"... Nobody understands why this war is going on"

The events in Ukraine are well known and covered in detail by the world press, while the inner life and processes in the elite groups of Russian society remain closed. Since February 2022, there has been practically no free press in Russia, since even publishing the word “war” can lead to a prison sentence. About what is happening in Russian society. changes in public opinion, attitudes towards the war with Ukraine, Russian analysts tell foreign journalists. One of the Russian philosophers, who prefers to publish under a pseudonym, answered the questions of the Turan agency not for the first time. We publish an unabridged interview with Ivan Shatov, professor of philosophy from Moscow. The professor characterizes in detail not only the current situation in Russian society, but also gives a forecast of future events in the Russian Federation, based on today's events.

- I ask you to classify the power elites in the Russian Federation that can influence decision-making. With indication of leaders. What are the goals of these elites and what is the public support?

- The system of power in Russia is organized as a patronage network. Official institutions, political parties, parliament - all this is a facade, all decisions are made by one person, but around him there are different interest groups united in clans, under the patronage of certain influential people. Conventionally, the group of these persons can be divided into two large parts, which may intersect and which are not homogeneous (the persons included in them may be at enmity with each other). But each of these two parts is defined by its function - some people are responsible for receiving income from trade and industrial activities, and others - for safety and security. In principle, these groups complement each other, but the distribution of power and influence between them can be different. As for the leaders, there are none due to the lack of organization and internal hostility. The only leader in the full sense of the word is the first person. But you can single out individuals who personify a particular group, and you can also single out bloggers who express the opinions of this group in the public space. So for the "commerce" group, one can point to Kudrin, Deripaska or Fridman as such "persons" of this group. And among the bloggers at the grassroots level, who are connected in terms of their views with this group, one can point to Dmitry Potapenko. For the “security” group, Patrushev or Shoigu can be singled out as a “face”, and at the level of bloggers in the public space, the well-known Strelkov (Girkin) and, to some extent, Maxim Kalashnikov, are the spokesmen for such views. It can be seen that the bloggers in question are often sharply critical of the elite in general, and the “faces” of their group in particular, but this is precisely due to the fact that, in their opinion, the representatives of the upper elite are not consistent enough express the ideology that they, according to the interests of their group, should express.

The goals of both groups are simple - to gain maximum power, influence on decision-making and, as a result, wealth.

In terms of public support, one can distinguish between an interest group and a broader group that is ideologically influenced by a given elite group. For the economic elite, these are people engaged in entrepreneurship and, in part, the liberal intelligentsia and students. For the elite of the security forces, these are people who are somehow involved in the power bloc (not all of them, some of these people are highly commercialized), as well as groups dependent on the state due to their property status (receiving support) or due to age (accustomed to the paternalistic state Soviet type).

In addition, there are a large number of employees who are not directly dependent on any of these groups. In general, they are generally outside of any ideology and are politically passive, but from time to time an intensified ideological campaign can capture them too. True, they can sabotage political activity by showing indifference, as in the well-known "puttings", where most of the participants appeared only because the authorities demanded it, and left as soon as the opportunity arose.

- Struggle between these elite groups. What instruments of struggle do they have, do they have their own media (names), which group is seen as winning now, are there any opportunities for others to win?

- The struggle takes place mainly in the form of a struggle for influence on the first person and the decisions he makes. In recent years, those who are responsible for security have gained decisive influence in this struggle, while the economic elite has mainly the task of serving the decisions already taken. The struggle for votes does not make sense, since the elections are completely administratively controlled. However, some very vague public support is of interest to the authorities. As for the mass media, their ability to deviate from the information policy adopted at the very top is very limited. Nevertheless, it is possible to single out more moderate ones (for example, RBC and other publications aimed at entrepreneurs) and more militant ones (for example, “Izvestia” or “Arguments of the Week), the latter with a populist tinge.

Opportunities for the economic elite to somehow change the existing distribution of power and overcome the influence of the power elite, I do not see now. Changes can occur, but two conditions are necessary for this - a clear defeat in the war for everyone and (or) a change of the first person. As for the first, it is most likely now a distant prospect, most likely the war will drag on and turn into a sluggish form. As for the second, this is the work of God (for those who believe) or historical accident. I do not believe in a violent coup that would return the economic elite to power. Another thing is that a defeat in the war can cause a coup by the security forces, which will bring to power a leader even more radical than Putin, which means the transition of a sluggish war into a total one, with mass mobilization, including the restructuring of the economy on a military footing, in a corporatist-fascist spirit (with elements of social paternalism), and to the transition to totalitarian forms of control. How this will be perceived by society is a difficult question, different layers will react differently.

- What is the task of the elite that initiated the war in Ukraine, and how does it formulate this task to mobilize the people?

- The task of the elite group responsible for security is to demonstrate their necessity and consolidate their victory over the economic part of the elite. The unleashed war, basically, pursues precisely this goal. The constructed image of the West, which allegedly threatens the very existence of Russia, is a means to bring society into a state of permanent war. At the same time, victory over an external enemy (NATO or Ukraine) is not so significant, although it is desirable. The main thing is to keep your own society in a state of constant military hysteria, as this state allows a narrow group of the power elite to maintain their power and influence, to the detriment of the other part of the elites. As for the people, they are intimidated with stories about Ukrainian fascists who almost eat children alive, as well as about the terrible NATO, which was completely ready to take over Russia, and only the valiant security forces prevented this tragedy with their preventive strike on Ukrainian fascists.

- Do Western sanctions affect these elites, that is, are sanctions against elites effective? After all, sanctions do not work against the people if you remember that the people do not eat at McDonalds and do not drive BMWs

- Sanctions hit mainly the economic elites, depriving them of resources and giving them completely at the mercy of the power group that seized power. For this grouping, sanctions are important only because in the long run they can deprive them of the means to continue the war. But this is a prospect, maybe two or three years. In the short term, sanctions suit the power elites, who exploit the image of the terrible and hostile West for their own legitimization. They explain to the people that they live poorly not because the elites started the war, but because the West is waging an aggressive war against Russia, part of which are sanctions.

Sanctions in the form of the exit of some brands and companies hit the most pro-Western part of the elite, that is, the urban middle class. Part of this class emigrate, part adapt, feigning exaggerated patriotism

In addition, sanctions have a very significant impact on the poor part of the population, due to a catastrophic increase in prices for the simplest products. This is a consequence of simple economic laws. If you remove part of the supply from the market, then the prices of all other goods will rise, not only for the expensive ones that the middle class consumed, but also for the cheaper ones. We already went through all this when the government introduced food counter-sanctions. As a result, all prices have risen, and the quality of products has deteriorated. A natural consequence of the artificial restriction of competition. In addition, it is clear that in the conditions of war, budget funds will be redistributed to an even greater extent from education and medicine to military needs, which will hit even more so-called ordinary people who cannot afford paid medicine. And education will become even more inaccessible to poor people, which will lead to further stratification of society into rich workers with high qualifications and the poor, who are only able to perform unskilled work that does not require education for a pittance.

As for the economic elites, those who do business relatively independently of the state will go bankrupt en masse. As for businessmen who are under the auspices of the security forces, they will always find a way to compensate for their losses from Western sanctions by redistributing the burden of income loss on the poor and the poorest segments of the population - at least through monopoly prices, which can grow almost indefinitely, as long as there is at least would be the minimum demand. People will eat and dress at least in something anyway. And some income from the sale of raw materials will remain with the elite, at the expense of India, China and other countries that have not joined Western sanctions.

- Russian democratic anti-war intelligentsia. What is the place of this layer in the list of elites, does it have influence on the power elites, or is it thrown to the sidelines, without prospects?

- The influence of the anti-war liberal intelligentsia is now reduced to a minimum. She was simply gagged, closing all the media through which she expressed her opinion ("Rain", "Echo of Moscow", "Novaya Gazeta"). Its influence on the so-called common people was minimal before - people mainly consider it responsible for the economic turmoil of the 90s, as a result of which people who had a certain prosperity in Soviet times practically turned into beggars. Most of these people, very few have benefited from the changes. And even these few are now practically expropriated by the power elite and barely make ends meet. In addition, the liberal intelligentsia, specialists and people capable of entrepreneurship make up the bulk of emigration from the country, which further weakens this stratum.

Nevertheless, there are anti-war sentiments in society. And it is among the so-called "ordinary people." First of all, those who have family ties with Ukraine are worried. In addition, as military casualties increase, relatives of the military begin to worry. Apart from rising prices and the disappearance of certain types of goods, economic difficulties have not yet begun in earnest. But they will gradually begin to manifest themselves more dramatically, for example, in the form of unemployment or the threat of losing a job. In addition, under these conditions, entrepreneurs and directors of state-owned enterprises can easily reduce wages or send people on forced leave.

In addition, among the majority, almost no one understands why this war is being waged. Official propaganda is formally accepted, almost no one openly argues with it - and this is dangerous - but the tension is growing, and this is manifested in a general increase in aggression and intolerance. Most likely, resistance to the ideology of the war party will take place in a passive form, similar to the resistance to the initiated vaccination campaign. That is, no one directly objects and does not fight, but all the initiatives of the authorities seem to be drowning in some kind of swamp, and if they are implemented, then only “under pressure”.

We have changed the interviewer's name for security purposes.