Peter Krikunov. Consolidation?

Consolidation?
The point of view of the “patriotic” press on events in Russia and the world (December 7-20)

Petr Krikunov

Publication date: December 20, 2000

The central topic for all Russian media over the past two weeks has been the problem of adopting Russian state symbols . The general position of patriotic publications on this issue boils down to the following: they, as one would expect, unconditionally support the former Soviet anthem and the red flag . Regarding other symbols of Russian statehood, their position ranges from cautious bewilderment to sharp rejection. Soviet Russia summarizes: “It is absolutely obvious that behind the controversy around the anthem, coat of arms and flag lies the struggle of two forces in modern Russia and beyond its borders, the struggle between the forces of imperialism, which have taken the guise of globalism, and the forces of socialism and the oppressed peoples of the countries of the so-called third. peace" (Vasily Safronchuk, "Symbolic Compromise" / Soviet Russia , #143, p.2). The Limonka newspaper, in its characteristic manner, paints pictures of an apocalyptic future: “Having spread its wings, an unapproved double-headed eagle flies over the Russian Federation - a still from the fantastic dystopia “A year after the thermonuclear war.” The Vlasov flag is rinsed” (#158, p.3).

However, it should be noted that the adoption of state symbols, from the point of view of the authors of patriotic publications, is still a secondary problem, since in no case is it even indirect evidence of the revival of the Fatherland. According to the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the leading force of the Russian opposition, revival is possible only if power is “returned to the people.” In an address to the people of Russia by the Presidium of its Central Committee: “The Communists call on Russian citizens to fight even more decisively for a change in socio-economic course. For the restoration of genuine democracy. For the return to the people of the national wealth that rightfully belongs to them. For the revival of the great Union State” ( Soviet Russia , #142).

The current situation in Russia is characterized by this part of the opposition press as extremely alarming. The economic newspaper categorically states: “If there are two states in one state - rich and poor - it is doomed to destruction” (#50-51). In a similar spirit, B. Valentinov’s article “Spiritual Schism”, published in the same Soviet Russia (#144, p.2), is written. The author concludes that “with the beginning of perestroika, society came out of the mode of development, reproduction, accumulation, and expansion of its resources.” To more clearly prove his assertions, he draws a diagram from which it follows that modern Russian society is split not only by the amount of income per capita, but also by the so-called “priority of spiritual values.” According to Mr. Valentinov, the majority of the population of the Russian Federation (130 million people with an average per capita income of $50 per month) remains committed to traditional values: “creative work, conciliarity, patriotism.” The remaining five (why exactly so many? - author) profess values ​​brought from outside: the cult of money, consumerism, cosmopolitanism.

The position of the “patriotic” press remains unchanged: it is through the prism of the division of society into rich and poor, into workers and consumers that it evaluates current economic problems. The assessment of the essence of liberal policy by its authors comes down to the formula: “If you can’t pay, die” ( Soviet Russia , #142). The situation that has developed in Primorye serves as another reason to remind the reader that the right to property “is increasingly coming into irreconcilable conflict with other human rights,” including the right to life. This right to life, according to this type of publication, is also contradicted by the new version of the Labor Code proposed to State Duma deputies, since it seeks to legitimize the new serfdom - the employer's right of ownership of workers.

However, without exaggeration, the most important topic of the “patriotic press” of the last two weeks can be considered the tenth anniversary of the newspaper Zavtra . The editorial dedicated to this significant event assures its readers that the previous course, the struggle “until complete victory over all enemies of the Fatherland,” will be continued. Editor-in-Chief of Tomorrow A. Prokhanov, in an article eloquently titled “We Fought for the Motherland,” compares his employees to “a monastic brotherhood surrounded by a countless army of patriots fighting for their homeland” (#50, p.1). The editors are not addressing any specific reader, but the people as a whole - apparently, those 130 million who have a monthly income of up to 50 US dollars. This people (and perhaps some other people) “are certainly right, for God’s Providence works through them .”

A. Lyskov’s strip article “Russian Stove” is devoted to the same problem. The author recalls how difficult relations with the people developed in 1991, how the editors painfully tried to find the basis for dialogue, “released issue after issue, but never burst into reproach” (#50, p.3). “Listening and peering at the people, we listened and peered into eternity,” continues Mr. Lyskov. Now, according to the author, complete mutual understanding has been achieved between the newspaper Zavtra and its reader, the Russian people. It cannot be otherwise, according to A. Prokhanov, because the newspaper has set itself the goal of “fulfilling the commandments of God and building an earthly kingdom on Truth, Goodness and Beauty.” “Christ ,” A. Lyskov ends his article, “ in the second coming he will warm himself at the Russian stove.”

While the Second Coming keeps waiting, patriotic journalism has to deal with purely worldly problems. Of the international events covered by the press of this kind, special attention is paid to Putin's official visit to Cuba . According to all “patriotic” media without exception, this trip indicates a change in Russia’s foreign policy course. Thus, in Pravda we read: “The importance of this visit lies in the fact that it finally heralds the end of the Kremlin’s pro-American policy that lasted a whole decade” (#145, p.1). In the materials and publications dedicated to the stay of our delegation in Cuba, much attention is paid to the economic aspect of interaction between countries: Cuba has large reserves of nickel and cobalt , and it is also a major supplier of citrus fruits and sugar), possible contacts in this direction are welcomed, and the prospects for military cooperation between the two countries are also analyzed.

In conclusion, it should be said that the development trends of the “patriotic” press, in our opinion, remain unchanged. Destructive criticism of the liberal economy, the proclamation of the slogan of “two Russias” - a country of the rich and a country of the poor - all this has been encountered in print media of a similar orientation before. What is new, and even then relatively, is their wary and benevolent attitude towards the actions of President V. Putin, at least to those of them that we discussed above. The most indicative of this is the attitude towards the adoption of state symbols: the global compromise is seen by the authors of Pravda and Soviet Russia not as their own defeat (after all, the music of the anthem and the red flag prescribed by the RF Armed Forces are not too great an acquisition, at least in relation to the total number of symbols new statehood, presented in the package agreement), but as an unconditional success of those forces with whose position the “patriotic” press associates itself. In a certain sense, we can talk - whether we like it or not - about a greater level of consolidation of Russian society achieved as a result of this step by the President of the Russian Federation.

On the topic of adoption of new state symbols of the Russian Federation, see also
Article by Gleb Pavlovsky
Article by Yaroslav Shimov
Article by Mikhail Remizov