Russian Political Eclecticism

Russian Political Eclecticism   Russians don't understand themselves, it is said, but foreigners never! Well, in light of that, I'll simply talk about what I've absorbed in thought after experiencing Soviet Russia in 1987 and becoming a citizen of Russia later. Today, I'll chat about what might seem droll to some people. Communism: Does it have a future, and how? As I'm chatting, we'll also walk through the Byelov Museum, as well as the superb Stalin architectural buildings in Omsk. In the 1920s, a new civilization sprung up, Soviet Russia under Stalin. The new world was going to be grand; the sky was the limit. And communism today lives on in Russia, in a way, as an undercurrent and tradition. Just as in WW2, the Soviet Union was suddenly encouraging itself to see all aspects of their history as grand, from the time of Rurik to the present. Out the window went the teaching that Russian history had been one long oppression given to serfs. Instead, Soviet movies starred Peter the Great and Ivan the Terrible. A transformation was occurring in the national thought brought on by a war for survival. Today, similar strengthening of the national mindset is being renewed. The Soviet period of history has also become part of the fabric of the modern Russian state. Western capitalism, so-called, is in a perilous state of collapse, debt, and semi-fascism. After personally living in West Baltimore, USA, I can assure you that such squalor I've never seen anywhere. Omsk looks palatial compared to that.  Soviet communism, as a government, being run by humans, worked just as well, more or less. I would say that communism didn't need to be an instrument of 'cancel culture' of religion. Indeed, the Soviet constitution guaranteed religious freedom but in fact made war on the church, which seriously undermined the credibility of the state over time. Also, the new Soviet elite seemed often to effortlessly fill the role of the old aristocrats. Soviet history, then, is different than many would think. Many would think that the Soviet Union would have used architectural styles of the latest Western fashion. But in fact, Stalin had a big influence here. He did not want the nation to live as peasants but to bring the peasants up to the level of the former aristocrats. Take a look at the home on Polkovaya Street. If Elizaveta Petrovna stepped out on the balcony, it would not be surprising. But this home was built for Soviet officers. This Stalinist Soviet architecture could not then but inspire and fill a citizen with grand feelings. Just as the once existing Penn Station in New York City, a person said, "When you entered, you felt like a god, but now, in the 1960s building, you ran down the corridors like a rat." So the Stalin era, in looking back, is very easy to pick out as the grand buildings inspire. And Stalin disliked 'western decadence,' so he chose designs in the best of classical Greece, Rome, and antiquity. That's why in the Byelov museum, for example, Soviet artists were also expertly trained to do classical art, and this is why so many landscapes were created by Omsk artists. But what about communism for today? Is there a place for it? Well, our mayor in Omsk is from the Communist party, so, on paper, yes. But I would suggest that the most effective use of the principles of communism would be to resurrect the commune, meaning farms. Orthodox monasteries with land attached to them used to be, in a way, also set up in communal living. But what I mean is to model that after the traditions of Slavic peoples. For example, my grandmother Sophia talked about life in Slovakia back in the early 20th century. In 1900, communal living was everywhere. Each year, the families of the village divided up the garden plots. Each year, a family was chosen to take care of the pigs and another, the cows. The men and women gathered to bring in the crops.  Therefore, in many places in Russia, the government could organize communal farms. People could voluntarily go to live there, receive a decent salary, have their housing provided for and other necessities, and work on a collective farm. Many would be attracted to this kind of life. There are areas of the country needing an innovative idea such as this one to rejuvenate. The Far East in Russia has been opened up by the government. Free land is offered. However, an individual might find it very difficult to suddenly farm the land. If a commune was available, then most of the problems with adapting to a new area would be solved. For example, my great-grandfather Andrei used to kill pigs for $5, and Grandma Sophie talked about the importance of dunking the newly killed chicken in very hot water to get the feathers off easily. Of course, a lot of that is lost on us today, as well as farming in the fields. But a commune could help provide training. The Amish farmers in America work as a group and all are very rich, in spite of using traditional farming techniques.

Видео Russian Political Eclecticism автора Omsk Life / Омская Жизнь