For Russia, the very existence of the Western world is destructive

Dmitry Luchikhin, philosopher

Of course, I am glad that the West did not cede a single inch of "sacred western land" in the negotiations. Well, if that's the case, of course.

But I was struck by a noticeable increase in the number of compatriots who, following the unnamed, moved to "their own world". Not to the world of the leader, where Russia is the Holy Grail, a source of light and a spiritual beacon for the peoples of the world, but also to their own, where Russia has been humiliated in every way for more than eight years and "spit on her shoes".

I guess that this is how the defense mechanisms of the psychic work, and I least of all intend to destroy these defenses. Therefore, the text is only for those who still live in our common reality.

I want to once again outline some of the systemic moments of the events that allow, in conditions of incomplete information, to still divide the interpretive versions into possible and conspiracy theories. In the same sense as the version that the missing screwdriver was stolen is not proven, but possible, but the version that the moth ate it is not.

Let me start by reminding you that Russia is neither an alternative civilization nor a special culture. That is, in a certain sense, it is, of course, a special culture. In the one in which the behavioral culture of any social cluster is both special and unique: a separate family, a separate work collective, a separate city. But what Russia opposes to the Western world is not special, but simply backwardness. I have written extensively about this and will not repeat myself. The only thing worth briefly mentioning is that this is not the underdevelopment of a five-year-old child in comparison with the consciousness of an adult, but the underdevelopment of a fairly aged and shabby individual with the mind of a five-year-old child.

It is important that this backwardness is not just a linear lag, but passes through the point of bifurcation of the human consciousness of our civilization: through the transition from individual-collective consciousness, identifying itself through participation in a common social myth, to individual-personal consciousness, experiencing itself as a source of culture-forming intention .

So, being not alternative versions of cultural development, but different states of the same culture, they cannot coexist without destructively influencing each other. The interpretations of Russian propagandists about the aggressive intentions of the West, about the motives for seizing land and resources, about xenophobic Russophobia, of course, are completely far-fetched. But beneath them lies the psychological certainty of the fact that for Russia the very existence of the Western world and peaceful coexistence with it is destructive. Less noticeable, but no less true, is the opposite. Russia also serves as a model and an example of opportunity for all the conservative-pro-fascist ideologies of the Western world itself. But more on that later.

In this regard, the terms of treaties and negotiations are generally not applicable to describe the relationship between Russia and the West. Moreover, using these terms, we preorganize our own consciousness in such a way that we “see” in the processes of interaction what is not in them, and do not “see” what is actually there.

The reality of these processes can only be described in terms of war, albeit in its "cold" stage. They basically lack the option to negotiate coexistence so that everyone can live in their own cultural paradigm. But on the other hand, the goals are presented in their entirety: “creating springboards for further expansion”, deceptive maneuvers, temporary truces for regrouping, etc.

Some difference in approaches lies only in the fact that if the Russian establishment unambiguously understands and follows the military logic in any interactions with the West, then in relation to Western politicians, there is no certainty in a full understanding. One gets the impression that often the West still hopes, through compromises and concessions, to find the border within which peaceful coexistence with Russia will be possible.

Probably, it is the approach in the light of the attitude to the contract that produces the shift in the starting point that we constantly observe in the assessments and interpretation of the results of "negotiations".

It's like re-marking a thermometer and drawing zero where it used to be minus ten, forgetting that the values of the numbers have physical correlates. We can call the past minus five a plus, experience related emotions about this, but the ice around will not melt, and the water will not flow.

It is the renaming of essentially military operations into treaty processes that makes it possible to understand “not a retreat” in section A, in exchange for a retreat in section B - as an equal compromise agreement. And rejoice in the next "victory".

Is it possible in this confrontation, a complete and final victory? - To be honest, I don't think so. Although unlikely, but still possible, “Russia’s victory” over the world is simply a reboot of civilization. A world in which Russia itself will no longer exist.

The victory of the West, that is, in fact, the victory of the civilization of the individual, also lies not in the plane of direct influence on Russia. This situation, or rather the trend, was accurately captured by the author of the popular Rowling saga. One of her heroes cannot die while a shard of his soul lives in the mind of another hero. And here, Russia cannot be destroyed as long as it, in its anti-Western, sovereign identity, exists in the West itself in the form of fascist and pro-fascist ideologies and mindsets.

The conservative-pro-fascist mindsets themselves are the result of the autonomization of the pre-personal state of consciousness of the masses, who are not integrated, and therefore not controlled by the individual-personal mind itself. Probably because of the too rapid pace of the formation of the civilization of the individual. They cannot be destroyed, because on their basis the building of personal self-identification is built. But their lack of awareness, not being included in the conscious whole of modern consciousness, leads to their autonomous existence in the form of fascist ideologies of the most diverse type, “color” and form of representation.

And the only possibility of "victory" over them is their awareness and integration into the whole of consciousness.

After that, the problem of Russia, as a full-sized, state form of existence of this autonomy of the prepersonal mind, becomes insignificant. Without this, it is most likely unsolvable.

Original is here.