August 27, 2022 - 1:00pm
Before they engaged in a devastating war, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union were allies. Their totalitarian regimes were mirror images of each other. If any reminder of this was needed, the Russian foreign ministry just provided it by celebrating the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact. What the ministry did not mention was the secret protocol of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, envisaging the occupation of Poland by both the USSR and Germany. The agreement reflected Germany’s conviction that it was destined to control a large part of Europe — Grossraum — just as Russia today sees itself destined to rule over ‘Eurasia’.
This is the context in which the assassination of Dasha Dugina is to be understood. Contrary to some Western commentators, Dugin is not Putin’s brain, but his popularisation of Carl Schmitt and his Grossraum theory go a long way explaining the mindset of the Russian ruling elites. Yet, just as Schmitt did not quite become the uncontested “crown jurist of Nazi Germany”, Dugin is not the sole architect of Vladimir Putin’s Eurasian Union.
For both Schmitt and Dugin, politics is a deadly struggle between friend and enemy, best kept outside the borders. While the conflict between nations are inevitable, the internal unity of Russia must never be challenged. As Leonid Slutsky, the leader of the nationalist Liberal Democratic party of Russia put at Dugina’s funeral: ‘Regardless of our political parties, faith and age, there can be only one approach: one country, one president, one victory.’
This public assassination marks a turning point. It comes a few days after an exodus of Russian tourists from the Crimea, occupied since 2014. They both raise questions about Russia’s ability to protect its citizens. “No form of order, no reasonable legitimacy or legality can exist without protection and obedience”, wrote Carl Schmitt, to assert famously (leaning on Hobbes) that “the protego ergo obligo is the cogito ergo sum of the state”. Dugin would be well aware of this dictum. His support for Putin and its imperial ambitions is based on the idea that conflict is best kept outside of Russia. Destruction had to directed at those who are considered Russia’s enemies, not its friends. That’s why Ukrainians had to be ‘killed, killed, killed’, as Dugin infamously put it.
Thus, if Dugina’s murder came from within Russia, indicating internal conflicts between various factions of the ruling elites, Putin would have failed in heeding one of Schmitt’s key lessons. Putin’s regime has been based on the unspoken social contract that has had strong popular support. You stay out of politics, and in return you can enjoy security, stability and maybe even a degree of prosperity. If, on the other hand, the assassins truly had some connections to Ukraine, as Russian authorities claim, their inability to prevent the murder exposes their weakness. This could seriously undermine the regime’s legitimacy.
Paradoxically then, a Putin incapable of ensuring basic safety would be the one to fear the most. What is to be expected is a further escalation directed both against the regime’s internal opponents as well as against Ukraine.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“Are you the Judean Peoples Front?”
‘Eff off! We’re the Peoples Front of Judea!”
Monty Python understood Gen Z et al 40 years before it happened.
The same thought occurred to me. Splitters!
The same thought occurred to me. Splitters!
“Are you the Judean Peoples Front?”
‘Eff off! We’re the Peoples Front of Judea!”
Monty Python understood Gen Z et al 40 years before it happened.
Fascinating, on so many levels, although i fully expect males who inhabit man-caves to baulk at this.
The seemingly permanent wry smile on Margaret Attwood’s face has had justice done to it by Kat Rosenfield. The ancient fear by society of women who no longer have sexual agency brings into focus a whole host of issues in the human psyche. I also wonder whether this plays into the obsession with trans women, i.e. a person who identifies as female but without the means of sexual reproduction.
Looking up the link to a term new to me, churail, also shows how different cultures (in this case, largely south-east asian) are haunted by females outside their control, as a shape-shifting spirit who can lure men to their doom.
The over-riding theme is one of the obsessive need for certainty. Perhaps it’s the case that the world has suddenly become too complex for adult brains, especially those still developing, to cope with. The need to categorise, to pigeon-hole writers and artists, to eschew (or simply fail to comprehend) nuance, may well be a reaction to this, emerging alongside the internet and the online world. Needing the security of one’s tribe therefore becomes a necessity, a survival strategy as old as humanity.
Many more avenues of thought derive from this, but i’m grateful to both Attwood and Rosenfield for their exploration which opens up those avenues, which seem to me to be both ancient and unprecedented. Now there’s a combination to be conjured with.
Thank-you for this comment, it adds extra depth to the article.
Edit: Good to see your courteous comment appreciated, after a raft of downvotes.
Courteous comment….
“males who inhabit man-caves”
“fear by society of women who no longer have sexual agency”
Courtesy is a word that has been mangled, like privilege, equality and racism among others.
Courteous comment….
“males who inhabit man-caves”
“fear by society of women who no longer have sexual agency”
Courtesy is a word that has been mangled, like privilege, equality and racism among others.
Edit: Good to see your courteous comment appreciated, after a raft of downvotes.
Great comment, but us old ladies still have sexual “agency” just no fertility. Some might say that gives us even more agency.
You’re absolutely right! Thanks for that correction.
I hope so
You’re absolutely right! Thanks for that correction.
I hope so
I think we’re in the grip of a collective nervous breakdown, brought on by our lack of understanding of how the modern technological world works. We can use the apps (maybe), but how many of us really understand what is going on inside the boxes of tricks we interact with? Very very few. This makes the insecurity terminal.
It’s ironic really, because our creative abilities have enabled us to free ourselves of most of the pressing problems of survival; perhaps there was a sweet spot where the average human could cope with (& have mastery over) all the new fangled inventions which improved our collective lot, but now the cyberbot nightmare begins ….
Life’s a b!tch ain’t it.
Kat – sounds to me like Atwood is playing it smart. Who could blame her or any other artist after seeing how JK Rowling has been treated.
“The over-riding theme is one of the obsessive need for certainty.”
Excellent insight.
RE: i.e. a person who identifies as female but without the means of sexual reproduction.
This is accurate but incomplete. It should be as follows: “a person who identifies as female but isn’t.
And what exactly is your problem with man-caves?
Thank-you for this comment, it adds extra depth to the article.
Great comment, but us old ladies still have sexual “agency” just no fertility. Some might say that gives us even more agency.
I think we’re in the grip of a collective nervous breakdown, brought on by our lack of understanding of how the modern technological world works. We can use the apps (maybe), but how many of us really understand what is going on inside the boxes of tricks we interact with? Very very few. This makes the insecurity terminal.
It’s ironic really, because our creative abilities have enabled us to free ourselves of most of the pressing problems of survival; perhaps there was a sweet spot where the average human could cope with (& have mastery over) all the new fangled inventions which improved our collective lot, but now the cyberbot nightmare begins ….
Life’s a b!tch ain’t it.
Kat – sounds to me like Atwood is playing it smart. Who could blame her or any other artist after seeing how JK Rowling has been treated.
“The over-riding theme is one of the obsessive need for certainty.”
Excellent insight.
RE: i.e. a person who identifies as female but without the means of sexual reproduction.
This is accurate but incomplete. It should be as follows: “a person who identifies as female but isn’t.
And what exactly is your problem with man-caves?
Fascinating, on so many levels, although i fully expect males who inhabit man-caves to baulk at this.
The seemingly permanent wry smile on Margaret Attwood’s face has had justice done to it by Kat Rosenfield. The ancient fear by society of women who no longer have sexual agency brings into focus a whole host of issues in the human psyche. I also wonder whether this plays into the obsession with trans women, i.e. a person who identifies as female but without the means of sexual reproduction.
Looking up the link to a term new to me, churail, also shows how different cultures (in this case, largely south-east asian) are haunted by females outside their control, as a shape-shifting spirit who can lure men to their doom.
The over-riding theme is one of the obsessive need for certainty. Perhaps it’s the case that the world has suddenly become too complex for adult brains, especially those still developing, to cope with. The need to categorise, to pigeon-hole writers and artists, to eschew (or simply fail to comprehend) nuance, may well be a reaction to this, emerging alongside the internet and the online world. Needing the security of one’s tribe therefore becomes a necessity, a survival strategy as old as humanity.
Many more avenues of thought derive from this, but i’m grateful to both Attwood and Rosenfield for their exploration which opens up those avenues, which seem to me to be both ancient and unprecedented. Now there’s a combination to be conjured with.
I am a fan of Atwood’s writing, but I’ve never thought of her as a feminist. In fact, I don’t think she’s ever liked feminists much. I also think she has a certain contempt for young attractive women, regardless of political persuasion. She tends to dehumanize her young female characters far more than any male writer I’ve read: pretty young women in her books are either passive & disposable, vicious & predatory, or empty headed fluff balls. It’s her older female characters who have all the complexity and strength. Perhaps Atwood developed a prejudice against young attractive women by working for so many years among college students.
Perhaps she’s jealous that they get more sex than she does.
like you would know.
like you would know.
Perhaps she’s jealous that they get more sex than she does.
I am a fan of Atwood’s writing, but I’ve never thought of her as a feminist. In fact, I don’t think she’s ever liked feminists much. I also think she has a certain contempt for young attractive women, regardless of political persuasion. She tends to dehumanize her young female characters far more than any male writer I’ve read: pretty young women in her books are either passive & disposable, vicious & predatory, or empty headed fluff balls. It’s her older female characters who have all the complexity and strength. Perhaps Atwood developed a prejudice against young attractive women by working for so many years among college students.
“The final twist in this sordid saga was like something out of a Philip Roth novel: the author … turned out to be a trans woman.”
Of course he was. .It would never occur to a biological women to identify with a piece of military hardware. It reminds me of a story a engineer colleague told me about his four children, who were all under eight at the time. He had three boys and one girl – she was second youngest. They were a family that eschewed toys which “re-enforced programed sexual identities”. So no toy guns and no dolls”. The were a STEM family 100% and all their toys were educational. One day he came home and found them in the backyard with their collection of dinosaur replicas. The three boys had arranged an army of them and equipped them with screwdrivers and pliers into armies which were having battles with each other. The girl had the largest dinosaur – a T-rex – in a basket wrapped up in a towel and was pretending it was a stroller she was pushing around.
Please tell me those dorky parents took the hint and got them a stroller, doll and a .99 cent bag of army men?
Sadly, no. I used to use the expression “helicopter mom” to describe their mother. But after listening to her tell of her intercessions – repeatedly – during their high school years to raise the rare A- to an A, often involving repeated teacher conferences and phone calls and sometimes visits to the Principal – I came to realize that “snowplow mom” was a much better description. We lost touch with them around the time she was trying to figure out how she could accompany her oldest along on his first job interview out of college. Oh – and it was Ivy League all the way.
You have upset me now after making me laugh.
But, one day she’ll understand she has no control and, God help us, her children will do precisely as they please
Sounds like “snowplow dad.” As a very engaged Mom with high standards & a big dose of 12 step prep work that taught me pre-parenting all about getting the f*** out of your kids way, I was frustrated and disappointed with the ongoing sexism by teachers, admins, and everyone else in projecting all sorts of stereotypes onto Mothers. I literally asked ONE class related question of my high achieving daughter’s school at the end of her Senior Year, and got grief. Her Dad and I learned that whatever issues we had with the school that our daughter couldn’t handle herself–we always encouraged her to self-advocate first–HE had to go in and talk to the teachers. In the 2010s, I as a Mother was immediately dismissed as a busybody, clueless, stage mother, when I was anything but. Frankly, my kids had three female teachers in particular who assumed that role much more than I did, attempting to “educate” me whenever I saw them at events as if I was pushing my kids when I wasn’t. They were hammers, w/ a library full of mediocre self-help books, in search of a nail, except that nail had to be a well-kempt blondish middle-aged woman with thriving kids, so these codependent, busy-body teachers could feel superior by projecting on us characteristics we didn’t have or failures we’d actually worked through years before. They enacted precisely the unreflective they were accusing me of, which sounds familiar, doesn’t it?
Helicopter Mom and Karen stereotypes overlap a great deal. Somehow the obviously much higher, almost suffocating IMO expectations I’ve seen in every Asian family I’ve met are celebrated as “cultural” for “Tiger Moms” (when we know the Dads are usually the most demanding), whereas if you’re of Northern European descent you can be the target of the midwit School of Education mob.
You have upset me now after making me laugh.
But, one day she’ll understand she has no control and, God help us, her children will do precisely as they please
Sounds like “snowplow dad.” As a very engaged Mom with high standards & a big dose of 12 step prep work that taught me pre-parenting all about getting the f*** out of your kids way, I was frustrated and disappointed with the ongoing sexism by teachers, admins, and everyone else in projecting all sorts of stereotypes onto Mothers. I literally asked ONE class related question of my high achieving daughter’s school at the end of her Senior Year, and got grief. Her Dad and I learned that whatever issues we had with the school that our daughter couldn’t handle herself–we always encouraged her to self-advocate first–HE had to go in and talk to the teachers. In the 2010s, I as a Mother was immediately dismissed as a busybody, clueless, stage mother, when I was anything but. Frankly, my kids had three female teachers in particular who assumed that role much more than I did, attempting to “educate” me whenever I saw them at events as if I was pushing my kids when I wasn’t. They were hammers, w/ a library full of mediocre self-help books, in search of a nail, except that nail had to be a well-kempt blondish middle-aged woman with thriving kids, so these codependent, busy-body teachers could feel superior by projecting on us characteristics we didn’t have or failures we’d actually worked through years before. They enacted precisely the unreflective they were accusing me of, which sounds familiar, doesn’t it?
Helicopter Mom and Karen stereotypes overlap a great deal. Somehow the obviously much higher, almost suffocating IMO expectations I’ve seen in every Asian family I’ve met are celebrated as “cultural” for “Tiger Moms” (when we know the Dads are usually the most demanding), whereas if you’re of Northern European descent you can be the target of the midwit School of Education mob.
Sadly, no. I used to use the expression “helicopter mom” to describe their mother. But after listening to her tell of her intercessions – repeatedly – during their high school years to raise the rare A- to an A, often involving repeated teacher conferences and phone calls and sometimes visits to the Principal – I came to realize that “snowplow mom” was a much better description. We lost touch with them around the time she was trying to figure out how she could accompany her oldest along on his first job interview out of college. Oh – and it was Ivy League all the way.
Great story.
It shows one thing for sure; parents have b****r all influence on their children
Please tell me those dorky parents took the hint and got them a stroller, doll and a .99 cent bag of army men?
Great story.
It shows one thing for sure; parents have b****r all influence on their children
“The final twist in this sordid saga was like something out of a Philip Roth novel: the author … turned out to be a trans woman.”
Of course he was. .It would never occur to a biological women to identify with a piece of military hardware. It reminds me of a story a engineer colleague told me about his four children, who were all under eight at the time. He had three boys and one girl – she was second youngest. They were a family that eschewed toys which “re-enforced programed sexual identities”. So no toy guns and no dolls”. The were a STEM family 100% and all their toys were educational. One day he came home and found them in the backyard with their collection of dinosaur replicas. The three boys had arranged an army of them and equipped them with screwdrivers and pliers into armies which were having battles with each other. The girl had the largest dinosaur – a T-rex – in a basket wrapped up in a towel and was pretending it was a stroller she was pushing around.
Any good writer, such as Atwood, will always resist any attempt to be dragooned by bright-eyed thought-bubblers. A good artist will remain true to doubt. As Camus says, “nothing is true which forces you to exclude”. People with beliefs and certainties are the antithesis of art, and are a plague on modern society. One should always disagree with the convinced, even when one agrees with them. It winds them up no end lol.
Any good writer, such as Atwood, will always resist any attempt to be dragooned by bright-eyed thought-bubblers. A good artist will remain true to doubt. As Camus says, “nothing is true which forces you to exclude”. People with beliefs and certainties are the antithesis of art, and are a plague on modern society. One should always disagree with the convinced, even when one agrees with them. It winds them up no end lol.
An interesting article on an interesting personality
An interesting article on an interesting personality
Great article and super comment from SM on one of the wisest published authors on the planet right now
Great article and super comment from SM on one of the wisest published authors on the planet right now
I’m not a big Atwood fan (I doubt many men are, though I recognize her talent). Nevertheless, I enjoyed this essay and found it somehow vaguely optimistic.
I’m not a big Atwood fan (I doubt many men are, though I recognize her talent). Nevertheless, I enjoyed this essay and found it somehow vaguely optimistic.
Atwood is making the point that instead of cancelling each other for our unconscious biases, why don’t we enlighten each other instead, try walking a mile in the other ones’ shoes.
Atwood is making the point that instead of cancelling each other for our unconscious biases, why don’t we enlighten each other instead, try walking a mile in the other ones’ shoes.
Great article. In the opening paragraph, I appreciate Rosenfield’s jab at those who fear they might: “accidentally engage with or, actually enjoy the creative product of a member of Team Bad”.
Fiction should always be allowed to engage with unfamiliar experience, and even empathize with people that are hard to look at, let alone embrace. Or at least resist heavy-handed villanization of imperfect, even contemptible people. Or make the bad guy farcically loathsome like Uriah Heep, Thomas Gradgrind, or Josiah Bounderby. Give the reader something to ponder and contend with, not binary sermonizing.
Can empathy only “hug down” now, in the direction of those considered outcasts or strangers–the “marginalized” and “voiceless” of nowadays parlance? Is it a breach of some newfangled, implied fictional contract to admit the nuance and complexity of real life into a story?
Gradgrind was not so terrible, he realised that he was wrong. Boundary, on the other hand, remained a git.
Fair point. Gradgrind was no M’Choakumchild, nor a Murdstone.
Fair point. Gradgrind was no M’Choakumchild, nor a Murdstone.
Gradgrind was not so terrible, he realised that he was wrong. Boundary, on the other hand, remained a git.
Great article. In the opening paragraph, I appreciate Rosenfield’s jab at those who fear they might: “accidentally engage with or, actually enjoy the creative product of a member of Team Bad”.
Fiction should always be allowed to engage with unfamiliar experience, and even empathize with people that are hard to look at, let alone embrace. Or at least resist heavy-handed villanization of imperfect, even contemptible people. Or make the bad guy farcically loathsome like Uriah Heep, Thomas Gradgrind, or Josiah Bounderby. Give the reader something to ponder and contend with, not binary sermonizing.
Can empathy only “hug down” now, in the direction of those considered outcasts or strangers–the “marginalized” and “voiceless” of nowadays parlance? Is it a breach of some newfangled, implied fictional contract to admit the nuance and complexity of real life into a story?
Sounds like a really interesting book. I hope my local library gets it.
Sounds like a really interesting book. I hope my local library gets it.
I avoid “straightforwardly instructive stories”. For me they must have at least one of “symbolism, irony, nuance” to be interesting. I also refuse to read anything that has a political message or has been put through a ‘sensitivity reader.’
A great article Kat, well written and making some excellent points about the (annoying) developments in understanding and evaluation fiction. Sigh.