The State and the Common Good

A soldier salutes from a tank during the parade in Moscow commemorating the 70th Anniversary of the End of the Stalingrad Battle (from the BBC).

Russia commemorated the 70^th anniversary of the end of the Stalingrad Battle on February 2. Part of World War II, this episode is widely acknowledged as one of the deadliest in history, with 1.2 million mortal victims from both the Soviet and Nazi sides. The outcome is source of a central civic holiday in Russia: the Red Army prevailed over the Wehrmacht, marking a turning point in the War as the Germans began what would be their final withdrawal.

In his speech, Vladimir Putin could not but retort to patriotism. As quoted in the Washington Post, he mentioned that “Stalingrad will forever remain a symbol of unity and invincibility of our people, a symbol of genuine patriotism […] And as long as we are devoted to Russia, our language, culture, roots and national memory, Russia will be invincible.”

Without difficulty, this kind of celebrations can be seen as having the subtext of an apotheosis of the state. If united the Russians were able to defeat one of the most feared armies in history, then nothing else is a real challenge. As an expected corollary: divisions are threatening because they weaken the community.

Under this light, Putin’s intentions to gain control over the diverse areas of society are less and less surprising. Also this week, the Post commented on the intention of the Russian legislature to pass a law regulating volunteer efforts. This idea, however, is older.

First, there are the diverse manners in which the government has been able to limit or directly control the activities of NGOs: forbidding contacts with foreign officers under threats of reducing funds, deliberately putting bureaucratic obstacles to any administrative procedure they must comply with, or harassing its members as if they were members of an opposite political party. Here must be mentioned the constant reduction for the scope of action for U.S.-funded or related NGOs. Second, it was last year that the draft of the volunteering regulation law was announced. The ideas surrounding the law were raising the efficiency of volunteer organizations, improve the perceptions the public has about them, or to regularize the tax regime when they offer compensations to their volunteers.

The opponents to those actions view them as means to increase the surveillance over independent groups, which work to foster citizen interests that the state is negligent about, intentionally or not. A strong state argument would say that those issues are not paid sufficient attention to because there are other topics more important for the society as a whole; division threatens. This is nothing new. Rather, it is yet another confirmation of the direction that Russia is taking.