[1] Apparently, some were paid for coming; to a normal consciousness it is shameful. To a postmodernist consciousness it may be just funny, I suspect.
[2] Russian Orthodox Church, Moscow Patriarchate.
[3] The authenticity of the Gifts does not make much difference here, they were used is a symbol.
[4] (Matthew 4:1-11)
I have been trying to think and write about Nemtsov’s murder since it happened on 27th of February but somehow I could not. I would write a few paragraphs but they would fall apart like sand cakes; they worked by themselves but they did not make a coherent meaning as a whole. Now I feel the force to write. Before there were just the fragments of the events and their versions, offered by the multitude of observers and analysts. They only obscured that, that was there yet unseen. Now I think I know what was that that. So here are the naked facts and then my understanding.
Over the time close to the day of the murder Nemtsov publically have stated that:
- he is concerned that Putin may murder him;
- he is very close to his mother who is eighty seven and that his mother is very worried that Putin will murder him because of his political activity;
- Putin is “a sadist”, “fucked in the head”, “a pathological liar”, “cannot change” and that “he will never leave his chair by his own will”.
Nemtsov was murdered on the Big Moskvoretskiy Bridge on 27th of February, at 23.30. This place is the most unlikely choice for any murder because it is the public area of the highest security surveillance in all of Moscow: with densely planted video cameras, police and secret services. He was murdered, from a photographic point of view, in front of the Kremlin. On the photos of the murder is a tiny figure and the enormous cathedral of St Basil (the holy fool) rises above him. In a regular life Nemtsov was a tall and very well-built man; the cathedral is a relatively small, somewhat homey church. The representation in the mass-media changed all that. Strangely, the live TV transmission from the site of the murder was immediately organized and everyone who wished could watch the dead body with the top pulled up so the belly, usually very sporty, looked huge (probably because of internal bleeding); how the cleaners were washing the blood from the concrete; how someone was rotating the helpless body. It remained there for a long time.
Nemtsov was the driving force of the march named ‘Vesna’ (‘Spring’). He was murdered three hours after an interview on the radio station ‘Echo Moskvy’ in which he said that the purpose of the march was to state the truth and that the Putin regime can be overthrown only by the truth. The focus of the march was the war in Ukraine. After the murder of their leader the opposition decided to change the root of the march and to make a very small procession from the near metro station Kitay-Gorod to the place of the murder – this is to honour Nemtsov. They walked with the portraits of Nemtsov and the posters “we are not afraid” and “fight” (the latter word is the play on the Nemtsov’s first name). The march terminated on the sight of the murder. Everything went according to the agreement with the city government (the slogans were approved).
The state power mass-media and their agents kept throwing into the public various versions of the murder; all the rest – opposition and others – kept endlessly chewing them, obsessively discussing “leaked” videos of the murder and “the information from the source close to…”. The truly stunning feature of this process was that, although everyone knew who killed Nemtsov they continued to discuss the brands of the bullets, the cars, the latest lover of Nemtsov and so on nevertheless. It looked like they were afraid to realize the truth and therefore occupied themselves with OCD-type watching, thinking, and talking.
The family wished to bury the body the day earlier but they were refused by the workers of the morgue for some reason. Therefore his body was buried on the 3rd, on the birthday of Nemtsov’s mother. The car which carried the coffin had a spooky number “KOX”, that is the surname of the opposition leader who was closest to Nemtsov. The strange number was noticed and received comments on the day. The opposition leader named concluded that he was the next victim.
Now the country speculated what happened with its leader and the publics’ attention was switched from Nemtsov’s murder to the possibility of “the beginning of a new “red terror” (the murder of Nemtsov was compared with the murder of Kirov) or perhaps “the death of Putin”. The common prediction was that “if Putin is dead everything will disintergrate”. Meanwhile even the most reasonable political observers came to the conclusion that Nemtsov was murdered by some Kremlin party for the purpose of blackmailing Putin.
15th of March, the documentary ‘Crimea: The Path Home’ is released
The most important statements of Putin who is the major hero in the documentary were:
- Crimea is ours: was, is, and will always be;
- the whole operation has been done: first – to save president Yanukovych from Ukranian neo-Nazis and fascists, second – to save Russian speaking people who otherwise would perish from their hands;
- we were (and are) prepared to use nuclear weapons;
- we overtook the parliament and brought the Russian army forces but all that was strictly in the frame of the international law and existing agreements with Ukraine.
Additional thoughts delivers by the secondary actors were:
- Crimea was in the process of being occupied by neo-Nazis and fascists;
- Ukraine is occupied by neo-Nazis and fascists;
- if not for our decisive actions in Crimea we would have a second Donbass and Lugansk (meaning bloodshed) there;
- “how wonderful it is to be home”.
He appeared to be satisfied, happy, and relaxed.
All but two members of the Parliament refused to honour the memory of Nemtsov by observing a minute of silence before the session began.
The concert-meeting “We are together” was organized to commemorate one year of the joining of Crimea to Russia. It took place on Vasilievskiy Spusk that is the square next to the Big Moskvoretskiy Bridge on which Nemtsov was murdered. Because the crowds were huge they naturally spilled onto the Big Moskvoretskiy Bridge. The place of the murder of Nemtsov still had flowers and photos which have been spontaneously delivered there by people daily. Police put a fence around it and maintained it by their presence. Nevertheless, there were balloons above the murder site with slogans completely contrary to those values which Nemtsov held, “KrimNash” (“Crimea is ours”), “Putin is the Saviour of Sevastopol” etc. Also, there were people holding the posters “I am proud of my country”, next to the murder sight.
The concert began with playing some recorded slogans, among which were “God is with us” and “Crimea is ours – Christ is risen”. Then Putin made his appearance and even sang. The whole show demonstrated the complete unity of the leader and the people.
The Russian public was informed that in St Petersburg a bust of Putin depicted as a Roman emperor is being prepared. The bust will be placed near the metro station ‘Parnas’. ‘RPR Parnas’ was the name of Nemtsov’s political party. It is a most probably coincidence but it is still a very nice touch, very much in a line with the “KOX” number, to not mention it.
The murder of Nemtsov was a ritual murder – not in a superficial meaning of those words but in its essence. Irrespective of his other qualities, Nemtsov was an honest and extremely outspoken person who refused to bend and compromise with Putin and his course of politics. Furthermore, he was handsome, intelligent and charming. He also was very alive. Anyone who knew him mentioned this aspect of his personality: extreme liveliness, optimism, lightness, outspokenness. Precisely because of this he became a victim: the evil is deathly and it cannot stand life; the evil is the father of lies and cannot stand the truth. Therefore, apart from the very personal hatred for Nemtsov by a narcissist who hates anyone who does not admire him (Nemtsov not only did not admire Putin but openly despised him; he also understood his sadism and pathological lies) Putin also hated him as a puppet of the evil. The reasons like “Nemtsov was a mediator between various fractions of the opposition and with the West” are legitimate but secondary to that liveliness.
So, the liveliest victim was chosen and murdered in front of Kremlin. The sight of the helpless dead was broadcasted widely. To murder someone in this location and not to be caught on the spot is impossible but apparently the murderer managed it; the message “I am invincible” is being delivered as a result. Putin does not say it directly of course, he gives to the astonished viewer an opportunity to reach this conclusion himself – it is OK because the majority will not be able to handle the truth but the memory of the horror of the discovery will remain. The same idea “I am unpunishable” is transmitted by the documentary ‘Crimea: The Path Home’: “yes, I have done all this, yes, I am a liar”; some episodes are so grossly overdone that the question arises whether the director – the real director, Putin – is mocking the viewer. In the murder the message “I am invincible” is horrific; in the documentary – it is somewhat homey, bloodless. It really looks like the nation had an enigmatic murder first, then the children were left by themselves feeling progressively more uncomfortable and scared, and then his majesty appeared with an offer “accept this soft version of my reign, the story with Crimea, and all will be well – no more nasty Nemtsovs, no fearsome darkness”. Considering that most Russians really like the “Krimnash” idea, no wonder they rejoiced.
And then there was the celebration, chosen to be on the place of not directly the murder site but very near. But this was just a coincidence, just like the letters “KOX” on the car, wasn’t it? We always celebrate on Vasilievskiy Spusk, why shouldn’t we celebrate the year of the joining of Crimea there? And we also fenced the murder site of the unfortunate. Those arguments are well-known. It is a recognizable trade mark: to set the things up on the edge so that there is always room for doubt and denial. Of course the stupid students with the posters “I am proud of my country” against the background of the place of the murder did not know what it was and probably did not even know who Nemtsov was. However, the organiser of those many-days of show knew – it is so funny to play with the human puppets making them to say “I am proud of the murder”. “They, those small human puppets, do not see it but I, who is above them, see it all.”
Actually, I think the following. The murder was done where it was done because:
- it gives a very good photo shot: the cathedral over the small body, first – carelessly semi-naked, then – packed in black plastic, an inhumane object to be deposited;
- it is a symbolic desacralization of the space; the association “church – dead body” stays in the mind;
- it is a symbolic murder of the truth because St Basil the Fool was known for speaking the truth to the tsars including to the tsar-murderer Ivan the Terrible;
- only such a place can convey maximum idea of the invincibility of the murderer;
- it is the heart of Russia – it is the symbol of desecration of Russia or the soul of the nation;
- finally, because it was necessary to make it very close to the conclusion, “the communion” with the masses occurred during the following celebration.
It does indeed look like the modern parody of the Passion and the Easter events. Nemtsov is murdered on Friday night. It also was “the official day of the forces involved in special operations” or “the day of polite/ green people” established by Putin a year ago. Then, just like after the murder of Christ, there is fear and confusion; then Putin disappears and the fear and confusion increase. During this period of anxious waiting for Putin to appear (alive or dead), in the minds of the people, Nemtsov is swapped with Putin the Absent – the victim is forgotten. Just as it was with Nemtsov’s murder, now there are countless speculations about Putin’s death. Some mockingly say “he will rise”. The documentary about “Putin the saviour’ is shown on Sunday proclaiming that “he is alive” – just like the myrrh-bearing women proclaimed in the Gospels the resurrection of Christ (speaking about women, the same allusion was made on the 8th of March by playing the recording of “Putin meeting with the women”). Then Putin makes some limited appearances “to a few”.
Eventually he appears “to all”. And almost immediately after that he appears practically on the place of the murder of his rival – of the person who played the role, only by the virtue of being truthful and calling others to do the same, of the Christ-like figure in this postmodern drama. Before Putin’s appearance the recorded slogans “Christ is risen, God is with us” are played. Then there is the appearance to all, almost over the grave, the crowds give the impression that the whole nation is ready to march with and for Putin[1]. He is literally hailed as “saviour”. All the values Nemtsov held (anti- war in Ukraine, free Russia etc) are symbolically overthrown by the opposite slogans chanted almost over (and actually over) the site of his murder. Then “communion” takes place: as the whole nation symbolically joins with the murderer by the implicit and explicit approval of the murder and of the ideas of the murderer. So Putin makes the ritual sacrifice then the whole nation (represented by those who came to the Red Square) partakes of the spilled blood of the innocent victim. Now it is prepared for its’ mission and ready to go forwards.
My understanding of the events is based purely on their symbolic meaning. I deliberately do not consider strategic calculations like “how beneficial the murder of Nemtsov was for Putin” because in my opinion such analysis is secondary, and only adds to the fog which obscures that which is hidden in plain sight. I will explain my “medieval” way of thinking.
It is an accepted fact that immediately before beginning the process of the annexation of Crimea they were visited by a Russian delegation bringing the so-called “Gifts of the wise men to Christ” for veneration to Sevastopol and Simferopol. These gifts came from Mount Athos (the Holy Mountain in Greece) just like the belt of Our Lady years before came to Russia for veneration. Among those who surfaced at the time the Gifts were in Crimea were the “Orthodox benefactor” and multi-millionaire, Malofeev who was later involved in financing the war in Donetsk and Lugansk, Girkin-Strelkov, (Russian intelligence officer and later commander of the pro-Russian forces which shot down flight MH17) and several others who are closely connected with the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Thus the bringing of the Gifts is interpreted by many as “a cover” for secret preparations of the later operations. I agree – it is a legitimate albeit entirely strategic account of the bringing the Gifts. It is most likely to be true as well. However, to stop on this obvious level of explanation is to see only the first layer of meaning. The next layer is that Putin and Co (no one can seriously doubt that any significant event in Russia must have the approval of Putin; also, ROC MP[2] which is effectively part of the Putin apparatus of suppression and curated by him personally) “organized” bringing the Gifts from Athos not just for the purpose of “a cover” (many other, less extravagant, methods can be used for a cover) but such a cover, the Christian cover is particularly pleasing for Putin. First, it is pleasant to bring the relics to Crimea and then to steal the land; “gift – stealing” is a particularly delicious mockery. Second, to use the Gifts which were given to Christ[3] as a symbolic beginning (and a cover) for the campaign is blasphemy.
So, what does seeing the actions of Putin as blasphemous and mocking add to the first layer (a cover) of understanding? Quite a lot; it provides the general feel/ grasp of his movements and purposes. The knowledge that the Gifts were used just as a cover does not really give much; it is highly unlikely that such a cover will be used in the future but the knowledge that there is a strange desire to make a use of the attributes of Orthodox faith (relics, icons, dates of important Christian feasts), especially before the significant events (like the annexation) and thus to blaspheme on the grandest scale does provide the understanding of the direction the man is going, his purposes, and his values. To know that Putin serves the evil is to know the possible scale of the events. Possible because to know that someone is a puppet of the dark forces does not mean that one must attribute to any action of the puppet an apocalyptic scale. By no means; the puppet can reach the status of Antichrist or he may not but the character of his actions in their essence is the same as of Antichrist. It is true for anyone who walks the path of evil.
Thus even if Putin will never realise the purpose towards which he seems to gravitate now, keeping this purpose in a mind is indispensable for the understanding of what is happening. The proof of this is the fact that since a certain moment of a time in the past those analyses of the actions of Putin which miss their metaphysical aspect tend to fall apart or look somewhat impotent. Something is missing in them, and the sense of the miss is increasing. It was especially noticeable when the analysts were dealing with the recent events, the murder of Nemtsov and the disappearance of Putin. Those words “ritual murder” and “mocking of the Easter events” put it all together, including the very bizarreness of the murder, disappearance, and the release of propaganda documentary. The extravagance of the explanation matches the extravagance of the events perfectly.
I am not saying that Putin is an “official” follower of the evil as the common imagination paints them, someone who conducts hidden rituals and takes every private minute to spit on the Cross – I simply do not know this. However, judging by the fruits of his deeds, I am quite convinced that his projects and operations thrive thanks to the aid of the inferno, simply because of the law of the mutual attraction of the similar things. The evil gives him the ideas and symbols which he uses even if he is consciously unaware of that. Nevertheless, they are still very potent ideas and very potent symbols. The symbols, being “released” into the public space, inevitably begin acting on their own gathering around themselves those whom they positively stir. For example Christians are more likely to have a theological conference in a room with the Crucifix then one with a statue of Ganesh. The destruction/ remaking/ discrediting of the symbols of the opponents prove that even if political observers do not take symbols seriously those who attempt to remake the world do. An obvious example is the remaking Christian Cross into swastika which literally replaced the Cross in churches across Nazi Germany. Whether Hitler deliberately bent the ends of the Cross or simply replaced it with the swastika taken from India is absolutely irrelevant. The fact is that in the Christian churches the eye sees the bent cross placed into the church, and the heart partakes of the unconscious meaning, a mockery of the Cross of Christ. But there is still the room for reasonable doubt aided by an unreasonable logic: he did not offend the Cross, he simply changed it with swastika because he liked it more, it had nothing to do with Christ of Christians.
I hope I managed to demonstrate how the game with symbols/ symbolic gestures, if skilfully done, always leaves the room for another, as a rule more “reasonable” interpretation, than the “primitive thinking” of the “religious nuts”. Only here the “religious nuts” have the courage to see events through the framework of meaning, which includes their feelings and values and not just strategic calculations. And just like them, the relatives of Nemtsov had the courage to state, without paying any attention to the various speculations of the observers, that it was Putin who murdered Nemtsov. The observers were too busy applying a form of ‘logic’ which generates endless possibilities and failed to see or state the obvious because they did not have the faith in God or the mad thirst for justice and truth which make even an atheist a believer.
What I am saying here is that logic and reasonable doubts are good as tools but they are hopeless if they are the only tools we have, using them without faith in God or at least active faith in the highest possible ethical and moral values. The evil is an excellent theologian – please see the temptation of Christ in the desert, in the Gospels. Actually, the episode is so telling that I will quote it here.
Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And when He had fasted forty days and forty nights, afterward He was hungry. Now when the tempter came to Him, he said, “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.”
But He answered and said, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’
Then the devil took Him up into the holy city, set Him on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written:
‘He shall give His angels charge over you,’ and, ‘In their hands they shall bear you up,
Lest you dash your foot against a stone.’
Jesus said to him, “It is written again, ‘You shall not tempt the Lord your God.’”
Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. 9 And he said to Him, “All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.”
Then Jesus said to him, “Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve.’”
Then the devil left Him, and behold, angels came and ministered to Him.[4]
Here the devil tempts Christ quoting the Scriptures and using the formal (out of context) logic. One may say that Christ respond to him the same way, also using the Scriptures. There is one difference however which makes it all: all the statements of Christ are God-centred. Unlike the devil who uses the name of God as a tool, every answer of Christ proclaims God to be the refuge, the stronghold beyond the doubts of a purely formal logic. Christ’s answers if you like convey the only spirit which can carry a human being over the traps of the rooms of ambivalence and doubts. It is of course the spirit of faith. One must note also that Christ is being very far from denouncing logic as a tool for faith; he renounces and overthrows the devil’s formal logic only i.e. the logic which derives its strength in itself only.
In the light of this quote it is becoming more understandable why Putin messes up the ROC MP so much. On one level, he is expected to do so because he is “the leader of the Orthodox country”. On another – ROC MP gives him moral credibility in the eyes of many, including the Orthodox abroad. On yet another one – it is his tool of choice for mocking. And further more – it is the tool using which he is hoping (consciously or unconsciously) to destroy Christianity. The situation is truly tragi-comical: the more Orthodox believe in Putin the more he is mocking them, the Church and God; his mockery brings in more participants and their sincerity (albeit stupid) turns into the mockery of God as well by participation. It would not be so if the Orthodox believed first and foremost in Christ – nothing can pollute such a faith – but they, unfortunately, believe in Russia = Putin = Orthodoxy. This is how the metaphysical black energy of evil is growing being fed by the participation of others. So, by encouraging people to conduct the acts of faith (veneration of the relics etc) Putin and Co together with the ROC MP are in fact degrading those acts of faith via by using the sacred for the purpose of evil, blaspheming and enticing the people to join in with their blasphemy.
I leave the reader to draw their own conclusion about how conscious Putin is in his games with the devil. The results of this so far are Russia morally/ spiritually destroyed; the fake church ROC MP which truly should have been excommunicated out of the Eastern Orthodox Church; the corruption of world Orthodoxy via the spread of pan-Putin moods with the heresies attached to them; and the spiritual fall of Athos; the defeat of Europe – still in spirit only but it will eventually fall; the war in Ukraine with thousands lives lost for nothing on both sides; the coming overthrow of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and the total control of the fake church ROC MP over world Orthodoxy; bringing to nothing the dialogue between the Eastern and Western Churches about their intercommunion as a fulfilment of Christ’ prayer/command at the last supper, “that you may be one”; the strengthening of the radical Islamic groups fed by Putin and Co; the activation of neo-Nazi and neo-fascists elements across Europe, etc. And the most important, the tool for this and the outcome of this which are one: the palpable evil poison, the discrediting of the “moral law within” and the making of souls to become insensitive to it.
I know very well that this article will not be understood or that it may be understood only by a few of the “religious nuts”. The room for ambivalence is far too well designed. Human pride is too high to push aside that logic and attempt to listen to the strange logic of the heart. To me the very fact that I will not be heard gives some ground for believing that I may not be mistaken in my understanding; that Orthodoxy is now sleeping with the devil’s puppet; that the West is too rational/ too proud/ to accustomed not to take anything said from the position of the faith seriously. The more infernal, under the banner of Orthodoxy, the behaviour of Putin becomes, the less possible it will be for the both camps to understand it. The moment looks ripe for something truly dreadful to break in.
22 of March 2015