Formula of fake love and sincere hate

In our perception, this formula is fixed in the Roman version: “Divide and conquer!” But in general, I think, this method of managing conquered nations existed among all empires, both before Rome and after it – from the times of Ancient Egypt to the Russian Empire. It is not without reason that the latter received the eloquent name “prison of nations.” And in prison, as everyone knows, God forbid you allow prisoners to unite – a riot will immediately arise.

This is what happened in the renewed Soviet empire, when, after WWII, front-line prisoners managed to consolidate in the GULAG system (Correctional Labor Camps – prison) with Bandera’s “forest brothers” and convict groups of natives of one country or locality. Uprisings broke out in the camps: Ekibastuz, Vorkuta, Norilsk, Taishet, Kengir. And the archipelago GULAG archipelago fell…

After the Leader’s death, the notorious Stalin`s national policy, which consisted of a combination of repressions and deportations with demagoguery and barracks-official patriotism, suffered a large-scale failure. What can you say, Joseph Vissarionovich overdid it, and the threads of the nuts broke. Khrushchev, Bulganin and Voroshilov had to urgently work back. But the foundations of ethnopolitics laid by Stalin still make themselves felt in the Caucasus, and in Central Asia, and throughout the Russian Federation as a whole! To evict people from an apartment building, place everyone together indiscriminately in a communal barracks, and then resettle them in someone’s own way into other people’s housing in a new, unusual place… The consequences of such “friendship of peoples” can be dealt with for decades without any hope of an acceptable solution.

The king was softer on this issue.

When national conflicts arose between indigenous peoples, the Great White King did not interfere in the mass violent actions for some time, he waited for enough blood to be shed on both sides, and the warring foreigners would crawl on their knees to ask for imperial mercy in the form of protection from each other. In the process of reconciliation, it was very important for the Emperor not only to preserve the final authority, but also to foresightedly balance “mercies” and “severities,” leaving in reserve the possibility of inciting those at war against each other and using repression for the inevitable repeated interethnic conflicts.

Which concept is more Jesuitical? The King`s or Stalin`s? Each reader is left to decide for himself…

It is also interesting that in both cases many similar political technology techniques are observed. For example, here is one of them…

There is such a zoo phenomenon called a “goat provocateur.” The role of the goat here is to show the way to the slaughter for the poor, stupid sheep. Having penetrated the sheep flock, confused with fear on the way to slaughter under the butcher’s knife, the goat leads the sheep to their inevitable end. The butcher appreciates his faithful assistant goat and may even do him some favors: allow him to bleat loudly about the freedom and independence of the sheep flock, show off at the head of the flock, feeling like a sovereign and full-fledged leader, etc. Butchers constantly use the trick with a goat provocateur – this could be the Abkhazian Bzhaniya, maybe the Chechen Kadyrov, and the Tibilovs with the Bibilovs and Gagloevs in South Ossetia, or maybe someone else… in different ways. Such vain and unprincipled leaders can always be found. They will all talk to the sheep about their version of independence, but the true value of their talk is often best known by their butcher master. He will tell Tibilov-Bibilov-Bzhaniya that he is Fidel Castro and Garibaldi in one package. He will whisper in your ear: listen to us – and we will help, support, protect you from the law and, most importantly, make you rich! He will convince you that independence is wonderful, but we will be there and will advise you so that the “pindos” (Americans) and Anglo-Saxons do not get in and ruin everything…

It looks like “controlled independence” at the hands of the Kremlin. A very convenient thing!

Now imagine that a similar “national leader” will be introduced into the public field if the struggle for the independence of Bashkortostan unfolds. Under the wonderful slogans suggested by the Federal Security Service`s curators, he will lead the Bashkorts of Tatarstan to kill the Tatars! And on the part of the Tatars, who live compactly in Bashkortostan, the Russians will find a similar “father of the nation” who will rush to kill the Bashkorts who are interfering with the independence of the Tatars. This is quite predictable. Russia is constantly looking for such “fighters for the sovereignty of Abkhazia” operating under the wing of the Federal Security Service. It is likely that the candidates are already found – and at hour “X” a character, for example, Khabirov is swept off the chessboard – and “the national leader of the liberation struggle of the Bashkorts of Tatarstan” appears on the field. Similarly with the Tatar “leader” in neighboring Bashkortostan… And Russia is creating a reconciliation commission and will reconcile during 30 years, simultaneously feeding both sides of the conflict.

But there is an antidote. Controversy about the revision of borders, reform of statehood, division or exchange of territories should be carried out under the control of the international community and with strict adherence to international law. But just no “observers” or assistants from the Empire! Destroying it is our common endeavor, all means are good for this, the experience of uprisings in Stalin’s concentration camps eloquently confirmed this thesis. And then it becomes possible to solve the existing interethnic and interstate problems of the indigenous peoples without wars and bloodshed.