Readalong with Anna Matveeva, Russophile Idiot

Anna Matveeva, Russophile Rat

Anna Matveeva, Russophile Rat

The freakishly weird looking individual at left is described by the Guardian newspaper’s website, in their “Comment is Free” blog section, as  “a visiting fellow with the Crisis States Research Centre at the London School of Economics.”

Remember Olga Ivanova?  Well, let us introduce you to her counterpart across the pond, Anna Matveeva.

In a recent blog posting, she declares that “anti-Russian stereotypes have become commonplace in the west. It’s up to the media not to spoil a vital relationship.”  It’s such a classic bit of neo-Soviet propaganda that we can’t help reviewing it line by line.  Read along with us, won’t you?

First, a few general observations.  Though Ms. Mateeva is a Russian citizen, she doesn’t say so to warn her readers, nor does she make any effort to examine her own bias.  She doesn’t say a single word about the possibility that “russophilia” might be a bad thing, nor does she spend a single word criticizing any Ameriphobia that might be found in Russia.  Worse, she doesn’t acknowledge the slightest possiblity that Russia might have done anything to provoke “russophobia” or might need to reform in any way.  Apparently, she thinks its totally irrelevant that Russia is governed by a proud KGB spy.  Finally, though she claims the West’s relationship with Russia is “vital” she doesn’t give one single scrap of evidence to substantiate this point.  There’s nothing remotely like research or journalism to be found anywhere in her ridiculous nationalistic tirade.

With those damning faults in mind, let’s take a look at the text, in boldface followed by our commentary in normal typeface.

A Russophobia virus has infected the air. What is it? It is when an English literature teacher in a good school, explaining how to answer an exam question on comedy, tells your daughter: “Don’t worry, simply write – I am Russian, I do not have a sense of humour.” Or the ease with which jokes like “You are Russian, you must know all about corruption,” are made. A BBC documentary presenter asks his Russian interpreter in the Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad: “Do you feel Russian or European?” What does he expect the woman to say?

Note well how she begins, dear reader.  If you criticize Russia, then you are “sick.” You need to be packed off to a mental institution and “cured.”  That’s the way the USSR dealt with dissent, and it’s the way Russia’s KGB regime deals with it, as we’ve repeatedly documented here on this blog.  But Russophila is perfectly healthy, of course, as is Ameriphobia.  Note well the use of anonymous sources, and the bizarrely paranoid nature of how Russians are offended.

When a fashionable detective writer wants to write a thriller with a foreign twist, guess who will be the nemesis? An al-Qaida plot in Hackney runs the risk of being politically incorrect. But Russian dissidents and oligarchs chased by Scottish police fit the bill perfectly. The British media, mindful of inter-race relations, seeks to avoid hurting the feelings of Muslims, but the idea that Russians can feel hurt does not occur to them. For Russians in the west, if one is not an oligarch, pop star or secret assassin, and does not think that “Putin’s regime” is second-worst to that of Ivan the Terrible, treading these waters is problematic.

So let’s see if we understand. If any Russian person is ever depicted in any movie as a corrupt villain, that’s proof of a worldwide “russophobic” conspiracy?  Did Russians consider the possibility that the West — to say nothing of the families of millions murdered by Stalin — might feel “hurt” when they chose a proud KGB spy as their president? Is this baboon aware of the fact that Russia is rated by Transparency International as one of the most corrupt civilizations on the planet, or that it has the fifth-highest murder rate in the world?  Note well, dear reader, that examples of Russians who are not evil, who are doing something useful to the world, don’t exactly come trippingly off the tongue of this writer.

This is not to say that Russians in Britain are discriminated against in the workplace, or that my neighbours suspect me of dumping polonium when I throw rubbish away. Rather, it is possible to say things without thinking of what it might be like on the receiving end. Stereotypes promoted by the media are now entrenched: Russian companies are corrupt and are puppets of the state, minorities are not allowed to speak their languages and males are chauvinist machos. The economy survives on pumping gas, while the leadership dreams of conquering half of the world. News from Russia is bad news. It is hard to blame journalists for reporting what is newsworthy: saying that Russians go to supermarkets and buy the same food as their western counterparts is boring, while writing that Moscow hosts the first ever all-male strip joint is “sexy”.

Is this maniac suggesting it’s a falsehood that the Russian economy depends on petroleum?  Is she aware that Russia’s average wage and per capita GDP are a tiny fraction of that in the West, while Russia’s inflation rate is two or three times higher at least? Does she know that Russia doesn’t rank in the top 100 countries of the world for male adult lifespan? Is she aware of Russia’s epidemic of race violence, which recently got an 18-year-old American student stabbed, or its crisis of medical care, which forced his removal to Finland for treatment?  Does she care even a little bit about actual facts?

The Russia-Georgia debacle brought these attitudes to the fore. The reaction of the media and the politicians was overwhelmingly anti-Russian, because their gut feeling told them who was in the wrong. More objective reports appeared much later. Why was the conflict in South Ossetia so important? Because Russia was a party to it. Readers were led to believe that minuscule South Ossetia is a proto-state like Kosovo, while no parallels were drawn with Nato action in ex-Yugoslavia in support of Albanians.

Hmm, so if China had invaded Georgia, the world wouldn’t have cared?   What a revelation!  It appears this skull-scratching ape is unaware that many nations cooperated in NATO’s action against Yugoslavia, while not one single nation in the world cooperated with Russia.  And like a typical Soviet propagandist, she doesn’t stop for a second to consider that any Russian misconduct might account for that fact.  Nope, impossible. The only explanation is blind seething hatred of Russians.  Is she unware of the fact that China reacted exactly the same way to Russian aggression as Western Europe did?  Is she aware that all reports, recent and contemporaneous, condemned Russian attacks on Georgia proper and found Russia guilty of gross human rights violations?  Does she believe a single word about Russia that is not printed by the Kremlin?

Most important, is this blockhead even vaguely aware of how Russians circulated and believed two totally outrageous falsehoods about the war in the early days, namely that 2,000 civilians had been killed in Ossetia by the Georgians and that an entire city had been wiped out?  Western media reported those claims by the Kremlin when they were made, only to learn later that they were propaganda inventions.  Has this idiot ever read the story of the fox and the grapes?  There is not one single word in her text acknowledging any misconduct of any kind by Russian in Georgia.  Is that how she lead by example?

The question is: can Russia do anything good? In Russophobes’ eyes, it should (1) surrender and apologise, (2) give western companies control over natural reserves because Russians mismanage them anyhow, (3) limit their ambitions to culture and (4) award Boris Berezovsky a medal for democracy-promotion.

Good question! Can Russia do anything good?  Notice how she doesn’t even try to answer that question. Notice how she speaks just as negatively about Western coverage of Russia as she condemns that coverage for being. This is classic Russian hypocrisy.  And notice, dear reader, how this so-called “scholar’s” rhetoric dengerates horrifyingly into the same childish, borderline crazy rambling that characterizes Vladmir Putin’s remarks when he’s under pressure.

Another good question she doesn’t ask is:  Can America do anything good? Can she point to reporting in Russia on state-controlled media that even-handedly reports American success and failure? Or is she too busy swilling the potent vodka of the Kremlin’s propaganda?

What feeds Russophobia? Moscow’s own actions are only part of the story. In the last few years several constituencies came together to create a new momentum. The cold warriors found a mission again. The existence of a familiar enemy who plays by the rules is more comfortable than the “enemy amongst us” who may work in a corner chip shop. Western liberals who passionately believed in Russia’s democratic transformation to their own recipe became disillusioned, turning the energy of embittered idealism into exposing the evils of “Putin’s KGB regime”. They were joined by immigrants who made their way in the new country by “unveiling the truth” about Russia.

Wait a minute! Is she suddenly admitting that Russia’s actions might have something to do with how Russia is perceived by the West?  If so, what mistake has Russia made that it should correct?   You’ll spend a lifetime waiting for the answer to that question from a crazed, rabid Russophile, like this one, dear reader.  Instead, in the next sentence we find out that the West is far more paranoid of foreign enemies than Russia is, and it wants to imagine the fact that Vladimir Putin is a proud KGB spy is somehow relevant, when it means nothing.

What are the effects of Russophobia? Economically, as BP and Shell found out, it is harder to do business. Politically, it is impossible to conduct a frank dialogue on issues of common concern, as trust has gone out of the relationship. In the security field, it has resulted in militarisation on both sides, undermining the achievements of disarmament. Finally, polarising language flourishes. Unlike in the 1990s, the Russian elite reads English-language media, getting from it the idea that “the west is against us”.

So, as we understand it, this raving lunatic is saying that if only the West hadn’t made movies with Russians as villains, Russia wouldn’t have stolen the assets of BP and Shell. There’s no hatred of foreigners in Russia, and the fact that the country is governed by a proud KGB spy who is wiping out civil society and well on his way to becoming “president for life” is irrelevant.  If only we’d just speak nicely and respectfully to Russia, everything would all be fine.  Yikes.  This is truly terrifying stuff, and not for the reason this writer would like to imagine. If a Russian studying in the West is this full of pathology, just imagine what those who remain back home are like!

Why should we care? Attitudes matter as Russia is at a crossroads. It can go either towards increased modernisation or militarisation. It can build pragmatic, but solid relations with the west, or it can indulge in spoiling the international game and setting up anti-western alliances. It is the responsibility of the western intelligentsia to see that stereotypes create enemies and not to miss their chance to prevent a new division of Europe.

“We”? What you mean “we” kimosabe? Intelligentsia? Aren’t they found in Russia?  Division of Europe? If sides are chosen, who exactly is going to be on Russia’s side?

16 responses to “Readalong with Anna Matveeva, Russophile Idiot

  1. I almost gagged when I saw this on the all-too-often-dire CiF page. Your frisking is a thing of beauty.

  2. I’ve always hated to watch movies where Russians are depicted as drunkards, violent or evil.

    But the Russians can’t cry foul because they continue to live up to their reputation. Perhaps it is well deserved.

  3. An excellent dissection of this Russophile bilge.

    The Guardian hosts all sorts of opinions in it’s ‘comment is free section’ and blogs you will find plenty that are not remotely Russophilic eg those Timothy Garton-Ash, Edward Lukas etc etc.

    At least we can console ourselves in one thing here. It illustrates that we have a free and diverse media where different opinion is heard (even if that opinion is worthless in this instance) in stark contrast to Russia.

    This piece is an example of Russian mentality though. The fact that external perceptions of Russia are based on solid substance , rather than unfair reporting (for that read compliant with the majority of sanitised/sycophantic/propogandist Russian media outlets) or deficiencies in presentation doesn’t enter her neo-Soviet mind.

    That would require a modicum of introspection, looking honestly at how one’s country behaves, not constantly blaming outsiders and foreigners for everything.

    Too much to ask for from a Putin/ Kremlin sock puppet I guess.

  4. Her game is to silence criticism of Putin and the Russian passivity and willful ignorance that keeps him highly rated in their polls as biased ethnic prejudice without a basis which is hardly the case. But, then, what do you expect from the Guardian. They have been a rag for self-loathing westerners for a long time.

    Her piece is typical of the same game applied by mulicultural pc censoring lefties that try to stop all debate by smearing one as a racist if you criticize Africans for their failed societies.

    There comes a point in time when Russians ought to be shamed for their anti-democratic behavior, the disgusting behavior of their goon squad fascist youth towards non-Russians, their greedy materialism, their failue to repent for their Stalinist past, Putin’s approval by the majority and all of the things that poll after poll there demonstrate the pathology of their society.

    Democracy doesn’t just happen to people. It is fought for and vigilantly guarded. Russians can whine all that they want about their sad sorry history, but, the bottom line is that they have generation after generation done it to themselves through very bad choices, stupidity, arrogance and hubris.

  5. Your utterly histerical reaction to a (more than innocent) personal opinion — is an another proof, what Russophobia is a serious mental disease.

  6. You know, I quite enjoy reading your blog for the latest news and revelations on Putin’s dicktatorship, but I’m really, really, REALLY put off by your constant juvenile personal attacks on anyone you criticize.

    Case in point. Re-read the first paragraph of this article. What in the hell does her appearance has to do with anything? Neither does it help your “cause” calling her a rat. What are you? Five?

    Cut the crap and stick to the issues.

    LA RUSSOPHOBE RESPONDS:

    It’s nice that you “enjoy” reading our blog, though it may surprise you to learn we don’t produce it for your entertainment — or anybody else’s for that matter — but what have you done for us lately?

    Do you, for instance, as we request take the time to list posts of ours that you do like on services like DIGG and DELICIOUS in order to circulate them to a wider audience? If so, you really ought to be telling us about your efforts so as to maximize your influence.

    Had we “stuck to the issues” as you, in a Stalin-like manner, would define them for us, what benefit would we obtain? What action against this Russophile would you then have taken which now you forestall?

    As a reader, you ought to know that we make it our business to make life as embarrassing and unpleasant as possible for those who lie about Putin’s Russia in the West. We’ve been doing it from day one, and we’ll continue to do it. If you come up with a better way of dealing with the likes of these Russophiles, do let us know. Until you do, we’re one of the most powerful Russia blogs on the planet, this post is perfectly consistent with our mission and style, and your personal sensibilities couldn’t be of less concern to us. If you can’t get past certain aspects of our posts you personally don’t agree with and see the big picture, your commitment is lacking and your readership means little to us. Frankly, it sounds suspiciously like the words of a person who is trying to change the subject and protect the Russophile. Conspicuous by its absence from your comment is any recognition of any error on her part.

  7. As it is in Russian tradition to never admit any wrongdoing, then it is rather hard for them to explain even to themselves why everyone who knows Russians closely enough (to his/her own bad luck) has a special attitude to them.

    As this creates vacuum in the chain of logic, which otherwise would be e.g. “we did to them THIS, and THAT is WHY they hate us…”, this vacuum needs to be filled by some artificial construct.

    And thus the idea of “Russophobia”, this Chimera of mind of Russian Chauvinist propaganda, comes to rescue.

    Very handy, without any need to re-evaluate its own history and to admit a need for change, and, what is more important, without any burden on sky-high-and-rising Russian self-esteem and insulted Imperial pride, the chain of logic gets fixed to become e.g. “They are RUSSOPHOBES (filthy, mentally sick, pervert creatures who hate us for no reason whatsoever just because they are … well… sick), and THAT is WHY they hate us…”.

    Fascinating! A single invented term, the meaning of which is not clear even to those who use it, solves all problems of modern Russian ideology at a blink of an eye.

    Congratulations to the propaganda genius(-es) who thought about such simple but effective method!

    I remember how the word “Russophobe” suddenly came around few years ago and all Russian-speaking media in the world simultaneously started to use it with great enthusiasm. This made to me an impression of a coordinated effort…

    LA RUSSOPHOBE RESPONDS:

    That is a very penetrating insight! Thanks for your valuable contribution to our blog.

  8. orknexus – great observation about the Russian psyche. It seems apparent that as a culture they are incapable of introspection. We Americans assumed responsibility for slavery in our history and made amends. Until Russians can look at their history and its relationship to the suffering of others, admit their culpability and make amends they aren’t going to advance. They will always be able to find a thug like Putin to keep their myths alive.

    Some one needs to ask Russians why is it that Americans and Europeans wish at heart that they would simply fade away. What good have they brought towards the advancement of western ideals? Ever?

  9. I wasn’t commenting on her article, but your commentary of her, which is juvenile. Your commentary on the issues she raised on her article wasn’t juvenile.

    As you were questioning what I’ve done for you lately (which I was 100% sure you would, because someone like you will ALWAYS attack those who critique you), I’ve circulated your articles among my friends for quite a while now, even posting references to one or two of them in my own blog.

    I won’t, however, give your ad-hominem attacks a wider circulation anywhere on anyone anywhere.

    Listen, there are people who are personally responsible for the state of affairs in Russia. Putin and his cronies are on top of that list. Writing disparaging articles about them personally would be appropriate. But this woman was just commenting on the issues, and yet you chose to go on to engage in ad hominem attacks on her. It would’ve been quite sufficient for you to disarm his article point by point, which you did quite well.

    The thing is when you start going onto these personal attack rants, you look like a ranting lunatic, just like the russophiles you’re criticizing. I’m sure you don’t want to do that. If you do, please let me know and I will stop reading your writings.

  10. Hey, I’m a “Russophile” but I absolutely hate and loath Putin (this makes me “KGB-phobe” I guess). I also like Georgians and I hate Stalin (or was he more of Ossetian? Putin was also seemingly born in Georgia, but this doesn’t change anything for me). What’s wrong with being a Russophile anyway? Liking Germany makes me a fan of the policies of Adolf Hitler? Come on. I didn’t even read the article.

    LA RUSSOPHOBE RESPONDS:

    You’re not a russophile, you’re a russophobe! If you read our definition, you’ll see that we too are russophiles who hate Putin. That is what being a “russophobe” means on this blog. Welcome to the club! It’s called tough love.

    Of course, since the people of Russia chose to be governed by Putin and do not now oppose him, surely you must assign to them some blame for his presence and demand that they change their view, just as we do.

  11. “Russia is at a crossroads – increased modernization or militarisation.”

    “Russia can build pragmatic, but solid, relations with the West.”

    There it is – sovok terminology direct from the sovok Kremlin.

    How many times have we heard “pragmatic” out of the Kremlin?

    If roosha truly believe in peace (мир, as the sovoks used to say), then it would automatically opt for increased modernisation, without worrying about increased militarisation.

    In the lexicon of sovok Kremlinoid terminology, what does “pragmatic” mean?

    It means nothing – it means whatever the Kremlin wants it to mean.

  12. I am the freakishly weird looking individual.
    Your article is not signed.
    I want to see your face.

    LA RUSSOPHOBE RESPONDS:

    There’s just a few small problems with your comment:

    (a) Why should we believe you?
    (b) We don’t publish our photo and therefore don’t invite abuse by doing so.
    (c) You don’t even try to defend the substance of your comments, rendering you even more inane.

    • AFrenchRussophile

      Anna Mateeva,
      This rabid reply to your post does not even pretend to be courteous, even as it pretends to be fact-based.
      Dehumanizing the counterpart is rule No1 of any totalitarian textbook.
      Today it is you Mrs Mateeva, together with Russia Today, Sputnik, and the communicating musketeers Sergey Lavrov, Dmitry Peskov, Maria Zakharova and Vladimir Putin himself, who hold high the standards of international diplomacy and communication. Being the underdog is of course an incentive to it; and being an underdog with unlimited national resources and nuclear weapons helps staving off uninvited “democratic“ progress.

      As an internationally educated Frenchman I used to be an avid reader of the star UK mouthpieces, namely the FT and The Economist, and a long time subscriber to the latter, where I also insisted that my own children would read it frequently. It even led to a compliment of sorts on their side that my writing style had indeed become TE-like. Till about 10 years ago when at about the same time they started their own vehement Russophobic campaign, and abused my credit card, with a refund promised and never implemented.

      Proper journalism, like the proper application of the rule of law, requires respect for facts and for due process. The war propaganda orchestrated since the beginning of the century is so blatant and constant that it is even offensive to its readers and viewers. Arrogant pricks do apparently believe that they can replace uncontroversial evidence and due process with intimidation and slurs. Their readership took note, and not only your humble servant.

      As a reminder of the process at play, this masterpiece, showing a western “journalist“ ridiculed publicly by VV himself, and not even aware of it. Very courteously as usually.
      The public conference : https://youtu.be/12s_n6F2ZEQ
      The private interview : https://youtu.be/E_WPk6Rxx00
      On molodec.

  13. orknexus stated:

    **This made to me an impression of a coordinated effort…**

    This is typical kremlin procedure, as explained in an interviw by an ex-KGB agent, in the link below.

    http://daylightpage.com/Bezmenev1.htm

  14. Pingback: 47. 📢Must Read 👉LETTER: Russians Outraged by Skewed Independent Reporting : the crude propaganda article which appeared in The Independent last month, praising 👉valentina matviyenko, the UNELECTED & CORRUPT governor of St. Petersburg👈, as

  15. Pingback: 47. 📢Must Read 👉LETTER: Russians Outraged by Skewed Independent Reporting : the crude propaganda article which appeared in The Independent last month, praising 👉valentina matviyenko, the UNELECTED & CORRUPT governor of St. Petersburg👈, as

Leave a Reply to penny Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s