A personal story: counting losses
The fog of nationalistic fervor — will take years to revert, with the key ingredient of a respected debate fomented by civil society missing.
Russian Parliament deputies are besting one another with bills that render any form of debate impossible: punishable by years of imprisonment, extending black marks of unemployment for those who won’t be able to respond by finding a different job, leave for other country. “Z” marks are promoted over media, those not able to compare and find painful analogies of world history — are pushed into mechanistic demonstration of unity though hollow slogans and visuals.
Slightly more than 30 per cent of Russian population have travel (foreign) passports allowing them to go anywhere outside of Russia. Less than 10 per cent travelled 1 per year — and most only went to sun-bathes of Turkey or Egypt — and seldom to less afordable Europe. Hence the additional layer of thick insulation that protects the state to claim whatever outlandish explanation it sends through the tightly controlled air and web waves to the receiving public.
COVID period of 2020–21, when propaganda increased and ability to dispel the mist of isolationism, added to the illusion of self-reinforcing truth.
The barrage of “info-analytical TV programms” is unprecedented.
Emotional incendiary treatment of events dazes and confuses: especially when there is no backup of analytical treatment: opposing views are criminalised, professional views marginalised, channels projecting them are forcibly closed.
Vociferous reiteration about purging filth from everywhere — demand for cleansing the pages of history and mandating it to be told according to state interests — demolishes what history is — a platform where one cannot choose what pages to read and what to skip.
Only understanding all pages of history allows one to free from the shackles of past — and move to the future. Frenzy to stick to selective storytelling casts one into a painful repeat of mistakes of the past.
“This is not up for debate”: without debate there is no future — only tragedy
Key elements of society that shall be treasured for the culture of debate they form — have been either cast into oblivion, ridiculed, disassembled.
For over 10 years I saw important to grow professionally and give back to the country that I called home: Moscow was my city that I learned to discover no matter that I spent close to 6 months each year on international errands:
My (failed) hopes:
(1) I led by example development of modern financial service innovation saving tens of millions for banks I was employed at — and numerous international projects, including EMV and contactless implementation, mobile app / wallet development, acceptance regulation etc etc;
(2) I consulted and advised international champions in payments, guided World Bank teams, originated ideas for world champions born in the country, passionately engaged in other people’s cultures;
(3) I genuinely believed that by building bridges one would embed firmly a domain housed by inquisitive consumers who would engage with the world;
(4) I saw how many technologies: be that propagation of m-token and contactless acceptance or consumer credit, international card to card P2P adds to the world and lowers the cost for people.
All that discarded by gradual monopolisation of common sense: guided by insular (unprofessional but crafty and cynical) courtiers — who care very little about services rendered by modernisation — but the proceeds from them.
Where my ambition and passion followed the rite of arguments and debate — the single-handed decision that white is black is riveting, disgusting. It has no future, since it provides no basis to stand on. It only provokes animal instincts of fear.
My personal fears:
(1) I fear I will never see my parents. I fear they won’t be able to seek treatment for their conditions — or (imported) medicine to treat them. They raised me and instilled qualities of diligent professionalism that I am trying to uphold.
(2) Material losses of locked wealth in Russia I am willing to tolerate — and its rather the forced exit to seek new domains that is frightening. Ability to glide across the world and still return to a global city of Moscow is no more. Controlling for what can be said and what can’t be voiced adds to schitzophrenia.
My deepest regrets:
No material losses can compare with physical torment out of loss of life by courageous people of a sovereign nation invaded by another. That is a fact.
A nation that proved it can walk great lengths once unshackled from the past, where a promise of modernisation and future shining prospects would energise.
Compared with that, inflammatory talks about the time of WW2 and patriotic sacrifices falls on deaf ears: also considering that these sacrifices are committed by human beings out of their fight for survival — and those who went through the carnage shun followup celebrations of tragic events but implore to remember the foolish rhetoric that led to them.
Being a graduate in History and hearing ideologic speeches of people shunning professional debate is especially regretful.
Below I am leaving a speech by famous Russian writer Daniil Granin that he gave at German Bundestag to commemorate tragic events of WW2 and Leningrad blockade that he personally went through. Given in January 2014, 8 years of Ukrainian tragedy were yet to happen.
