Vladislav Surkov: A Valentine Card in Scarlet

Vladislav Surkov: A Valentine Card in Scarlet
As women become increasingly more powerful and vocal, is the world on the edge of an era of matriarchy? Vladislav Surkov, an enigmatic Russian politician some have labelled a "grey cardinal" in the Kremlin, speaks out.

“Me Too” has swept the world in recent times, as women, including celebrities like Gwyneth Paltrow, Jennifer Lawrence and Uma Thurman, took to social media to share their stories of sexual harassment or assault by men. Yet, the movement had its critics as well.

Iconic actress, Catherine Deneuve, led a group of 100 French artists and intellectuals in signing a letter castigating the campaign. The former US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice also warned that “Me Too” risks to do more harm than good as it could “infantilize” women.

The campaign indicates that “matriarchy is clearly on the rise” and foreshadows a grim future for the males, who may become the victims of harassment meted out by women, Vladislav Surkov, one of the most enigmatic figures of Russian politics in recent decades, wrote in a special essay, dedicated to Valentine’s Day. In his controversial piece, the author also suggests that the passing of power to women signals a new weakness in the world of "liberal democracy."

Before the western elite believed Vladimir Putin was behind the success of everything they didn't like (Brexit, Donald Trump, etc.), the mainstream media liked to portray Surkov as being behind everything Putin did.

Acres of newsprint was devoted to labeling the official as the "Kremlin's grey cardinal," and all the attention even saw the term "Surkovian" enter the lexicon. A fluent English speaker, Surkov has a sideline as a writer and is a big fan of edgy poets like Allen Ginsburg. He has also collaborated with the Russian rock star Vadim Samoylov and there have been unproven rumors that he writes novels under the pseudonym of "Nathan Dubovitsky." His day job is working as an adviser to Putin.

We have translated Surkov’s "Valentine”  essay, which has received a lot of attention inside Russia. It's a thought-provoking read and it may give an insight into how influential Russians see the world. Or at least this particular influential Russian.

A Valentine Card in Scarlet

Boris Grebenshchikov(1) said in the early 2000s that the Age of Aquarius(2) has arrived, signaling imminent restoration of matriarchy.

Should decision-makers listen to someone that is neither a political scientist, a sociologist, or an economist? Should political strategists listen to a magician, a master of the occult, a visionary – because that is what Boris is? I say, by all means, yes. If you have any doubts, look at what is going on in the West right now. Matriarchy is clearly on the rise. It is girl power time.

The number of female heads of government, ministers and mayors in very influential countries is constantly growing. More and more, we are surrounded by women who do business, women who administrate, women who are in charge of something or somebody, or women who are simply extremely aggressive for no particular reason.

Hollywood films and TV shows, the modern-day oracles defining the hierarchical structure, downgrade men and uphold women. You don’t see many male bosses these days; it’s lady bosses all over the place. Strong men are portrayed as uncouth and thickheaded, needing smart women to wisely guide them. You see many self-confident moms and grandmas acting as police chiefs, heads of special units or sometimes even intelligence agencies. The last Jedi in the latest installment of the Star Wars saga is also female, naturally.

The current crusade against sexual harassment is probably just the beginning. Next, women will want to turn the tables – now it is their turn to harass men. After all, in order to have sex, someone has to make the first move. This is better than no sex at all.

We all know that British researchers always stay abreast of the latest trends, and this time was no exception. A genetics professor from the University of Kent published an article (4) earlier this year, claiming that the male Y chromosome, which carries the SRY gene (responsible for the development of male sex organs), will soon disappear as part of the evolutionary process. The set of genes responsible for producing males will be dropped from the genome. Basically, this is a nice way of calling all males degenerates.

So, what’s going on? Really, what’s going on? Remember how James Brown sang (and girls echoed him), “This is a man’s world?” In fact, 50 Cent sang the very same words just recently.

Indeed, the world as we know it was invented and shaped by man. It’s not perfect, but it is what it is. Moses and Buddha, Shakespeare and Nabokov, Newton and Mandelbrot, Saladin and Zhukov, Korolev and Oppenheimer, Zvorykin and Jobs, the Beatles and Brin – they are the ones who have shaped the world around us. So, why are women taking over this man’s world? And, more importantly, what is their goal?

There is a theory that does not get much publicity (as this would be clearly a wrong time for it), yet it is quite widespread. It says that the elevation of women (as well as members of other non-masculine genders who always join women in this elevation) is a sign of decline.

It’s hard to tell how wrong this theory is. On the one hand, it seems that it can be easily refuted. On the other hand, its proponents are stubborn and think they have substantial arguments and examples.

Aristotle, for example, claimed that Sparta fell due to the increased influence of the “weaker” sex. The number of males decreased dramatically because of constant wars. Large parts of land and power that they come with, were passed into the hands of widows. Instead of mourning their late husbands, these widows engaged in usury, which would be unthinkable in earlier times, given the ethical and economic norms of the once ascetic nation. This was the end of Sparta.

When Helena, the mother of Constantine the Great, embraced Christianity, it was the end of the Roman Empire. The emperor soon gave Helena the title of Augusta and adopted the teaching of Jesus, as conveyed by Saul, as the state religion – the teaching that denied the cult of the emperor and thus undermined the very foundation of the state. Rome lost its status as the ruling city and the Empire moved east to Byzantium, where it agonized for a few more centuries as an imitation empire, while the real Rome, the Rome of Scipios and Caesars, was irrevocably lost.

When Catherine de’ Medici intervened in the rule of her three sons, who were French kings, the House of Valois collapsed.

Elizabeth I was the last monarch in the Tudor dynasty, replaced with the son of Mary Stuart, who she had executed. Under Queen Victoria, the British monarchy lost whatever power it had left and switched to purely ceremonial functions.

Many historians agree that the so-called 'Sultanate of Women' (a period of about 100 years when state affairs were dominated by concubines, wives and mothers of sultans), was the turning point and the beginning of the fall of the Sublime Porte.

In Russia, the 18th century, also known as the Century of Women, as illustrious as it was, did irreparable damage to the absolute monarchy. The age of Anne, Elizabeth and the two Catherines was marked by a series of palace coups, the rise of szlachta (3) and favoritism. On top of all that, something unthinkable happened: a monarch was killed, and not just one, but two monarchs (male, of course), which resulted in desacralization of monarchy.

While a few “czars” had been killed before, this only happened during the 'Time of Troubles' and only to “false” czars, those not from the Rurik or Romanov dynasties: Feodor Godunov, False Dmitry and False False Dmitry (4). The assassinations of Peter III and Ivan VI, on the other hand, were truly revolutionary events that paved the way for everything that came later: Count Pahlen (5), Decembrists (6), Narodnaya Volya (7) and, eventually, Bolsheviks.

The strengthening of women’s influence is not the cause, of course; it is a symptom, a manifestation of decadence. It was not Alexandra Feodorovna (8) who destroyed the Russian Empire, and it was not Raisa Gorbacheva (9) who destroyed the Soviet Union. However, their names invariably come up in the conversation whenever people talk about the last days of the Empire or the last days of the Union.

Political systems turn to women when they are exhausted from periods of intense growth or when they reach the final, terminal stage in their development. This is why, although not all female rulers look like nurses, their manner of ruling is very similar to that of a nurse taking care of a sick patient – futile attempts to help in a helpless situation.

Liberal democracy is currently being replaced with matriarchal democracy in the West. Adopting a softer stance and disguising itself, feminism spreads far and wide, no longer being limited to radical sects. Lady-pleasing is perhaps the most effective kind of populism today for those who want to make a political career. All signs point to an imminent decline of Europe (actually, Euramerica).

And what do men do in this situation? Some have signed up to serve their new lady bosses, saying things like: “Count me a feminist.” Others moan and wait. Still others keep drinking and making merry like they used to during the previous Age of Pisces (10).

It’s just a small number of the chosen ones (or cast-outs) who know that a decline is followed by a rise. They don’t look at the things that are coming down. They seek to understand what is on the rise. They are engaged in real men’s work: they invent and engineer a new reality while their women administrate the old one. They have handed over to women what is no longer of any use to them – the steering wheel of the obsolete political machine, which is broken and can’t go any further.

Nobody wants to assume power without understanding first what went wrong – nobody except women. This is why gentlemen generously let their ladies deal with Brexit, the migrant crisis, the lack of social mobility, the bubble economy, volatile markets, stagnant median income, convoluted multipolarity and unlimited militarization.

Women have climbed to the top tiers of the political ladder when it is about to collapse. Men have gone down, and are busy doing something at lower levels. In the face of matriarchy, they went underground to regroup and rethink their values. They are creating things for the future, things that are unheard of, like the digital economy without people (whose humanlessness makes it inhumane) – or innovative weapons of a thousand megadeaths – or turning hackers and other online criminals into the ruling class (just like robbers and raiders formed the aristocracy in the pre-Internet world, and the American robber barons evolved into the contemporary capitalist elite) – or a religious teaching produced and preached by artificial intelligence – or a global state based on total control combined with mass-produced fake freedoms.

In a word, everything will be once again man-made tomorrow. Made by men. Which means, it may not be good but it will definitely not be boring.

In every family, there are times when the husband is at a loss because of some difficulty. Having spent some time arguing with his wife, with the children and finally with himself, and not getting anywhere, the husband withdraws to another room. For a period of time, there is matriarchy. The husband smokes a cigarette and does thirty push-ups to let off some steam, and then comes to the table for dinner as if nothing ever happened. Then, the proper order is restored and life goes back to normal. Yet, something is forever changed from this point on.

The same thing is happening on a global scale today. Humankind has hit the wall. Moms are taking care of the house. But dads will later come back with a new world, with new toys for everybody.

P. S. Our God-protected homeland has been affected by feminism to a very slight degree. There is no particular friction between the sexes. I’m not sure what this means, whether we are ahead of the rest of the world or we are lagging behind. This ambiguity shows the only strategy available to us should women revolt. It is the strategy of Cunctator (11) and Barclay de Tolly (12). Take your time. Maneuver. When attacked, do not engage in a fight. Oh, and one more thing – love your opponent.

1) Iconic Russian songwriter and singer famous for philosophical lyrics of his songs

2) Hypothetical time period signified by a profound shift in society under an influence of magical cosmic powers

3) Polish nobility class. Their craving for privileges is considered in Russian historiography as a major cause for the decline of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and its eventual partitioning by the Russian Empire, the Kingdom of Prussia, and the Habsburg Monarchy. Szlachta was a source of constant turmoil in Russia.

4) The death of Tsar Boris Godunov left Russia in political turmoil fueled by rumors that Godunov had usurped the throne after ordering the assassination of the rightful heir, Dmitry, son of Tsar Ivan IV. Godunov’s son Fedor was killed by supporters of False Dmitry I, a person claiming to be the dead prince having miraculously survived. A string of other pretenders claiming to be the same person followed (and were consequentially killed).

5) Peter Ludwig von der Pahlen, the ringleader of a palace coup against Emperor Paul of Russia, which ended in regicide.

6) The perpetrators of a military coup in 1825, which caused a monumental impact on Russia, despite its failure to impose a constitutional monarchy.

7) A Russian leftist revolutionary organization, which operated in 1879–1887 and used terrorist tactics against the government.

8) The wife of Nicolas II, the last Emperor of Russia.

9) The wife of Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of Soviet Union.

10) A period coming before the Age of Aquarius, according to some astrologists.

11) Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus, Roman general famous for the strategy he used to wear down the army of Hannibal Barca during the Second Punic War.

12) Russian military commander during Napoleonic Wars, who used the attrition strategy against invading French troops.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.