My background is that I have served in military intelligence for most of my career.
I am an officer and an intelligence colonel who retired last fall. I started here in January at the University as a teacher. I teach intelligence.
As I have spent most of my career in intelligence, Russia and the Soviet Union have always been my point of interest.
In 1986, as a young lieutenant, I was sent to what was then Leningrad to study the Russian language.
Even then I started to wonder why the Russians were doing things differently than we do? (in the western world) Why do they see the world differently than we see it?
Since then, I have worked with the Russians and with the Soviets until my retirement.
I’ve been to the Soviet Union and to Russia a lot during my career and been in a lot of contact with them.
I’ve always wondered why they thought things differently. Then when I started writing my PhD here at the University I discovered the theory of strategic culture.
Governmental, political and military questions - How is Russia different from all the other countries and why?
That theory opened up how to rationalize and think about why Russians do things differently than we do.
This strategic culture is a way (to analyze). It was created in the United States during the 1970s when the Americans lost the Vietnam War.
They began to wonder how a superpower like the United States could lose to Vietnam, which Americans considered to be a very underdeveloped country.
They realized that not everything is a plus and a minus, that is, a zero-sum game.
There are other factors behind it that affect the people and how the people operate together.
The Americans developed a theory of strategic culture capable of explaining about a country.
In this case, about Russia, how does the state leadership see a crisis?
How does it see the use of force in a crisis? How does it see the role of a crisis and the use of force in foreign policy?
How does it see the enemy? How does it see a threat? And then how does it envision the possible strategic options by which it might respond to a threat?
This theory of strategic culture explains it. The theory of strategic culture is based on trying to outline what factors influence the decision-making of the state leadership.
It then looks at how things are reflected in government decision-making and how they are reflected in practical action.
This is a pretty good way to explain the actions of a state, in this case Russia.
On why Russia has acted as it has. This will help us understand. When I say understand, I do not mean that we have to approve of what Russia is doing.
But it helps us understand why Russia does things differently. It may even give us the instruments to predict what may happen next.
Churchill said in 1939 that "Russia is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma." It is true.
This is well said. Let us now set out to dispel this riddle through the theory of strategic culture.
Russia's six layers in history: Slavic, Byzantine, Asian, chaos, European and Superpower
Before we start with that, we must remember that we do not have one Russia.
We kind of have many layers of Russia. Different historical layers that still influence the thinking of the Russians about how the Russians work today.
If we start from that very first movement, that is, Slavic Russia. Language and entity and Russianness were born there.
Also the belief that all Slavic people, as it were, are one was created there.
And the Russian people, the largest of the Slavic peoples, have the duty of keeping them all in check and protecting them.
When we go further in history. With the fall of Constantinople, the traditions of Eastern Rome were transferred to Moscow.
Moscow uses the term third and eternal Rome for itself. The Russians are, as it were, followers of the Eastern Roman tradition.
Religion, conservatism and the relationship to authority came from there.
It means that one does not challenge authority. Authority is obtained from God. He who leads us has received authority from God to lead us. He is infallible.
Authority will not be challenged under any circumstances. This idea comes from Byzantine Russia.
Cultural features from the Mongol era: corruption, cruelty and lying
The third era that influenced Russian thought in a great manner is Mongol Russia.
In the 1240s, the Mongols conquered Russia. They held Russia for 150 years. That time was cruel.
There are a lot of words in Russian, related to torture, taxation and corruption, that come from the Mongol language.
Dominance under personal authority was rooted in the administrative culture from the Mongols. That is, there is only one khan that leads.
It is he who leads, no one else. Others are passive followers. That one guy leads and takes responsibility and the initiative.
When the belief of divine legitimacy to lead is attached to this, the leader will appear as fairly tough in their world view.
The corruption and cruelty also comes from the Mongol era. During the Mongol rule the only ways to survive were lying, corruption and violence.
This still lives very deep in Russia’s strategic culture. When Mongol rule ended, the Mongols did not just pack their bags and disappear from Russia.
Instead they mixed with the locals. So the traditions also stayed with the people. In particular, to the leading caste.
The Mongols who had previously ruled the country merged into the ruling layers, which is still visible today.
When looking at genetic inheritance, they are pretty dark, dark eyes for example. There are not many blondes in Russia.
Then came this era of turmoil. Although it was a a short period of time, it had a great importance to the Russians. Because then both external and internal enemies roared.
The Poles who conquered Moscow and Russia did not have a strong leader. Romanov was then elected Tsar and the Russians realized that a strong leader was better than chaos.
In addition to all this when the authority comes from God and the autocrat is indeed a leader.
It was stated there that only sovereignty will save Russia.
It has been several hundred years in their genetic inheritance that autocracy is the only right solution.
That is, autocracy is better than chaos and mayhem. Then we came to European Russia.
The era of Europe and Russia as a superpower: Peter the Great, a land between the West and the East
Peter the Great founded the city of St. Petersburg in the early 18th century on that Finnish swamp to the Neva estuary.
After that, the Russians began to clash whether they were in the West or in the East.
The Westernizers (Západniki) favored the West and the Slavophiles favored the East. This struggle is still going on.
Russia began to rise into a great power. As Russia modernized, they also started to mystify themselves.
That is, Russia itself began to mystify itself through authors for example. They kind of built a smokescreen between us and them, consciously mystifying Russia.
Then came the great power of the Soviet Union and the Cold War. The power politics and the sphere of influence of Russia come from the Cold War era.
World War II taught them that it is better to fight not in their own territory but on the territories of others. The Soviet Union lost more than 20 million people during World War II.
Authoritarian rule has followed Russian rule since Mongol era. It hasn't changed since then.
The name of the leader has changed but authoritarian rule itself has always remained the same. Russia sees itself as the heir to the Soviet Union, as it is in some respects.
So these are the six layers of Russia. When we think of Russia, we always have to take into consideration that there is Mongol rule, how it affects and so on.
There is not one Russia that was born in the 1990s. Instead Russia has a long tradition that goes back to the 13th century and earlier.
Geographical nature of Russia, 11 time zones and flat area on the west
Eleven time zones in Russia. These huge distances also affect Russia.
One interesting thing, this area. From the Polish border to Moscow, through to Urals, is a plateau that is easy to attack with both horses and tanks.
That is what has been done. Napoleon attacked, the Germans attacked and so on. That idea is also in the genetic inheritance of the Russians
That someone is always attacking. "We will be conquered". They have no shelter, no mountains, no rivers. There are no lakes between the east and the capital.
Geographically, Russia has always been easy to conquer, which also influences their thinking.
Belief in Russianness at three points: Orthodoxy, autocracy and the people, narodnost
Belief in Russianness. Russianness consists of three things. It is orthodoxy, autocracy, and narodnost.
There is no Finnish translation for Narodnost, but it means the people or things related to the ordinary people.
We do not have such a word in Finnish. Let's open that point more. But first the autocracy.
Autocracy: a central authoritarian regime
They have always been an autocracy since Mongolian times.
Either it has been a Khan, or it has been a Tsar. Or it has been a communist party usually personified by Stalin or Khrushchev or anyone.
Or now for the president.
Russia has strong autocracy. They also want autocracy because they are used to it. A good leader keeps confusion away. They think this way and are used to it.
Conservatives have held power in Russia for 200-300 years. There were a few radical reformers: Peter the Great, his reforms were mostly successful.
The reforms of these other gentlemen were mostly not successful. Someone can, of course, consider Lenin's accomplishments as a success or Gorbachevs.
But the Russians themselves see for example that Gorbachev disintegrated the Soviet Union. Nor was Yeltsin a super reformer. In other words, the Conservatives have always held power.
Autocracy: Faith in a fair good tsar and princes
The Russians believe in a just Tsar. Once the Tsar has taken authority from God, he cannot make mistakes.
The Tsar is infallible. He has princes who gradually become infallible near the Tsar.
Some prince becomes a Tsar in due course. The infallible Tsar who is always right.
The mistakes are happening here within the boyars. Between the people and the infallible Tsar, there is a boyars.
Autocracy: Boyars between the people and infallible leaders: No right of ownership, but a right of possession according to social status, rules, corruption and nomenclature
Boyars, which at different times are from a slightly different social class.
Boyars as an institution were born as early as the 9th century. Their position in the hierarchy came after the princes.
We have a Tsar who is infallible, princes who grow into a tsar some of whom become infallible when they become Tsars.
Then there are the people. In between the prince and the people are the boyars, who make the right decisions of a wise Tsar, sometimes wrong.
If an error occurs somewhere, it is the boyars who have made that error. The Tsar, the President or the Secretary-General of the Central Committee is always infallible.
The fault is found in the boyars. After a period of turmoil, the boyars completely lost their power over the Tsar and their property as well.
That was during the turmoil era, ownership changed. Previously, they had ownership, but it became tenure.
That is, the Tsar took everything away and gave tenure to boyars. "You get to control this state or you get to control these slaves. You get to control this merchant ship." and so on.
But tenure can be taken away if you misbehave. If the Tsar is not satisfied, the possession will be taken away from you.
That is, ownership became tenure. During the Soviet era, tenure continued instead of ownership.
That is, in the Soviet Union when you reached a certain position of power you had tenure. You got to visit a dacha and the Yalta and you had a servant who was looking out for you.
However, you did not own these, but you had possession, a tenure of these. Another point is that when you reach a certain position, you are entitled to a certain amount of corruption.
That is, a certain degree of power gives you the right to a certain degree of corruption, too.
At a lower rank, you didn’t get to steal that much. The higher you get, the more you get to steal. It had rules.
Those rules had to be followed, they weren’t written rules, of course, but everyone knew these rules of the game. This same system is currently in Russia.
The nomenclature tells who is on what scale compared to everyone else and how much corruption he is allowed to take.
These business oligarchs also belong to this group. The rules are as follows: You must not steal from the wrong guy or you're not allowed to steal more than your position allows you to.
You only steal the amount of your position in the hierarchy. Here are some of these boyars. There was a live broadcast last summer. Putin was on television and took the boyars with him.
Autocracy: Boyars practically in a modern Russia
Here are the governors of different regions in Russia. A man called Putin on television and said, for example "In our area this road network is in poor condition?"
Putin asked the governor of the area "Why the roads are in poor condition, fix them".
The governor replies, "Yes, Mr. President." The caller says "Thank you Mr. President, that you took care of this too."
That is, the boyar procedure still works. It was even done publicly on television.
If you reach a certain position then you will get a certain share of corruption. Neither too much nor from the wrong guy.
Here's a person who stole too much. Khodorkovsky, stole too much, 10 years in prison. Currently living in Switzerland.
Ulyukayev stole from the wrong person, Sechin, who is close to Putin and probably the second most influential person in Russia.
Ulyukayev went to steal from Sechin, 10 years in prison.
That is, if you follow the rules, everything will go well, if you don’t follow the rules, you suffer.
This is how it works. Then there is the religion. Religion is important because it unites people together. This is Putin's inauguration.
Orthodoxy: The Importance of Religion in Russia
Here is Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia. Look where they stand.
First Schröder, the Prime Minister is behind him.
Minister of Defense at the rear. It is no coincidence that the patriarch stands first.
That is, Kirill belongs to the boyars as well and his job is to swear faith in people. "Even though it goes a little bad now, when we get to heaven, it will go really well there."
That is his job in the system. Of course Putin. The story goes that he has even been baptized secretly. Believes who believes.
In any case, he was a member of the Communist Party and an officer of the KGB. He is the number one believer.
This is how situations change. This is Kirill. As an example the Russians found a picture where Mr. Kirill is holding a $ 30,000 watch on his wrist.
I don't know what kind of salaries the priests have in Russia but my wife is a priest and she does not have such a watch.
When this became public, the Russians tried to cover it up by editing the image
But forgot to edit the clock reflection off the table surface.
In this way, the boyars are sometimes caught.
Then the third component, namely the people, narodnost.
The people: narodnost, nationality. The Tsar knows better what is best for the people
In the 19th century, after the French Revolution, there was a lot of talk about the people and what kind of role people in the community have and so on.
In Russia, it was also considered, from the leaders perspective and was determined what narodnost is.
It is Russia's own version of the people. The Tsar knew better than the people themselves what was good for the people. The Tsar is infallible.
When a leader has received power from God, he knows better what is good for the people.
During the Soviet era, this continued in the same way under communism.
During the Soviet era, on the roofs of the houses read "the party and the people are one," although they were certainly not the same, but the roofs of the houses read so.
Narod and narodnost was a big deal. This is still evident in Russia.
Ability to wait and endure suffering and two different realities, sacrificing oneself to the leader
The Russians have the ability to expect and endure a tremendous amount of suffering. This is an amazing trait for them. They are able to anticipate and endure suffering.
They have made suffering as if it was a virtue. When you suffer on behalf of the Soviet Union or Russia, things turn out really nice when all that is over.
For example, when you die or when you reach communism.
"There are no refrigerators and no real food, but when we get to communism then there will be everything."
The Russians have a miraculous ability to endure suffering. On the other hand, they also have a wonderful way of forming two realities.
They formed a Soviet public reality and a kitchen table reality. Around the kitchen table things were really being discussed.
I had a chat at the kitchen table in 1986, extremely interesting. Perestroika was about to start just then.
It was interesting because they are like two different people when they go outside compared to how they're around the kitchen table.
There are two different realities that are still operating in Russia.
Here is Mikhail Glinka, who in the 19th century composed the opera "A Life for the Tsar"
in which a peasant sacrifices himself for the Tsar in order for the Tsar to be saved from the gut and against the Poles when Russia went to war.
The sacrificer, a peasant, is a person belonging to the narodnost. He sacrificed himself so that the Tsar would be saved.
It's no coincidence that in 2004 Russia issued a stamp from this same opera.
That is, people are still told that it is the their job to sacrifice themselves for the Tsar.
"Do not forget the role of you as a people." During the Soviet era, the Homo Sovieticus was created.
Homo sovieticus - the new Soviet man
They initially believed that the Soviet system could create a better person, who would be called the Homo Sovieticus.
In fact, some others then quickly changed it to have an another meaning, how it really was seen:
Careless, does not care about common property,
passively accepts everything given by the director, avoids individual responsibility and so on.
Whoever has been in Russia and in the Soviet Union could wonder for themselves whether these traits resemble reality or not. Then, in 1987, when the Soviet Union began to collapse,
Yuri Levada, who later founded the Levada Research Center, estimated that Homo Sovieticus was on the brink of extinction.
In 1994, 75% of Russian respondents said that the break-up of the Soviet Union was more bad than good.
In 1998, the word democracy began in Russian minds to resemble the same as chaos.
That is, only a strong leader will save us from chaos.
Then, in the late 1990s, Homo Sovieticus was, after all, alive and waiting for a strong leader.
Faith in Russian summarized before and now - Has anything changed?
Here are the sayings of Nikolai the First, this could be Vladimir the First, who is currently in power.
"Autocracy, orthodoxy and 'Russkiy mir' - or the Russian world - must be assembled under the protection of the wings of the Russian double eagle"
And that "Russia's sacred mission is to act as a messenger of a higher civilization." And: "A little warfare in the border areas is needed to maintain a patriotic spirit."
"A little war in the border areas is needed to sustain a patriotic spirit" from the 19th century
This was said in the 1800s century but this could have been said in the 2010s or in 2018.
Nothing has changed. Here is Jurgen Habermas’s communicative theory, the social system, which explains how people usually think.
Social system - receiving information in Russia from a state television channel
Here it can be an individual or it could be a larger community. It has the values ​​and norms which we are talking about today, the values and norms ​​of the strategic culture.
Here at the bottom right are the facts. Facts come into our and the community's consciousness, followed by our thoughts reflecting the received facts through our values ​​and norms.
Then decisions are made, specific objectives are pursued and finally we act accordingly.
Strategic culture can be found here in terms of values ​​and norms. So how does this work in Russia? A little differently...
80% of Russians get all their information from television.
These television channels are under the control of Putin and his close associates.
That is, 80% of Russians receive filtered information.
They do not get the facts from the media. In Russia the values ​​and norms are already strong and the information that is constantly being fed is different from our western point of view
Therefore, it is quite certain that the goals and actions of Russians will not be the same as how we would perform in the same situations.
This difference must be remembered. More and more young people receive information from the internet because they know other languages ​​and follow information from the web.
80% of the older population still receives information through television.
The Kremlin's narratives: a besieged fort, a constant war, and an enemy at the gates
This is the narrative that is told on television in Russia. It is said there that Russia is a besieged fort.
"NATO is besieging Russia." "Russia is at constant war with NATO. The enemy is at the gates."
Here's how they see NATO's siege. In fact, there are a few kilometers with NATO. (between Norway and Russia)
Then there is the border with the Baltic states, which is really the NATO and Russian border. But this picture is being shown to them, the Russians. America also surrounds Russians both from air and from space.
The only task for and within the state leadership is to stay in power.
They are not much interested in the life of an ordinary Russian. Their only task is to stay in power. With this in mind, they stay in power by telling how the "enemy is at the gates, we are at war."
"Only an autocrat like me can keep this country safe."
"A weak leader means chaos." The enemy is at the gates and inside.
According to the narrative, the West is feeding the opposition.
When the opposition raises its head, it is said to be in a conspiracy with the West against Russia and must be responded to accordingly.
80% of Russians receive this information, that Nemtsov and Navalny were western agents.
The Russians believe this story quite a lot, at least they pretend to.
I don’t know how they’re talking about it at the kitchen table. This is the story told by the Russian media under their leaders.
"Russia is a besieged fort that is at constant war with the West and the enemy is inside."
Putin said "Russia never lost the Cold War because it never ended."
That's how they talk there. He also said how “The Collapse of the USSR was the geopolitical tragedy of the century.”
When he says so, he also really thinks and means it himself. When Kennan was the U.S. ambassador to Moscow after World War II.
The Kremlin's neurotic view of the world affairs is based on a traditional and instinctive sense of insecurity
He began to see how the Soviet Union would not necessarily be an ally for the United States now that Nazi Germany had been defeated.
He wrote a long description of how Soviet policy was changing.
He wrote "The Kremlin's neurotic view of world affairs is based on their traditional and instinctive insecurity"
So the Russians have a feeling of insecurity about "someone always attacking us."
You remember the steppes up to the Urals, easy to attack with horses or with tanks or whatever.
That's how they were attacked. Napoleon attacked. The Mongols conquered most of present-day Russia.
Hitler attacked and got really far into the Soviet Union. Finns and Swedes have also been to Russia. Jacob De la Gardie was in Moscow for one winter before leaving.
Then why did we have a winter war in 1939? We had a winter war because the Russians did not think we could defend our own territory.
The Russians imagined the bustle coming in the direction of St. Petersburg/Leningrad. Now evil NATO is going to attack Russia. This is the story.
"Evil NATO is now in Ukraine and attacking rebel areas."
The story is based on a neurotic sense of insecurity.
Faith in power and use of force: Deaf to the logic of reason, but very sensitive to the logic of power
This is also what Kennan wrote: "Russia is deaf to the logic of reason but very sensitive to the logic of power."
Lenin once said: "Try it with a bayonet, if it's soft, push. If it's hard, leave."
In other words, if we treat Russia in the Sea of ​​Azov and in Crimea and in eastern Ukraine as before
By only resenting without doing anything else, there will always be more stitches coming from Russia.
But they are sensitive to the logic of power. Meaning that if there is a tough opponent against them, they leave. Kennan said it back in 1946.
When a bear looks into the pond, it sees itself. Power is what works with Russia.
Territorial enlargement: fear-based imperialism
The Russians are imperialists as are the Americans. But American imperialism is based on the fact that they want to have resources, oil, or whatever.
On the other hand, Russian imperialism is based on fear. To compare, the cause and starting point of Russian imperialism is quite different. Russian imperialism is based on someone potentially attacking them again.
They sought to solve this problem in the 1950s by forming the Warsaw Pact, from which they got a buffer between the enemy and themselves.
Now that the Warsaw Pact has been dissolved the Russians are building the buffer a little differently now.
Here is a picture in the upper right corner, the Russian S-400 air defense systems.
They are building a buffer zone in the air now. From the Kola Peninsula, the Karelian Isthmus, Kaliningrad, Crimea to Syria.
They are now building the buffer zone differently. Because they can’t get land, they take air.
They are taking not only air but also information. The Russians do it by pushing their own influence to the information environment. The Russians use terms like information geopolitics.
Asymmetry - Information Geopolitics & Information Influence: Are characters like Johan Bäckman just distracting from real influence?
Information geopolitics means that when we cannot move on land, we are advancing in the air with anti-aircraft systems and also in the information space.
Russians are also seeking more protection from the information space between them and the enemy.
Roughly speaking, they have clumsy and skillful information influence. We may not realize skillful influencing as influencing at all.
With clumsy influencing the goal is to draw our attention away. Johan Bäckman (an activist working for the Russian government), for example, is involved in clumsy information influencing.
When Johan Bäckman speaks for Russia we notice "Hey, he's speaking for Russia" And we're pleased with ourselves for seeing this influence on information
When, in fact, Bäckman's job (and that of people like him for Russia) is to draw our attention away as a diversion in order for the skillful information to take place somewhere else more effectively.
We have former prime ministers on the boards of Russian banks. We have former prime ministers in charge of gas pipelines.
We have a hockey team that plays in the KHL and so on. Maybe the real information influence of Russia is happening somewhere out there
While we watch Johan Bäckman, thinking, "hey we notice this". The Russians are good at this. As early as the 1920s, they founded the predecessor of the KGB,
an information office whose mission was to influence the mind and politics of the press specifically through influential agents.
It was the same in KGB, Putin has attended KGB school. This information influence is likely to continue by Russia.
Lenin talked about useful idiots who may not realize they are serving the interests of Russia or the Soviet Union at any time.
They think they're doing something good, peace movements for example. They did not realize how they were actually used.
They thought they were doing something good but ended up being largely part of Russia’s information geopolitics.
Russia's Messianic Mission and Pan-Slavism - The Leaders' Knowledge of Saving Europe
The Russians have a wonderful belief in how they have to save Europe.
In some sense, they are right, they have. They think that they must save Europe and unite the Slavic peoples.
In history, they have saved Europe from Napoleon. Really, they beat Napoleon. They saved Europe from Hitler, fascism.
Right now, I remember when I was on a business trip to Russia in the 1990s.
I asked the Russian officers, "What are you doing there in Chechnya and why are you fighting there?" According to them, the Russians were there to defend Europe
Against Islam, when Europeans themselves do not realize how great a threat Islam is and how much Russia is doing for Europe to prevent its spread.
Really they believe in how their mission is to defend, protect and save Europe.
They may not know against what, but in any case, they will always save us. Even if we don’t want to.
Tolstoy supported that doctrine, as did Dugin, who is considered the geopolitical brain in the Kremlin.
He pushed and is pushing hard for the view that Russia would save everyone, even if not asked.
The Russians seeing the world through history
Russians see the world through history. I was talking about the conquest of the Poles and the time of the turmoil.
Here in the bottom left is a merchant Kuzma Minin and Prince Dmitry. They reunited. Once again, the story features the people, and a prince who joined forces and defeated the Poles in Moscow before the end of the turmoil.
Minin and Dmitri are immortalized in statues on the red square near the church in Moscow.
In order for the Russians to not forget that the people and the prince reunited and joined forces, resulting in Russia being unbeatable.
This is remembered in military parades annually, troops march past these statues.
Remember, well, that's how it happened. When we joined forces the Poles lost.
In Russia, the beginning of November is Unity Day (4th of Nov). It's the day when Minin and Dmitry beat the Poles.
Near the former anniversary of the October Revolution, 7th of October.
Next to it, the Unity Day was formed. Unity Day reminds us that when the people and the prince united, no one could do anything to beat the Russians.
This is a reminder of how Russians think of everything through history and power. When Molotov told Stalin that the Russians should establish relations with the Vatican during World War II
Stalin asked: "How many divisions does the pope have?" Molotov said: "Well, none at all," to which Stalin replied "Forget it."
The Russians did not realize how one Polish Pope behind the Iron Curtain would be able to break the whole system.
When there was a Polish Pope, if it was a CIA operation, it was an extremely well-planned operation.
If it was just a coincidence, it was a pretty good coincidence, at least in my opinion.
How do Russians see Finns? Bronze Horseman - A.S. Pushkin - The Russian landscape through the first poem taught to children
Here's how Russians see us Finns. Pushkin is a national poet in Russia.
The Bronze Horseman is the first poem that the little girls with braids and the little boys memorize at school in Russia.
This is the first poem they memorize in school. The Bronze Horseman by Pushkin.
The poem tells the story of the founding of the city of St. Petersburg in the early 18th century. Read this and see what image these little girls and boys get of Finns or Chukhna.
Very rarely is the word Chukhna actually written anywhere, but here it can be found in Pushkin. And what kind of people are Swedes? (according to the poem)
(15 second pause)
In other words, the city is founded to be a nuisance for the haughty, the Swedes.
Before the city was established the area was mostly a swamp with a couple of cottages.
“Where wretched Chukhna for shelter crowded” Chukhna, that is, us Finns.
"The Finn, a miserable stepchild of nature", and it is actually put much sharper in the original version.
I mean this poem has been translated positively for us Finns.
(According to the poem) Finnish waves can bang their heads on the walls of St. Petersburg.
In other words, this is the image that the children get of Finland and Sweden from an early age. This is where the thing starts.
In Finland if someone were to teach similar things about Russians the teacher would probably get fired right away.
Russia's technological backwardness throughout history, from ships to atomic bombs to computers
Russia is technologically backward and has always been. Someone said that the Russian has invented nothing but a samovar and even there the faucet was stolen from the Germans.
I don’t know if the story is true but that’s the saying. This is an interesting painting. Ilja Repin's painting Barge Haulers on the Volga.
This is an interesting painting in the sense that Russia's backwardness is seen here.
Not in these ferries but over there, in the right hand corner at the back.
There you can see a steamship from Germany. In other words, German ships began to operate on the Volga, not Russian ships.
When these people pulled the ferry upstream, there was already new hope in the background, but it wasn't Russian hope, it was German imported goods.
If you think about it, Peter the Great learned to build ships in Holland.
The Russians themselves tried to build computers in the late 1970s they made a decision. "No, we don't have the capacity to do that, we have to copy IBM." The IBM 360 was the system that the Russians started to copy.
The war in Afghanistan made procurement a little more difficult, but they still got IBM equipment through cover companies, including Japan.
The equipment they dismantled upon receiving them, made similar parts, copied them and then assembled again.
In the upper right hand corner is a Russian microchip that is a copy. About nuclear weapons. When Stalin realized the United States was developing nuclear weapons
the Soviet intelligence service's most over-the-top intelligence priority was everything related to nuclear weapons. "Get it here."
The Russians got the atom bomb a few years later. Pictured bottom left are individuals acquiring them (from the United States.)
A few got put into an electric chair. In any case, the Soviet Union had stolen nuclear weapons data from the United States.
Now what happens today. Russia does not have the capacity to develop artificial intelligence itself. The Chinese have it, the Russians do not.
Putin has said: "Whoever masters artificial intelligence, he will become the ruler of the whole world.”
It is certain that right now one of the most important tasks of intelligence services is to acquire everything related to artificial intelligence.
Russian Truth: The Significance of Language and Concepts, Especially for Lie and Truth
Russian truth. This is interesting. After all, language tells how people think, how they perceive the world and how society thinks.
The United States has two words for positive rights: "liberty" and "freedom" and so on.
Russia has two words for the truth and three words for the lie. It is certainly not a coincidence.
There’s the word “pravda”, which is truth but not absolute truth.
Rather the kind of truth that gets rid of awkward, wicked situations. It's like tactical truth. “Istina” is the opposite of a lie. Istina is true, as true as can be.
But pravda is rather… sometimes it can be true, at other times not so true.
Three words for lie: “Vranyo” is a white lie, but of the strategic level.
It is also kind of a way to get rid of nasty situations. The Russians know it, we don't know it. We think that there is only truth and lie in the world
It's just black and white, or plus and minus. We think so because we usually have it that way. The lie in Russia was born under Mongol rule
During Mongol rule: Violence and lying were the way to survive. This tradition has been in their system ever since.
Russia has the word “krugovaya poruka” (круговая порука), or gang guarantee. By the way, the Finnish word "porukka" (gang) comes from here.
It means that when we have some set of people with a common goal. Be it the Kremlin leadership or the Russian armed forces or whatever.
We have a common goal and I step out of the circle and lie to an outsider.
My gang hears that I lie but they don't judge me as a liar
Because they understand that I am using tactical truth (vranjo) to achieve the greater goals of our gang.
The use of tactical truth, or a lie, is accepted if it is done for the benefit of the in-group.
Just like you can steal when you don’t steal too much or from the wrong guy. You also get to lie if you lie for the sake of the gang.
For us in the West, the truth is black and white.
There’s a good book from Masha Gessen that I have with me here.
"The Future is History" Worth reading to anyone interested in this theme. Masha Gessen speaks of doublethink (as did Orwell in 1984).
That is, at the kitchen table, different things are said than outside the home. This is similar.
Everyone understands that Bob speaks very differently around the kitchen table than he does in public. Everyone understands why he does so.
This is based on the in-group launching their own story.
For example "We had nothing to do with the poisoning of Skripal." Or that "We have nothing to do with the shooting down of the Malaysian plane".
This is based on the fact that we in the West, under the rule of law when we make an argument we need to be able to 100%, unequivocally prove the claim to be true.
But when Russia makes an argument, there are always small gaps left here and there that we (westerners) start to think about, "Is that really so?"
The notion of lie and truth works differently in Russia. Examples: The Terijoki government (Russian attempt to make a puppet government for Finland in 1939) pushed the narrative
Examples of the frontiers of lie and truth in a Russian narrative
that the working population of Finland supposedly was tired of the Mannerheim-Tanner (Marshal of the Finnish Defence Forces in 1939) fascist junta and formed a government to liberate the Finnish people.
When the Russians came over they noticed it wasn’t quite so.
Or this one. The president said "We have nothing to do with interfering in the 2016 U.S. presidential election".
He says just like that. The Russians who see and hear this know that "We were there, but we didn't get caught."
Then the West thinks, "Well, who could it be, if it wasn’t the Russians?" Because we don't realize the use of Russian tactical truth.
When they went to Crimea, Putin said, "They are not Russian forces." If our commander-in-chief of the Finnish Defence Forces were to deny that a Finnish soldier was a Finnish soldier, that would lead to unfortunate situations.
The soldier would go on a strike or get depressed or something. But the Russians were proud that the president was able to use tactical truth.
Putin said "They are not Russian forces." We started thinking here in the west, "Well, who are they then? Where did they come from?"
They had two or three days to take over Crimea completely.
Then Putin remembered, "Oh, they were Russian troops after all". Or this shooting down of a Malaysian plane.
It has been proven unequivocally that the missile that shot that plane down was from the Russian 53rd Air Defense Brigade.
The wildest stories that were moving in Russia were that, when the situation was at its hottest
that these people were already dead there on the plane. This story was spread.
Those people who died in the accident did not die in the attack but they were already dead (before the missile struck the plane.) But no one questioned it because the Russians knew it was a tactical truth.
They did not question how the captain agreed to fly a plane full of dead people, about to be shot down.
No one questioned it because they knew it was a tactical truth. Or, another story, in the Donbass region brave miners fight the fascist junta in Kiev.
However, some so-called civilian protesters had apparently forgotten to remove their Russian Armed Forces tags.
Or "We have nothing to do with the hacking of the DNC, the US Democratic Party."
In fact, they got caught, both the GRU, the Russian military intelligence service and the FSB, the civilian intelligence, both caught on servers.
Or that “We don’t have anything to do with the poisoning of Skripal.” Except that there was a Russian intelligence colonel
who had received the Hero of the Russian Federation honorary medal from Putin.
There was also a doctor present who was tasked with making sure Chepiga, who was performing the poisoning operation on Skripal
would not be exposed to the poison himself. The funniest thing here is that Chepiga's grandmother, who lives near Arkhangelsk, in her foolishness had published a picture
of Chepiga receiving the medal from Putin himself. You never guess what happened to the Grandma after that? Grandma disappeared.
Or that “we’re not involved in Eastern Ukraine". Here is the tomb of a 21-year-old paratrooper. In Pskov. Fallen in the Donbass.
We need to understand that the use of Russian truth and falsehood is completely different from our thinking.
If they say something, they won’t necessarily mean it but the tactical truth is meant as an instrument to slip through a slightly open doorway to get out of a nasty situation.
Russia's destabilizers in modern times
So what could destabilize Russia? Middle class? Internal conflict in the system? Activation of the opposition?
Some threats have been eliminated already. Change in the energy sector? Whatever would happen to Russia, they have such good reserves that they don’t bump
Even if the price of oil drops to $40 a barrel. Nationalism is not a problem when it is channeled.
Chechnya has been treated, there Kadyrov pulls the strings at the moment. The global recession is not really a problem to Russia since they are in a recession all the time anyway.
But these are the ones that could make a difference. This is what the Russians fear: a time of turmoil.
What are the Russians afraid of? Fear of internal unrest and striving for a strong leader
A time of turmoil as the time before Romanov was elected leader.
This is their horror, a time of turmoil. The Russians also use the 1990s as a time of turmoil.
When there's a weak leader, the country is in turmoil.
That is, even if it hurts a little, they prefer a strong leader, because under a strong leader chaos is absent. This right hand image in the top corner is interesting. The picture is from Leningrad. Sobtshakin, mayor.
Behind him is a gray official named Vladimir Putin. He’s not really the protagonist of this image yet but the next person who appears in the image is the protagonist of the image. Viktor Zolotov.
He is a lathe operator by profession. Putin's judo friends. Let's get back to Zolotov later, but remember the name, Zolotov.
Putin's judo friends. Lathe operator by profession, by education and by sophistication.
The Russians have a fear of internal unrest. Putin, who fears internal unrest, has elevated this Viktor Zolotov as a boyar
This guy, a lathe operator by education, first followed Yeltsin to Moscow
After which he was made 1.5 years ago (2017) the Commander of the National Guard, three-star general.
I have been in military school for six years and I retired at the rank of Colonel. He has studied to be a turner and he is a three-star general because he belongs to the boyar.
He is trustworthy because he has been Putin’s judo buddy since the 1970s Look at that look, he would even set his hand on fire because of Putin.
In the background of this image is a picture from an act that came into power a few years ago, a law that empowers the National Guard.
Putin cannot rely entirely on the armed forces. The National Guard was established around Putin to protect him.
Among other things, the National Guard was tasked with quelling internal unrest. They are allowed to use violence
But because the law is humane, they are allowed to fire at protesters, but they are not allowed to fire at such protesters who are women and pregnant.
That is, the National Guard must look among the protesters not to shoot pregnant women because the law is humane.
Zolotov is a tough guy. Navalnyj challenged Zolotov. Of course, since Zolotov is high on the scale of the boyars, he is entitled to high levels of corruption.
He has a pretty large amount of assets. Navalnyj, who hates this corruption, found Zolotov's property
And challenged Zolotov to a conversation on television. Navalnyj said: "I'm challenging you to a conversation in a television about this corruption."
Zolotov, who is an old judoka, replied, "I'll challenge you to a duel, in a ring or on a judo mat, I'll make you minced meat."
In a western world would a high-ranking police commander say to make minced meat out of someone, how long would he stay in office?
But this kind of discourse is business as usual in Russia.
This is what they are afraid of: Repetition of the Maidan. This is where Putin took a little back when they started raising the retirement age,
The Russian Landscape Through History, Changes and Similarities: Tsarist Russia, Soviet Union, Chaos in the 90s, 2000s
so a little was taken back because it was seen that people simply did not like this increase in retirement age.
Russia's change. If we look at how Russia has developed. Tsarist Russia had an authoritarian system of leadership.
The Tsar had received his power from god and was infallible.
Corruption was intense, opposition was persecuted, Westerners were portrayed as a threat
Autocracy, Russia had a messianic mission, they sought regional expansion and believed in Russianness.
Then the power of the Tsars collapsed and the Soviet Union was established. There was an authoritarian system of leadership, there was corruption, there was opposition persecution
the West was described as a threat, there was a sham democracy they had a messianic mission, their mission was to spread communism to Cuba, Angola and so on in exactly the same way.
The messianic mission of spreading communism.
Regional enlargement efforts and they believed in Russianness. That is, although the Soviet Union was the home of the peoples
The Russian part was still the leading class, although it was not highlighted
Then came the time of turmoil. Everything went a little bad. Power was decentralized, the regions gained a lot of power. Corruption did not disappear.
Russia had freedom of speech in the 1990s. They even thought about NATO membership. The West was no longer a threat.
There was an era of democracy that turned it into a curse word and an ugly word in the minds of the Russian people because they were financially on their knees.
Identity was lost. They were trying to save the remnants of their empire through wars in the 1990s
Chechnya's first war and so on. Western culture began to push itself into Russia. But then, thankfully in the Russian mind, along came a strong leader who saved everything.
Let's go to Russia in 2000. Putin's Russia. There is an authoritarian system of leadership, corruption, persecution of the opposition, the West is described as a threat
a guided democracy, Russia has a messianic mission, regional enlargement efforts, and a belief in Russianness.
If we look at when Russia was liberated from the Mongols in the 15th century to the present day
This bottom red line is an authoritarian system of leadership, the west is the enemy and so on.
And that small yellow dot is a time when there was freedom of speech, democracy and the West was not seen as a threat.
In other words, the one who thinks Russia would change, you can think so, but I don't agree.
This anomaly of the 1990s was a coincidence. This will continue as long as it continues.
Homo re-sovieticus in the last few years: worship of the past and other themes of Russian thinking today
Let's see how it goes. Homo re-sovieticus is born.
In 2017, Levada conducted a survey for Russians. 10 most significant people in world history (according to Russians.)
Stalin 38 %. Quite a hard figure when, according to some sources, 20-25 million people were executed or died in camps by Stalin.
34% said Putin is the toughest man in world history. Half of Russians in 2012 considered the purges by Stalin a political crime, in 2017 only 39% did.
An increasing number of Russians know nothing of the purges. This Masha Gessen, whose book I showed, is talking about suicidal terrorism in Russia.
If you think of Nazi Germany’s phenomena of Nazis killing Jews, they were different gangs, and so on.
But in Russia people killed each other. families and clans were mixed up so that there were victims and executions in every family and house
This matter was not settled in Russia, as it was in Germany.
People are told: "The Nazis were evil and the Jews were victims and this can not happen again."
There has never been such dealing with the subject in Russia because they were so messed up.
There was a shooter and a victim from the same nuclear family. There was a shooter and a victim from the same extended family. It never got there to a situation where it would be dealt with what really went through and what really happened.
That's why they still consider Stalin a tough guy, and that’s pretty worrying. Worship of the past. They want to go back to that kind of imaginary past
There was no such thing as the imaginary past they want to go back to but they think there was.
Stalin’s glorification, longing back for the Tsarist Empire and so on. Then there is the desire to correct the historical injustices experienced by Russia.
Let's face it. All nations have experienced injustices. We Finns lost Karelia. But we won't shout for it anymore. We were beaten and so be it.
But the Russians are digging for the injustices they have been wronged for and seeking redress for any reason.
Currently in the Crimea. Crimea was given to Ukraine in 1954. The Russians took it back because it was just a correction of a historical injustice and so on.
They have a longing for a Soviet Union that never existed in reality.
Here is a Russian pensioner, a civil servant, a teacher, a student and a schoolboy. The picture has their ages and years of birth.
Gessen is talking of such an imaginary past, which is in fact a romanticized, glorified Soviet era, which it was not.
The more the time goes on, the finer the times become in people’s minds and heads. Then there is this democracy, which is a time of turmoil.
Then Gessen uses the term "a future that does not exist". Here’s in what era people of different ages today in Russia lived.
When we expand it to a wider timeline, we can make a conclusion about what the schoolboy or student is thinking.
He has actually lived under Putin's rule all his life. He has heard all his life on television that "the west threatens us"
"We are a besieged fort and we are at war" and so on. This is very challenging.
What can happen in Russia? The period of stagnation will continue until Putin leaves.
What does Russia's future look like? Five different scenarios based on history
Or there will be a harsher period, Stalin's time part two. Another purge. Development stops and repression begins, the Iron Curtain.
Or the whole system will collapse as it did in February 1917.
Or Russia democratizes, which I personally don’t believe. Or it polarizes with westernizers and slavophiles, the west and the east will begin to struggle with each other again.
Belief in a fair good tsar and princes: Russia's next leader?
I talked earlier about princes. There are two princes here today. We have a good tsar who is infallible and he will retire in 2024, probably.
A new tsar will be elected to replace him. Here are two potential candidates.
The prince must be a tough guy. He needs to be able to guarantee a peaceful rest of the life for the retiring tsar.
Just as Putin guaranteed Yeltsin's life so that Yeltsin lived in peace from all legal action until he died.
In exactly the same way, Putin is now looking for such a prince. Medvedev is too soft. He can't do it.
Here are two candidates. This is Djumin. The Russian princely story requires that the prince is a hero. Before he becomes the infallible tsar he must be the hero.
He is somehow heroic. Djumin is heroic, he has been awarded the title of Russian hero.
He rescued Yanukovych in February 2014 from the clutches of fascists in Kiev.
That is, he led the Yanukovych rescue operation from there when, according to the story, the fascists came to power in Kiev.
He earned the title of Russian hero. He was a major general and Deputy Minister of Defence.
He has then been recovered in that Tula area. He has earned the hero's cloak, he is safe in Tula.
He has been castled. Russian chess gamers like to castle. Djumin has been castled there to the Tula area to wait
It is close to Moscow. In an area where nothing should go wrong, i.e. the hero will no longer do anything wrong before 2024.
And he waits there, learning administration in a good Tula district.
This second candidate, Zinitsev, is currently Minister of Emergency Situations. The Minister of Emergency Situations is always the one who saves the Russians whether it is a flood or whatever.
That is, he will also receive the title of Russian hero. He will save the Russians at some point before 2024.
He has a pretty hard track record when we look at where he has worked in the past. KGB, FSB, FSO, a man of the system. He has been very close to Putin.
These two candidates look similar to each other, funnily enough. The only difference is that Djumin plays as a goalkeeper for the hockey team in Putin.
Djumin is a good goalkeeper except when Putin shoots then that’s when it usually goes all the way to the goal. He also knows this boyar game quite well.
Putin's support and comments on national conditions
Here it was. Let's go back. Sociological research. Putin's support is beginning to decline. (Fall 2018)
There is talk that Putin is responsible for the problems of Russia where the armed forces are not so important.
More important is the well-being of the people. 20 million people live below the poverty line.
22 % of the population can only buy essential food. Yes, little bubbles are bubbling under the surface.
Here is a statement by protester (Olga Koltsova) in which she says “Either those in power are aware of the mood and are listening to the people or"
"some kind of social explosions will rise up. When the lid of the boiler is closed very tightly, it will eventually fly into the air.”
Just like in February 1917 and in the November Revolution.
When the lid is too tight then something could happen. This is her view. This interview was conducted a week ago (November 2018).
It is difficult to say where Russia is going and what is happening. This is the last picture. This is a demonstration from Moscow in September 2018.
The impact of online youth on Russia's future
This may be the future of Russia.
This person probably belongs to the group that gets their information from the internet, he does not belong to the 80% filtered television population.
This may be the future in 10-15 years.
Sometimes by 2030 something might happen if the lid does not bounce up before the next presidential election in 2024.
Alright. I will end the presentation here.