Why did Anna Politkovskaya have to die? by Globetrotter

Reading Anna Politkovskaya is like learning a lesson on the hypnotic power of political language. No doubt that the use of words is a luxury and one of those which saves us of many pains. The State provides this sedative but we never know whether the State is a resource in the Defence against threats or if it is a threat in itself. Anna won't speak anymore, but Dostoievsky or some anarchists of the old Russia would know why, indeed she just couldn't.
Let's begin by stating that a Nuremberg Tribunal for the European-wide Balkans of the Twentieth Century, is missing in the backdrop of our european Consciousness. A Tribunal where some British, some Americans and a lot of Russians would have to sit and respond for several holocausts. Ideological composites such as "social-fascism" or "State capitalism" ( because the current Russian Nomenklatura only allows those milionaires who contribute to the obedient civil organizations) are empty words, raised to smoke-screen some essential questions of our Culture.
The current war of Russia in Northern Caucasus ( much wider than the journalistic soundbyte 'Chechnya", which , in fact, reaches as far as Daghestan, Northern Ossetia, Ingouchya and, of course, Georgia) reveals not only the terrible aspects of any other war but also the new ones of Military planning and executing murders against its own people, in order to get a purely military solution.
Russian Opposition, the one of Grygory Iavlinsky or the former chess champion, Gary Kasparov, whether it is not bribed by the Kremlin or doesn't manage in reviving any russian tradition, is going through a frightening metamorphosis. Its most active, effective and militant branch is the youth of the National-Bolshevik Party, the natsboly. Despite the combination of Nazi nationalism and bolshevik Imperialism, dictated by a former Punk-poet and soviet dissident, Edward Limonov, the Party's style and ideology are more palatable than its nazi parafernalia. The problem with this Party, beautified as it was, at its inception, with New-wave black-leathers, military boots, or skin-head daring is the fact that it intends to whitewash Bolshevism and avoid that it be included, straightforwardly as it should be, in the general phenomena of european Nazism. It is not by chance that Limonov, their leader ( a guy somewhat similar to the leader of the portuguese rock-band "Mão Morta") was not only befriended with the north-american artists Charles Bukovsky and Lou Reed, but also friend of the serbian nazi Radovan Karadzic and has, himself, participated im 'serbian missions" in Bosnia.
Yes, Anna Politkovsakaya had to die. Besides being in rage with the Secret Services' Dictatorship which took power in Moscow, she was also in rage against the "democratic Opposition", which collaborates with Power, in a low profile dictated by the West.
Before dying, she was already breathing through the tube of the lyrical solidarity, which is congenial to the Christian Russia, this means, she was leaning to the romantic leftism, so keen in whitwashing every type of crime, on condition it has been dictated by someome who's beautiful, white, and young. However, everybody knows that the first victims of Communism (and this as an exercise of effectiveness) are always those ones who place themselves on its "left".
Who killed her?
I doubt that it was those criminal lobbies that she fingered at -- everybody in Russia knows who they are. Neither the islamic allies of Moscow in Chechnya -- their brutallity is not so futile. It was certainly not Putin, no matter the agencies which are investing in him and he cannot control yet.
Politkovskaya was murdered by clever nazis. In Russia's recent History a large portion of genuine resistance against Nazism was something individual and with a national identity as it happend with the Ucranian National Army which had collaborated with the German Nazis, but only to hold the front against the Soviet Nazis. The "Banderewizi' were crushed, only in 1964.
All things accounted for, one takes two lessons of the slaying of Anna Politkovskaya:
First - the black Magic of Nazi propaganda is an offspring of Dadaism and other psychotropic aesthetic modernisms which flourished at the same time in Paris, red Moscow, black Rome or browning Berlin ( they also have a foothold in New York). One has to kill or blind something inside before taking the path of political assassination and Genocide.
Second - romantic leftism as the one of the natsoboly should have an hard look on itself and get back to the times before the French or American Revolutions in order to set its feet on something more solid than bloodshed. Fraction lines in the diverse an rich balcanic territory we call Europe have been erased during the World-War II and suffocated in the post-war period, when the rst of the world began its tectonic mouvement away from Europe.
In one of the last interviws of Anna Politkovskaya, a veteran of the War in Chechnya who's now in the business of "protection"( organized gangsterism against organized crime) told her that he and his former comrades-in-arms were for Zhirinovsky and they only saw a solution in an "authoritarian Monarchy" for Russia.
If there is no such thing ( either it is a Tirany or it is not a legitimate Monarchy , because Monarchy is authoritative but it doesn't even found its legitimacy in "Nation") russian leftism has to return to the original roots of political Authority of Europe, if it wants to remove the Secret Services from the Kremlin. Otherwise it will go on experimenting some young people in the hell which is the russian penitenciary system, incestuously longing for an eternal youth, which the liberal elite of Russia, in lack of self-esteem, will never recover.
Who killed Anna Politkovskaya? Whoever did it, didn't want to punish her for what she knew, since everbody guesses some of the bad news she could further report. They wanted to avoid she turned into the moral counsciousness of Russia. She was mother Russia against a leader, too young and cold to be called the father of Russia.
Her murder was a ritual one. Look not among the atheists, but among the neo-pagans of Russia, wherever they may be...


Anonymous said...

Monarchy is evil, I would rather die than be the subject of any tsar, and I am sure many fellow true socialists would fight against that evil way http://www.lonympics.co.uk/thecrimsonbookofroyalty.htm

mch said...

Look, Anonymous,

Monarchy has so much evil in it as Republic or any other Regime, does. These systems apply differently to different circumstances, with different results. Maybe Monarchy tends to weigh more a certain line of Tradition, on condition this weighing is more effective in balancing what we can expect with what we can do. I do not believe that a community of Human Beings, with its convictions, representations and also limitations, may choose only once, but the choices it made before in History, certainly condition the choices it has to do in the Future. The experience either of Authoritarian or Democratic Republic in Europe was conducive of social and ecological caos; eUROPE BECAME an abstraction and lost its roots. So it is time for Devolution. Time to return some dimension of Governance (notably the one which leads to the profissionalization of Politics) to a method which has been more balanced with the rest of our existences which is not Politics.

Your claim as a socialist sounds good, but remember, f.i., that one of the guys hanging from their feet in a Milan Square, besides Mussolini, was a former communist leader, Niccolò Bombacci, who fled Moscow, as he once fled fascist Italy, the second turn to die with Mussolini, apparently for no reward, except the one of dying with the socialist comrade of his youth. This is not a joke. Do you know how he died? With several fascist leaders making the roman salute;lined up by his side, in front of the Death Squad, he asked the young partisan assigned to shoot him, to aim at his heart. Then he raised his fist and shouted:"long live Mussolini! Long live Socialism!". This is only a case, but Bombacci was since very young, a generous and prestigious communist, in such a way that the Italian Communist Party had to hide his role, as well as the slaying of Mussolini so that their corpses couldn't "talk". I could tell you other cases where socialism is a mysterious thing which has many meanings, precisely as Republic once did, or Democracy does today. Remember always the brothers Strasser, who founded Hitler's NSDAP and who ended up fighting against Hitler. They were socialists and nationalists, at the same time. In terms of "isms" I prefer to leave it to a moral, political but also cultural combination which may live well both under a Monarchy or in a Republic.

Regarding the "tsarism", in Russia, as you know, it corresponds to a particular claim of the Russian authocrats, beginning with Ivan the III, who considered themselves the inheriters of Rome. "Tsar", Czar, Kaiser, Caesar all are branches of the same claim, stretching over different corners of Europe.

Maybe it is time for Russia to think of a King instead of an Emperor. However, to fight for an Human Face in a Nation's form of Government against any type of faceless Imperialism, could be a good idea and it could help Russia to get out of the vicius circle of Oriental Greatness and western misery, where Tragedy always looms. But Regime is a thing more about living for, than fighting or die for...

Thanks for your comment,