putinism, a struggle on national lines where all other struggles are subsumed. Principled communists ought to recognize opposing war and opposing Russian state influence are synonymous, they can only endure through a workers movement.