Yesterday I mentioned that I wanted to address the issue of Russia, in contrast to the American state that is largely based on post Enlightenment classical liberalism.
"The religious renaissance in Russia has less a religious than a national and political character, with most people equating being Russian with being Orthodox. Talk should therefore be of a borrowed religious boom, one that has less to do with the internal dynamics of the religious than with political, cultural, and economic factors."
Seems to me the basic question here is whether there's an actual spiritual revival taking place, or if Russians are simply identifying as Orthodox as a matter of national identity.
Given the Orthodox emphasis on large families, along with huge improvements in incomes and living standards since 1991, plus government incentives that encourage large families, you'd expect this trend to have reversed by now:
All good points. I saw an Andrei Martyanov video some time ago. He's an outspoken atheist but says he's "Orthodox"--meaning, I guess, Russian. The author I referred to definitely has an axe to grind. He makes good points in his critique of the West but glosses over some problems in the East.
Unfortunately, Russia is always asking for "concrete guarantees", a "signed treaty", a "legaly binding document", etc, from the Anglo-Zionist golem...(they are so legalistic, about everything, it's sad). Sure, they will sign some papers, "okay, no problem-TRUST US! - this time we PROMISE, for real!" They never seem to learn, one key fact to all the history of the Zionists' Janissaries, since at least the early 1800's : the only "guarantee" when dealing with the subjugated West is that that treaty WILL BE BROKEN, before the ink is dry! That is the ONLY thing reliable when dealing with the "Western" powers. I cannot, for the life of me, grasp that mindset-especially after the Russians have been betrayed over and over, every time-throughout all of those years?? Name ONE they have honored, with *anyone*, ever, especially the Russians. NEVER trust the "Saxon" powers...(at least not until they toss the Zionist monsters' yoke!).
This is the problem when one side believes they're pursuing a zero sum game--all or nothing, world domination or nothing. Obviously from such a perspective treaties, agreements, laws, whatever are only tactics.
Thanks for this excellent introduction to the uniqueness of Russian - Byzantine worldview.
Alexander mourned that he had 'no more worlds to conquer,' but I fear I may run out of years before I learn all that varied civilizations have accomplished.
The US has an equally foundational grounding in religion.
Puritans in Massachusetts
Puritan dissidents in Rhode Island
Reformed in New York
Quakers in Pennsylvania
Catholics in MaryLand
Anglican on the mid-Atlantic
A prnal.colony in Georgia
Seven very different religious groups in 13 colonies (with unknowns in Jersey, Connecticut, and Vermont), Spanish Catholics in Florida and the Southwest, Acadian Catholics in Louisiana, Irish Catholics on the East Coast, German Catholics in the Midwest, Scandinavian Protedtants in the Midwest, Jews in the East, Italian Catholics in the East, African Methodist EpiscopalIan in the South, plus Southern Baptists, Union Baptists, Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Pentecostals...
Then 100 years on, many of those bonds loosen. Try and live together and we have these United States, if not the United States.
Add to that the Pennsylvania Dutch, Appalachian Presbyterians, Methodist (maybe give them Georgia), Acadian Catholics in Louisiana,
100 years on, the religions are detuned to Unitarians in Mass, spiritualists in New York, hippies, Carnegie, and all sorts of spiritual glippety-glop. And the Russian state-church has a massive advantage.
Good essay Mark. Suggest Billington’s Icon and the Axe, to see the threads from the high medieval to the 20th century. Also, our Digital Bomb! substack has a number of essays concerning Russia.
What is Russia? Rather than see Putin or anyone else as even nominally in charge, place the ROC at the front. That is the power center now for Russia. Anyone that wants to be successful in Russia knows this. So what is the ROC? Important to view it today as both retrieving its Medieval civilizational history as well as getting up to speed in the Digital Paradigm: the technology that can propel the civilization forward and to new heights.
Russia had a very different experience with Modernity than the rest of Europe and the US. Peter and Catherine the Great were quite aware of this difference and attempted to bridge it, recall Leibniz being brought in to address modern science and that failure. The West nearly fully embraced the Printing Press and the fractures this brought. This was the ground of Modernity and its ideas. Russia was very late to the game on this front. Russia maintained its Oral and Scribal grounds much longer, thus the “evil” of the Bolsheviks/Socialists, who were book people trying to drag Russia into Modernity.
The ROC quite purposely became unlike the Roman Catholic church: it has no Pope or others in a hierarchy. The Catholic Church retains much of its Medieval corporate structure. The ROC is quite different, thus the identification with the Protestant churches over time.
To what extent is Russia really part of the West? Arguments can be made on both sides, which means it is more part of the West than the East. One can argue that Russia and the West split over eschatology, which is not Catholic.
So why are we seeing all of this happening now? The US and parts of the West holding onto Globalism, liberalism, and certain views on eschatology, with the Russians, Chinese, Indians and others, embracing their Medieval/Ancient spiritual/religious roots and thus different notions of eschatology?
The death of modernity brought on by the ubiquitous adoption of digital technologies everywhere.
The very old narratives are being dug up and dusted off.
This means all new narratives are on the way. This happens as the rest of the world deals with creating new philosophy, sciences and theology (think Medieval before this separated in the West).
Ultimately what these other civilizations are aiming for are new elites to guide them and the world, in light of the crashing of the US/West. All new institutions.
You are right to ask about Trump and what MAGA means both internally and externally, particularly as the US becomes less secular and more spiritual/religious and thus more populist - everyone is going to go populist/DIY.
Note that Russia and China are trying to avoid the “populism” of the West by in effect getting out in front of it. Whether this works when everyone has the world in their pocket device remains to be seen.
A way to think about both Billington and Sam Huntington, who were pointing to the gaps in US thinking/understanding if it wanted to maintain its preeminence, is that they ended up on the losing side. Huntington is strikingly ignored: we refuse to think in terms of civilizations and what that implies. We are fully in the globalist box at the highest levels.
Another book for you Mark is: Genesis: Artificial Intelligence, Hope, and the Human Spirit
Kissinger’s last contribution, along with Eric Schmidt.
It really is striking that Kissinger in his two last books, both with Schmidt, turned away from his past. Meaning that tech has so changed things as to risk taking humans out of the equation: none of his approaches would work in negotiations with a robot.
A note on Schmidt: he is not pro human as such and is now a massive arms dealer, as he plainly states. He wants the US to triple down on its approaches to globalism and really commit to the adoption of tech to change the battlefield: a new kind of deterrence.
He is more focused on China in the future, but he, like everyone else, lacks the understanding of China and it’s embrace/retrieval of its spiritual background as it uses Digital to propel itself up towards the next historical cycle height - about 120 years from now.
I just orderd it, basex on Jeff M and your comments.Could you, or any of the superb commenters here recommend some good books on the history of Byzantium/ Ottoman empires?
You're welcome. Be aware that the author has an axe to grind. I can agree with much of his critique of the papacy as it developed in the West, but am not nearly as sure about the Byzantine model of national churches.
Happy New Year, Lass! I have read extensively on the Byzantine Empire. For a real in depth read you can read Vasilyev's History of the Byzantine Empire (there are certainly others). My copy was a two edition book with lots of facts and details, etc. Lars Brownworth wrote "Lost to the West. The Forgotten Byzantine Empire That Rescued Western Civilization", and as Mark mentioned the sack of Constantinople I liked Jonathan Phillips' "The Fourth Crusade and the Sack of Constantinople." Alan Palmer wrote a readable "The Decline and Fall of the Ottoman Empire." I found Roger Crowley's "1453" on the conquest of Constantinople by Mehmett II to be informative and written like a novel. Another is Robert Byron's "The Byzantine Achievement An Historical Perspective from CE130-1453." All were enjoyable.
HL, this great classic springs to mind! Peter Brown’s specialty, the era of the end of the Western, of Roman, empire and the rise of the Eastern, or Byzantine empire:
Happy New Year, ML! Thanks for mentioning the Peter Brown book. I read that some years ago and your mentioning it has made me think of re-reading. I just finished Judith Herrin's "Byzantium" similar to the title you reference below. I have not read the one you cited.
Happy New Year to you too KT Cat! Yes, it does seem time to revisit the outstanding writings of a former generation- do you also know the works of Robin Lane Fox - he’s more Antiquity, and also gardens, a typical Brit!
I dunno. But on this first day of the new year I am trying to keep my thoughts and perspective optimistic. I truly believe today that Trump may have been deeply affected by that near miss this summer. A level of humility and religious introspection might have taken place as a result that otherwise would not have. I am thinking that we don’t know today, but we might be able to discern more after hearing the speech given upon his inauguration.
Russians Return to Religion, But Not to Church
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2014/02/10/russians-return-to-religion-but-not-to-church/
This might explain the apparent contradiction:
https://academic.oup.com/book/10298/chapter-abstract/162637775?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false
"The religious renaissance in Russia has less a religious than a national and political character, with most people equating being Russian with being Orthodox. Talk should therefore be of a borrowed religious boom, one that has less to do with the internal dynamics of the religious than with political, cultural, and economic factors."
Seems to me the basic question here is whether there's an actual spiritual revival taking place, or if Russians are simply identifying as Orthodox as a matter of national identity.
Given the Orthodox emphasis on large families, along with huge improvements in incomes and living standards since 1991, plus government incentives that encourage large families, you'd expect this trend to have reversed by now:
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/RUS/russia/birth-rate
Then there's the divorce rate:
https://www.datapandas.org/ranking/divorce-rates-by-country
and of course this rather thorny issue:
https://apnews.com/article/abortion-russia-women-rights-feminism-fc5eab75b5e3d028aeb1f70ec8a9a2b1
All of which casts doubt on the idea of an actual religious revival.
All good points. I saw an Andrei Martyanov video some time ago. He's an outspoken atheist but says he's "Orthodox"--meaning, I guess, Russian. The author I referred to definitely has an axe to grind. He makes good points in his critique of the West but glosses over some problems in the East.
Unfortunately, Russia is always asking for "concrete guarantees", a "signed treaty", a "legaly binding document", etc, from the Anglo-Zionist golem...(they are so legalistic, about everything, it's sad). Sure, they will sign some papers, "okay, no problem-TRUST US! - this time we PROMISE, for real!" They never seem to learn, one key fact to all the history of the Zionists' Janissaries, since at least the early 1800's : the only "guarantee" when dealing with the subjugated West is that that treaty WILL BE BROKEN, before the ink is dry! That is the ONLY thing reliable when dealing with the "Western" powers. I cannot, for the life of me, grasp that mindset-especially after the Russians have been betrayed over and over, every time-throughout all of those years?? Name ONE they have honored, with *anyone*, ever, especially the Russians. NEVER trust the "Saxon" powers...(at least not until they toss the Zionist monsters' yoke!).
This is the problem when one side believes they're pursuing a zero sum game--all or nothing, world domination or nothing. Obviously from such a perspective treaties, agreements, laws, whatever are only tactics.
So maybe there will be a "capture the flag" type move, whereby the Turks will take Jerusalem while the Russians take Constantinople?
Thanks for this excellent introduction to the uniqueness of Russian - Byzantine worldview.
Alexander mourned that he had 'no more worlds to conquer,' but I fear I may run out of years before I learn all that varied civilizations have accomplished.
The US has an equally foundational grounding in religion.
Puritans in Massachusetts
Puritan dissidents in Rhode Island
Reformed in New York
Quakers in Pennsylvania
Catholics in MaryLand
Anglican on the mid-Atlantic
A prnal.colony in Georgia
Seven very different religious groups in 13 colonies (with unknowns in Jersey, Connecticut, and Vermont), Spanish Catholics in Florida and the Southwest, Acadian Catholics in Louisiana, Irish Catholics on the East Coast, German Catholics in the Midwest, Scandinavian Protedtants in the Midwest, Jews in the East, Italian Catholics in the East, African Methodist EpiscopalIan in the South, plus Southern Baptists, Union Baptists, Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Pentecostals...
Then 100 years on, many of those bonds loosen. Try and live together and we have these United States, if not the United States.
Add to that the Pennsylvania Dutch, Appalachian Presbyterians, Methodist (maybe give them Georgia), Acadian Catholics in Louisiana,
That last paragraph is mostly a typos.
100 years on, the religions are detuned to Unitarians in Mass, spiritualists in New York, hippies, Carnegie, and all sorts of spiritual glippety-glop. And the Russian state-church has a massive advantage.
Basically we are having a religious war to the last Ukrainian between post modern Wef / Davos / Soros and Russia, ignited/started by Neocons.
This explains why the majority of European Leadership is so anti Russian.
Good essay Mark. Suggest Billington’s Icon and the Axe, to see the threads from the high medieval to the 20th century. Also, our Digital Bomb! substack has a number of essays concerning Russia.
What is Russia? Rather than see Putin or anyone else as even nominally in charge, place the ROC at the front. That is the power center now for Russia. Anyone that wants to be successful in Russia knows this. So what is the ROC? Important to view it today as both retrieving its Medieval civilizational history as well as getting up to speed in the Digital Paradigm: the technology that can propel the civilization forward and to new heights.
Russia had a very different experience with Modernity than the rest of Europe and the US. Peter and Catherine the Great were quite aware of this difference and attempted to bridge it, recall Leibniz being brought in to address modern science and that failure. The West nearly fully embraced the Printing Press and the fractures this brought. This was the ground of Modernity and its ideas. Russia was very late to the game on this front. Russia maintained its Oral and Scribal grounds much longer, thus the “evil” of the Bolsheviks/Socialists, who were book people trying to drag Russia into Modernity.
The ROC quite purposely became unlike the Roman Catholic church: it has no Pope or others in a hierarchy. The Catholic Church retains much of its Medieval corporate structure. The ROC is quite different, thus the identification with the Protestant churches over time.
To what extent is Russia really part of the West? Arguments can be made on both sides, which means it is more part of the West than the East. One can argue that Russia and the West split over eschatology, which is not Catholic.
So why are we seeing all of this happening now? The US and parts of the West holding onto Globalism, liberalism, and certain views on eschatology, with the Russians, Chinese, Indians and others, embracing their Medieval/Ancient spiritual/religious roots and thus different notions of eschatology?
The death of modernity brought on by the ubiquitous adoption of digital technologies everywhere.
The very old narratives are being dug up and dusted off.
This means all new narratives are on the way. This happens as the rest of the world deals with creating new philosophy, sciences and theology (think Medieval before this separated in the West).
Ultimately what these other civilizations are aiming for are new elites to guide them and the world, in light of the crashing of the US/West. All new institutions.
You are right to ask about Trump and what MAGA means both internally and externally, particularly as the US becomes less secular and more spiritual/religious and thus more populist - everyone is going to go populist/DIY.
Note that Russia and China are trying to avoid the “populism” of the West by in effect getting out in front of it. Whether this works when everyone has the world in their pocket device remains to be seen.
It's been many years since I read The Icon and the Axe, but I recall being hugely impressed. Maybe it's time for a reread.
A way to think about both Billington and Sam Huntington, who were pointing to the gaps in US thinking/understanding if it wanted to maintain its preeminence, is that they ended up on the losing side. Huntington is strikingly ignored: we refuse to think in terms of civilizations and what that implies. We are fully in the globalist box at the highest levels.
Another book for you Mark is: Genesis: Artificial Intelligence, Hope, and the Human Spirit
Kissinger’s last contribution, along with Eric Schmidt.
It really is striking that Kissinger in his two last books, both with Schmidt, turned away from his past. Meaning that tech has so changed things as to risk taking humans out of the equation: none of his approaches would work in negotiations with a robot.
A note on Schmidt: he is not pro human as such and is now a massive arms dealer, as he plainly states. He wants the US to triple down on its approaches to globalism and really commit to the adoption of tech to change the battlefield: a new kind of deterrence.
He is more focused on China in the future, but he, like everyone else, lacks the understanding of China and it’s embrace/retrieval of its spiritual background as it uses Digital to propel itself up towards the next historical cycle height - about 120 years from now.
I just orderd it, basex on Jeff M and your comments.Could you, or any of the superb commenters here recommend some good books on the history of Byzantium/ Ottoman empires?
You might want to dip a toe into Byzantine Revisionism:
https://www.unz.com/article/byzantine-revisionism-unlocks-world-history/
Mark, thank you again! This was fantastic! Need to re read it, so much to absorb!
You're welcome. Be aware that the author has an axe to grind. I can agree with much of his critique of the papacy as it developed in the West, but am not nearly as sure about the Byzantine model of national churches.
Thank you!!
Happy New Year, Lass! I have read extensively on the Byzantine Empire. For a real in depth read you can read Vasilyev's History of the Byzantine Empire (there are certainly others). My copy was a two edition book with lots of facts and details, etc. Lars Brownworth wrote "Lost to the West. The Forgotten Byzantine Empire That Rescued Western Civilization", and as Mark mentioned the sack of Constantinople I liked Jonathan Phillips' "The Fourth Crusade and the Sack of Constantinople." Alan Palmer wrote a readable "The Decline and Fall of the Ottoman Empire." I found Roger Crowley's "1453" on the conquest of Constantinople by Mehmett II to be informative and written like a novel. Another is Robert Byron's "The Byzantine Achievement An Historical Perspective from CE130-1453." All were enjoyable.
Cosmo:
Can't wait to get started! Thank you so very much!!
My pleasure.
HL, this great classic springs to mind! Peter Brown’s specialty, the era of the end of the Western, of Roman, empire and the rise of the Eastern, or Byzantine empire:
https://www.amazon.com/World-Late-Antiquity-150-750-Art/dp/0500297487
ML This looks great! Thank you so much!!
Happy New Year, ML! Thanks for mentioning the Peter Brown book. I read that some years ago and your mentioning it has made me think of re-reading. I just finished Judith Herrin's "Byzantium" similar to the title you reference below. I have not read the one you cited.
Happy New Year to you too KT Cat! Yes, it does seem time to revisit the outstanding writings of a former generation- do you also know the works of Robin Lane Fox - he’s more Antiquity, and also gardens, a typical Brit!
I don't, but thanks for the tip and I plan to check out Julius Norwich's "Byzantium."
And then there is John Julius Norwich’s “Byzantium,” also now a classic:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6103.Byzantium
Yes, two classics.
Mark, excellent summary. Dostoevsky is another who would fit into the Khomyakov/Berdyaev/anri-enlightenment orbit.
In fact, D. is mentioned in the article--that part got trimmed.
I dunno. But on this first day of the new year I am trying to keep my thoughts and perspective optimistic. I truly believe today that Trump may have been deeply affected by that near miss this summer. A level of humility and religious introspection might have taken place as a result that otherwise would not have. I am thinking that we don’t know today, but we might be able to discern more after hearing the speech given upon his inauguration.
I too am hopeful that Trump's brush with death will break the lack of humility referenced here-
https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/01/an-ignored-us-diplomats-warning-on-russia-my-interview-with-e-wayne-merry-on-his-long-telegram-of-the-90s/
I am more hopeful than optimistic.
I share as many do here your cautious optimism!