The price of great historical transformations
reflections on Burckhardt, civilisations and Putin
The war in Gaza enraged and saddened the world; and revived that old historical aphorism, that there are decades when nothing happens, and weeks when decades happen. A new battle for our minds began. But the deeper insight into the history of the multipolar world came this week from a speech by Vladimir Putin on the civilization state. What can we learn about history of our world from the words of this observer, and participant, in the great historical transformations of the last twenty-five years?
“Great historical transformations are always bought dearly, often after one has already thought that one got them at a bargain price.
Jacob Burckhardt, Historian (1818-1897)
Fragments of the Burning Archive is my weekly live journal of historical writing on how we are to live, now, in this time of crisis, war, peace, ruin and fragile hope.
It comes in two parts: World Crisis Glimpses, for all followers; and the World History View, for paid subscribers. This week I am making the World History View freely available for all readers. If this writing helps, interests, informs or intrigues you, then please take out a full subscription.
Just some quick reminders. Tune into my podcast (Spotify, Apple or other platforms. This week I profile six great history books from the shortlist for the Wolfson History Prize, and discuss my plans to establish an online history reading or discussion club.
Watch my YouTube channel, including my playlist on the Nobel Prize for Literature, reviews of quality history books and commentary on world affairs.
Check out my books, articles, and digital courses at www.theburningarchive.com.
And please share my writing with your network.
World Crisis Glimpses
Usually in World Crisis Glimpses, I offer my own observations on key dimensions of the crisis, drawn from my reading, listening and viewing. But for a change, before the World History View, which looks at the big ideas of his speech, let us peer at five glimpses of the world crisis through the eyes of the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin.
Every year President of Russia, Vladimir Putin speaks and answers questions at the closing plenary session of the Valdai Discussion Club. This year the forum held its 20th annual conference, entitled Fair Multipolarity: How to Ensure Security and Development for Everyone. The speech by Putin addressed this theme through the idea of civilizations, one of my recurring interests, which I have explored on the podcast and my writing. So this speech offers some reflections on history, not merely pontifications of a politician.
Before I share the glimpses, let me respond to a possible objection in your mind. If you perceive Vladimir Putin primarily through Western media coverage, you might think that I am parrotting the words of an evil monster and and ruthless dictator. If you feel this way, let me assure you I am no propagandist, merely a curious, open-minded writer on history. May I ask you to put aside any prejudices inherited from the myth of Putin in the Western media. After all, Putin has led a major power, central to world events, since 1999. At the very least, on the face of the facts, his viewpoint is better informed than yours, or mine.
As Philip Short, a former BBC journalist and no Russian propagandist, wrote
“To try to work out why Putin behaves as he does, why under his tutelage Russia has become the country it is and what may lie ahead, both while he remains its leader and under his successors, it is necessary to put aside stereotypes and examine each piece of evidence for what it is soberly and without prejudgement.” (Short, Putin: His Life and Times, 2022, pp. 15-16)
Great Power Rivalry
On my recurring theme of great power rivalry, Putin made several key remarks about the growing resistance of powers around the world to the US-dominated ‘rules-based international order’. He challenged the assumptions of hegemony both bluntly and subtly.
At the blunt level, he said of the US and its many warnings to other states, who are you to warn others?
To attain these goals, they try to replace international law with a “rules-based order,” whatever that means. It is not clear what rules these are and who invented them. It is just rubbish, but they are trying to plant this idea in the minds of millions of people. “You must live according to the rules.” What rules?
And actually, if I may, our Western “colleagues,” especially those from the United States, don’t just arbitrarily set these rules, they teach others how to follow them, and how others should behave overall. All of this is done and expressed in a blatantly ill-mannered and pushy way. This is another manifestation of colonial mentality. All the time we hear, “you must,” “you are obligated,” “we are seriously warning you.”
Who are you to do that? What right do you have to warn others? This is just amazing. Maybe those who say all this should get rid of their arrogance and stop behaving in such a way towards the global community that perfectly knows its objectives and interests, and should drop this colonial-era thinking? I want to tell them sometimes: wake up, this era has long gone and will never return. (Vladimir Putin)
At the more subtle level, he described the changing international system in ways that do not fit the standard “geopolitics” categories. The emerging world is not the unipolar dream, not a bipolar division of blocs, and not even what many assume by multipolarity, a balance of three or more regionally dominant states. Putin said,
“humanity is not moving towards fragmentation into rivalling segments, a new confrontation of blocs, whatever their motives, or a soulless universalism of a new globalisation.… the world is on its way to a synergy of civilisation-states, large spaces, communities identifying as such.” (Vladimir Putin, 2023)
Putin’s remarks reflected an emerging view in foreign policy and intellectual circles in Russia and Eurasia. It was backed by analysis by the Valdai Discussion Club report of the new distribution of power, resources and exchange between states. This report characterised ‘fair multipolarity’ as dynamic and pluralistic.
The life of the international community should gradually evolve into a state of dynamic equilibrium, where the ability of the global social organism to self-adjust overcomes the challenges associated with the end of an era based on the balance of power and the dominance of the strong. The ideal image of the future in this case lies not in a specific organisational or ideological packaging, but in the substance of relationships between countries. It’s not a one-time achievement that will last a long time, but an ongoing effort to maintain balance, resolve conflicts, and find solutions to each specific issue. (Valdai Discussion Club 2023 Report)
Political Disorder
Putin was deeply critical of Western political culture in his speech. It is stained by the legacy of colonialism, old and new, and and derailed by:
“the push to drive the world into a situation of ongoing ‘us versus them’ confrontation is a bad legacy of the 20th century. It is a product of Western political culture, at least of its most aggressive manifestations.”
He argued essentially, in the words of John Quincy Adams, that the West prowls the world in search of monsters, always needing an enemy to unite the world behind its leader. Putin also remarked that American exceptionalism had driven Western political culture off the cliff of reality. Here Putin’s remarks have some affinity to my own observations in essays on American impunity and flight from reality. Putin said,
“Everyone realises that in an international system where arbitrariness reigns, where all decision-making is up to those who think they are exceptional, sinless and right, any country can be attacked simply because it is disliked by a hegemon, who has lost any sense of proportion – and I would add, any sense of reality. Unfortunately, we have to admit that our counterparties in the West have lost their sense of reality and have crossed every line.”
The pursuit of unrealistic policies by Western elites has consequences for political order. They betrayed their peoples and culture, he argued, and the quality of political elites decayed, in part because of the media-dominated performance of modern Western political institutions. Putin said,
“strategic thinking has been replaced with the short-term mercenary interests of not even countries or nations, but the succeeding groups of influence. This explains the unbelievable, if judged in Cold War terms, irresponsibility of the political elite groups, which have shed all fear and shame and think of themselves as guiltless.”
Social Fragmentation
Putin also refers to the social fragmentation, culture wars and even betrayal of their own civilization by Western elites
“The way other states run their lives is none of our business. However, we see how the ruling elite in many of them are forcing societies to accept norms and rules that the people – or at least a significant number of people and even the majority in some countries – are unwilling to embrace. But they are still urged to do so, with the authorities continually inventing justifications for their actions, attributing growing internal problems to external causes, and fabricating or exaggerating non-existent threats.”
Cultural Renewal
But there is also hope and evidence for cultural renewal in the world. His message is predoninantly positive. He sees the possibility of a symphony or synergy of civilisations. He sees grounds for confidence, in Russia’s recovery from the shocks, mistakes and conditions of the 1990s. He sees the rising potential of all states around the world, and he grounds this hope in the idea of civilisations (in the plural). Indeed, his discussion of civilisations echoed themes I discussed with Felipe Fernandez-Armesto (podcast episodes 114 and 115), even if Professor Fernandez-Armesto reflected the general Western academic presumptions about Mr Putin.
War
Putin also made some remarks on progress of the war in Ukraine, noting that Russia’s objectives are being steadily achieved. He framed these remarks with reference to Russia’s strengthening sovereignty, and noted that this approach has been dictated by the Western, or more specifically US, hostility towards Russia. The US never really ceased hostilities when Gorbachev declared peace in 1989. Elsewhere, on the podcast (for example, this podcast episode), I have articulated the idea that the Cold War did not end with a negotiated peace; but rather that America carried on with a long Anglo-American piratic plan to loot and pillage Russia. The Anglo-American geostrategists have long sought to break-up and “decolonise” Russia, by recolonising it. It continues today with plans, conferences and maps of a partitioned Russia that has finally bent the knee to NATO. On this issue Putin said,
Here is what I would like to say in this regard. The people who, for some reason, started fighting today’s Russia after 1991 – I mentioned some of it in my remarks… I have no idea why they did it. Perhaps, they did it out of arrogance or foolishness, I cannot find another explanation. I keep asking myself: Why? After all, we opened our arms and said, “We are here for you.” But instead they tried to finish us off. Why? Nonetheless, they began doing this. This led us to the only remaining choice which was to strengthen our sovereignty in the economy, finance, technology, and security.
This choice to strengthen Russian sovereignty drew on the strengths, resources and diversity of Russian civilisation.
World History View
Putin on Civilizations
The war in Gaza has enraged and saddened the world; and revived that old historical aphorism that there are decades when nothing happens, and weeks when decades happen. But the deeper insight on the great historical transformations of the world came from a speech by Vladimir Putin on the civilization state in the multipolar world.
“Great historical transformations are always bought dearly, often after one has already thought that one got them at a bargain price.
Jacob Burckhardt, Historian (1818-97)
Normally, my newsletter adds a paywall here. But I am making my premium content available to all followers this week so you can receive a glimpse of the value you will receive from a paid subscription. Please consider supporting my writing, and read on at your leisure.
So Putin’s speech at Valdai addressed the idea of civilisation, and proposed some new foundational principles for a world order in which many gardens of civilization may flourish, not just one American parking lot. There is some depth to this idea; but, you may ask, what does the quotation of a 19th century historian Jacob Burckhardt, which I have featured in this post, have to do with any of this?
Burckhardt was the author of the classic 1860 history of the European Renaissance, The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy. In German, this text is Die Kultur der Renaissance in Italien. But many thinkers in the nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-first century have used these big concepts of Civilisation and Culture to describe, as Burckhardt did, the character that animated the particular activities of a people in a given epoch; not just fine arts, but in all cultural, social and political habits; and not just in single nations or ethnic identities, but in the more cosmopolitan influences of civilisation that reach beyond the borders of nation or the blood of ethnos.
Burckhardt’s observation about historical transformations is also fitting, given the changes in the world order that Putin has experienced. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, and American exceptionalists declared a unipolar New World Order, they did indeed believe they had bought a historical transformation, or even the end of history itself (an historical transsubstantiation?), and that they had bought it at a bargain price. Mackinder’s dream to seize the heartland of the World Island, Russia, had been realised. Cheap Chinese manufactures were always on tap. And America would become the universal republic, at next to no cost to themselves.
But, as Burckhardt warned, this transformation was bought dearly. Russians and all the citizens of the post-Soviet states paid an enormous price in the social devastation of the nineties. The citizens of the USA’s empire, within its continental homeland and outer satrapies, also paid a blood price. The endless wars drained the deep pockets of the US Treasury. The dream that the American Empire could make its own reality exacted a growing tax on the real world.
Putin declared in his speech that the real world has once again revolted against the leaders of the USA. The Atlantic dream is exposed as the “soulless universalism of a new globalisation.” He countered to this soulless universalism pluralistic, diverse and dynamic civilisations. From the vitality of these civilizations, a new more peaceful and fairer world will emerge. It will be a world not without conflict and tensions, but perhaps it will be rid of American endless wars. It will be a world of large civilization-states, including, but not limited to, China, India, Brazil, South Africa, Europe and, of course, Russia. These states will develop the next “world order”, and it is a vision of hope because “the world is on its way to a synergy of civilisation-states, large spaces, communities identifying as such.”
Putin uses the concept of civilisations in some interesting ways, while recognising that:
Outstanding thinkers from around the world who endorse the concept of a civilisation-based approach have engaged in profound contemplation of the meaning of “civilisation” as a concept. It is a complex phenomenon comprised of many components. (Vladimir Putin)
There is a short piece on the theory and practice of the civilization published by the Valdai Discussion Club. It emphasises the importance of the concept of civilization-state in Russian intellectual traditions and for making sense of the experience of civic culture within multi-ethnic countries. Valdai Club Programme Director, Oleg Barabanov, notes that
The concept of a civilisation state is now becoming almost an official approach to understand Russia’s place in the world. It occupied a prominent place in Vladimir Putin’s recent speech at the 20th Annual meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club. This concept has both domestic and foreign policy dimensions. It relies to a certain extent on the works of conservative pre-revolutionary Russian thinkers (Ilyin, Danilevsky), and is intended to provide justification for the “peculiarity” and “special path” of Russia. (Oleg Barabanov)
Indeed, the concept appears in the Russian Foreign Policy Concept. This comprehensive policy paper stated,
More than a thousand years of independent statehood, the cultural heritage of the preceding era, deep historical ties with the traditional European culture and other Eurasian cultures, and the ability to ensure harmonious coexistence of different peoples, ethnic, religious and linguistic groups on one common territory, which has been developed over many centuries, determine Russia's special position as a unique country-civilization and a vast Eurasian and Euro-Pacific power that brings together the Russian people and other peoples belonging to the cultural and civilizational community of the Russian world.
In a previous Valdai address, Putin referred to a “symphony of civilizations” (a phrase I prefer to synergy, and a contrast to Huntington’s “clash of civilizations”) and some of the Russian thinkers who influenced his concept. I explain these ideas in this video. It is important to emphasise that Putin does not use “civilisation” in the apocalyptic way that Aleksander Dugin does or commentators like Steve Turley. It is important to stress this point because the darker visions of these concepts can lead people astray. For example, Dugin has conjured multiple visions of the apocalypse in relation to both the war in Ukraine and now the war in Gaza. During the week he tweeted (or is it xed?)
“Russia is the pole of a multipolar world. Islam is the pole of a multipolar world. Both poles oppose the West's desperate attempts to save unipolarism and its global dominance at any cost, even at the cost of a world war. The Palestinian conflict with Israel was not the frontline of a conflict of civilizations. Now it is. Just as the tensions between Russia and Ukraine were regional in character until the Nazis in Kiev were supported by the West, the war in Ukraine has become the frontline of a global confrontation between multipolarity and unipolarity. The scope of this confrontation is growing. The situation is becoming more and more sinister. Already, billions of people on the planet are convinced that the collective West and its allies are absolute evil and the civilization of the Antichrist. Democrats, globalists and neoconservatives are leading humanity straight into the abyss. Which, strictly speaking, is what demons are supposed to do.” (Aleksander Dugin, 2023)
All of these commentators would do well to read the opening chapter of Felipe Fernandez-Armesto, Civilisations. It is one of the best brief essays of the idea of civilisation. However, Putin’s style is not apocalyptic. He stressed rather some historical thinking about the concept of civilisation that has similarities to the key points made in that essay by Fernandez-Armesto.
Putin noted that civilization has become confused with Western civilization of the Atlantic world. “There was once an outwardly colonial interpretation,” Putin said, “whereby there was a “civilised world” serving as a model for the rest, and everyone was supposed to conform to those standards.” In other words, civilization is not coterminous with the West. He further noted two fundamental points, also made by Fernandez-Armesto,
there are many civilisations, and none is superior or inferior to another. They are equal since each civilisation represents a unique expression of its own culture, traditions, and the aspirations of its people. (Vladimir Putin)
But Putin only briefly discussed the conceptual issues of civilisation. He focused on the practical manifestations of the idea. Here he contrasted not the imagined unity of the ethno-state, but the intricate diversity that is synthesised in a civilization-state.
The essential characteristics of a civilisation-state encompass diversity and self-sufficiency, which, I believe, are two key components. Today’s world rejects uniformity, and each state and society strives to develop its own path of development which is rooted in culture and traditions, and is steeped in geography and historical experiences, both ancient and modern, as well as the values held by its people. This is an intricate synthesis that gives rise to a distinct civilisational community. Its strength and progress depend on its diversity and multifaceted nature. (Vladimir Putin)
This statement firmly rejects the flat Netflix world of the American rules-based order. Arguably, it takes a step outside the post-1945 world of united democratic nations. In this sense, ‘civilization state’ may be best understood in contrast to the liberal democratic ethnically defined nation state. It is also a plea to respect the political traditions and institutions that emerge from the dynamic synthesis of civilizations, rather than the single path of Western modernization.
In this view, effective civilization states develop not in a melodrama of vanilla democracies and sour autocracies. They find their own way to way of governing. Russia’s experience, through its dearly bought historical transformation since the 1980s, provides for Putin a real life example of the principle. “A truly effective and strong state system cannot be imposed from the outside,” he remarked. Political orders grow variously and “naturally from the civilisational roots of countries and peoples.”
In other words, states must not follow the Washington consensus, but instead rely on their civilisation, if they are to succeed “in the modern world, unfortunately a disorderly and dangerous world that has lost its bearings.” And China, India, Brazil, Russia, South Africa and many more are doing so, and more assertively so. Putin said,
More and more states are coming to this conclusion, becoming aware of their own interests and needs, opportunities and limitations, their own identity and degree of interconnectedness with the world around them. (Vladimir Putin)
This is the remark that immediately precedes Putin’s comment that the world will not evolve as a unipolar, bipolar or even limited multipolar system. It will evolve as a synergy or symphony of civilizations. But to do so all countries must practice respect. Exceptionalism must end. “If everyone lives by this rule, we can live in harmonious coexistence and in creative interaction between everyone in international relations.”
At this point in the speech Putin turned from the philosophy of history to principles that might be stated as real rules for a fair international order. He set out six core ideas about the future world that Russia is seeking to build, together with the other states of the world.
Openness. "We want to live in an open, interconnected world, where no one will ever try to put artificial barriers in the way of people’s communication, their creative fulfilment and prosperity." (Vladimir Putin, Valdai, 2023)
Diversity. "We want the world’s diversity to be preserved and serve as the foundation for universal development." (Vladimir Putin, Valdai, 2023) There will always be civilisations, plural; not one supreme, exceptional nation.
Full Representation. “Third, Russia stands for maximum representation. No one has the right or ability to rule the world for others and on behalf of others. The world of the future is a world of collective decisions made at the levels where they are most effective, and by those who are truly capable of making a significant contribution to resolving a specific problem. It is not that one person decides for everyone, and not even everyone decides everything, but those who are directly affected by this or that issue must agree on what to do and how to do it.” (Vladimir Putin, Valdai, 2023)
Indivisible Security. “Russia stands for universal security and lasting peace built on respect for the interests of everyone: from large countries to small ones. The main thing is to free international relations from the bloc approach and the legacy of the colonial era and the Cold War.” (Vladimir Putin, Valdai, 2023)
Justice. The world should not serve the dominance of America, or Europe, but “justice for all. Everyone should be given access to the benefits of today’s world, and attempts to limit it for any country or people should be considered an act of aggression.” (Vladimir Putin, Valdai, 2023)
Sovereign equality. There should be no more exceptionalism, no more hegemony, but rather “equality, for the diverse potential of all countries.” Putin said, “This is a completely objective factor. But no less objective is the fact that no one is ready to take orders anymore or make their interests and needs dependent on anyone, above all on the rich and more powerful.” (Vladimir Putin, Valdai, 2023)
These ideas are not the ravings of an isolated ‘madman from the Kremlin’. They express a broad consensus of the Russian, and increasingly the Eurasian intellectual. They are expressed in more extended form in Russian’s Foreign Policy concept.
18. Russia is striving towards a system of international relations that would guarantee reliable security, preservation of its cultural and civilizational identity, and equal opportunities for the development for all states, regardless of their geographical location, size of territory, demographic, resource and military capacity, or political, economic and social structure. In order to meet these criteria, the system of international relations should be multipolar and based on the following principles:
1) sovereign equality of states, respect for their right to choose models of development, and social, political and economic order;
2) rejection of hegemony in international affairs;
3) cooperation based on a balance of interests and mutual benefit;
4) non-interference in internal affairs;
5) rule of international law in regulating international relations, with all states abandoning the policy of double standards;
6) indivisibility of security in global and regional aspects;
7) diversity of cultures, civilizations and models of social organization, non-imposition on other countries by all states of their models of development, ideology and values, and reliance on a spiritual and moral guideline that is common for all world traditional religions and secular ethical systems;
8) responsible leadership on the part of leading nations aimed at ensuring stable and favourable conditions of development, both for themselves and for all other countries and peoples;
9) the primary role of sovereign states in decision-making regarding the maintenance of international peace and security.
That document makes clear that Russian diplomacy intends not to conquer the world, but to assist the world adapt to the realities of a multipolar world. It set out methods to do so, primarily by eliminating the vestiges of domination by the US, improving international mechanisms for ensuring security and development, and restoring the UN's role as the central coordinating mechanism in reconciling the interests of UN Member States and their actions in pursuit of the goals of the UN Charter.
The purposes of that United Nations, as stated in Article 1 of its Charter, are indeed,
To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
The principles articulated by Vladimir Putin may even serve one day as a basis for some amendments to the Charter of the United Nations in a world with no hegemon. In such a world, there there may be, as stated by the Russian Foreign Policy Concept, “constructive dialogue, partnerships, and cross-fertilization of various cultures, religions and civilizations.”
In my minor little way here on The Burning Archive I hope I can contribute a little to that dialogue and cross-fertilization of the many-stranded cultural heritage of the multipolar world.
I hope you have enjoyed this special extended bonus edition of my weekly newsletter.
Take care, stay sane, and remember, “What thou lovest well will not be reft from thee.”