I have been trying to think and
write about Nemtsov’s murder since it happened
on 27th of February but somehow I
could not. I would write a few paragraphs but
they would fall apart like sand cakes; they
worked by themselves but they did not make a
coherent meaning as a whole. Now I feel the
force to write. Before there were just the
fragments of the events and their versions,
offered by the multitude of observers and
analysts. They only obscured that, that
was there yet unseen. Now I think I know what
was that that. So here are the naked
facts and then my understanding.
Facts in a chronological order
Preface
Over the time close to the day of
the murder Nemtsov publically have stated that:
- he is concerned that Putin may murder him;
- he is very close to his mother who is eighty
seven and that his mother is very worried that
Putin will murder him because of his political
activity;
- Putin is “a sadist”, “fucked in the head”, “a
pathological liar”, “cannot change” and that “he
will never leave his chair by his own will”.
27th of February, the murder
Nemtsov was murdered on the Big Moskvoretskiy
Bridge on 27th of February, at 23.30.
This place is the most unlikely choice for any
murder because it is the public area of the
highest security surveillance in all of Moscow:
with densely planted video cameras, police and
secret services. He was murdered, from a
photographic point of view, in front of the
Kremlin. On the photos of the murder is a tiny
figure and the enormous cathedral of St Basil
(the holy fool) rises above him. In a regular
life Nemtsov was a tall and very well-built man;
the cathedral is a relatively small, somewhat
homey church. The representation in the
mass-media changed all that. Strangely, the live
TV transmission from the site of the murder was
immediately organized and everyone who wished
could watch the dead body with the top pulled up
so the belly, usually very sporty, looked huge
(probably because of internal bleeding); how
the cleaners were washing the blood from the
concrete; how someone was rotating the helpless
body. It remained there for a long time.
28th of February,
Putin sends a telegram to the mother of Nemtsov,
describing the murder as
“cynical” and promising her to find the
murderers; he himself will oversee the
investigation he said and will make sure that
the murderer(s) are caught.
1st of March, the
march of the opposition
Nemtsov was the driving force of the march named
‘Vesna’ (‘Spring’). He was murdered three hours
after an interview on the radio station ‘Echo
Moskvy’ in which he said that the purpose of the
march was to state the truth and that the Putin
regime can be overthrown only by the truth. The
focus of the march was the war in Ukraine. After
the murder of their leader the opposition
decided to change the root of the march and to
make a very small procession from the near metro
station Kitay-Gorod to the place of the murder –
this is to honour Nemtsov. They walked with the
portraits of Nemtsov and the posters “we are not
afraid” and “fight” (the latter word is the play
on the Nemtsov’s first name). The march
terminated on the sight of the murder.
Everything went according to the agreement with
the city government (the slogans were approved).
The period of diarrhoea of
endless versions of the the murder; the active
phase lasted 4-5 days
The state power mass-media and their agents kept
throwing into the public various versions of the
murder; all the rest – opposition and others –
kept endlessly chewing them, obsessively
discussing “leaked” videos of the murder and
“the information from the source close to…”. The
truly stunning feature of this process was that,
although everyone knew who killed Nemtsov they
continued to discuss the brands of the bullets,
the cars, the latest lover of Nemtsov and so on
nevertheless. It looked like they were afraid to
realize the truth and therefore occupied
themselves with OCD-type watching, thinking, and
talking.
3rd of March, the
funeral of Nemtsov
The family wished to bury the body the day
earlier but they were refused by the workers of
the morgue for some reason. Therefore his body
was buried on the 3rd, on the
birthday of Nemtsov’s mother. The car which
carried the coffin had a spooky number “KOX”,
that is the surname of the opposition leader who
was closest to Nemtsov. The strange number was
noticed and received comments on the day. The
opposition leader named concluded that he was
the next victim.
6th of March, Putin
disappears from the public sight for nine days
Now the country speculated what happened with
its leader and the publics’ attention was
switched from Nemtsov’s murder to the
possibility of “the beginning of a new “red
terror” (the murder of Nemtsov was compared with
the murder of Kirov) or perhaps “the death of
Putin”. The common prediction was that “if Putin
is dead everything will disintergrate”.
Meanwhile even the most reasonable political
observers came to the conclusion that Nemtsov
was murdered by some Kremlin party for the
purpose of blackmailing Putin.
8th of March, Putin
appears on TV
in the format of a record of his meeting with
women made in advance for the International
Women Day.
15th of March, the
documentary ‘Crimea: The Path Home’ is released
The most important statements of Putin who is
the major hero in the documentary were:
- Crimea is ours: was, is, and will always be;
- the whole operation has been done: first – to
save president Yanukovych from Ukranian
neo-Nazis and fascists, second – to save Russian
speaking people who otherwise would perish from
their hands;
- we were (and are) prepared to use nuclear
weapons;
- we overtook the parliament and brought the
Russian army forces but all that was strictly in
the frame of the international law and existing
agreements with Ukraine.
Additional thoughts delivers by the secondary
actors were:
- Crimea was in the process of being occupied by
neo-Nazis and fascists;
- Ukraine is occupied by neo-Nazis and fascists;
- if not for our decisive actions in Crimea we
would have a second Donbass and Lugansk (meaning
bloodshed) there;
- “how wonderful it is to be home”.
16th of March, Putin appears in
public
He appeared to be satisfied, happy, and
relaxed.
17th of March
All but two members of the Parliament refused to
honour the memory of Nemtsov by observing a
minute of silence before the session began.
18th of March, the
concert-meeting
The concert-meeting “We are together” was
organized to commemorate one year of the joining
of Crimea to Russia. It took place on
Vasilievskiy Spusk that is the square next to
the Big Moskvoretskiy Bridge on which Nemtsov
was murdered. Because the crowds were huge they
naturally spilled onto the Big Moskvoretskiy
Bridge. The place of the murder of Nemtsov still
had flowers and photos which have been
spontaneously delivered there by people daily.
Police put a fence around it and maintained it
by their presence. Nevertheless, there were
balloons above the murder site with slogans
completely contrary to those values which
Nemtsov held, “KrimNash” (“Crimea is ours”),
“Putin is the Saviour of Sevastopol” etc. Also,
there were people holding the posters “I am
proud of my country”, next to the murder sight.
The concert began with playing some recorded
slogans, among which were “God is with us” and
“Crimea is ours – Christ is risen”. Then Putin
made his appearance and even sang. The whole
show demonstrated the complete unity of the
leader and the people.
19th of March, PS
The Russian public was informed that in St
Petersburg a bust of Putin depicted as a Roman
emperor is being prepared. The bust will be
placed near the metro station ‘Parnas’. ‘RPR
Parnas’ was the name of Nemtsov’s political
party. It is a most probably coincidence but it
is still a very nice touch, very much in a line
with the “KOX” number, to not mention it.
Facts translated into the symbolic language of
the metaphysical
The murder of Nemtsov was a ritual murder – not
in a superficial meaning of those words but in
its essence. Irrespective of his other
qualities, Nemtsov was an honest and extremely
outspoken person who refused to bend and
compromise with Putin and his course of
politics. Furthermore, he was handsome,
intelligent and charming. He also was very
alive. Anyone who knew him mentioned this aspect
of his personality: extreme liveliness,
optimism, lightness, outspokenness. Precisely
because of this he became a victim: the evil is
deathly and it cannot stand life; the evil is
the father of lies and cannot stand the truth.
Therefore, apart from the very personal
hatred for Nemtsov by a narcissist who
hates anyone who does not admire him (Nemtsov
not only did not admire Putin but openly
despised him; he also understood his sadism and
pathological lies) Putin also hated him as a
puppet of the evil. The reasons like
“Nemtsov was a mediator between various
fractions of the opposition and with the West”
are legitimate but secondary to that liveliness.
So, the liveliest victim was
chosen and murdered in front of Kremlin. The
sight of the helpless dead was broadcasted
widely. To murder someone in this location and
not to be caught on the spot is impossible but
apparently the murderer managed it; the message
“I am invincible” is being delivered as a
result. Putin does not say it directly of
course, he gives to the astonished viewer an
opportunity to reach this conclusion himself –
it is OK because the majority will not be able
to handle the truth but the memory of the horror
of the discovery will remain. The same idea “I
am unpunishable” is transmitted by the
documentary ‘Crimea: The Path Home’: “yes, I
have done all this, yes, I am a liar”; some
episodes are so grossly overdone that the
question arises whether the director – the real
director, Putin – is mocking the viewer. In the
murder the message “I am invincible” is
horrific; in the documentary – it is somewhat
homey, bloodless. It really looks like the
nation had an enigmatic murder first, then the
children were left by themselves feeling
progressively more uncomfortable and scared, and
then his majesty appeared with an offer “accept
this soft version of my reign, the story with
Crimea, and all will be well – no more nasty
Nemtsovs, no fearsome darkness”. Considering
that most Russians really like the “Krimnash”
idea, no wonder they rejoiced.
And then there was the
celebration, chosen to be on the place of not
directly the murder site but very near. But this
was just a coincidence, just like the letters
“KOX” on the car, wasn’t it? We always celebrate
on Vasilievskiy Spusk, why shouldn’t we
celebrate the year of the joining of Crimea
there? And we also fenced the murder site of the
unfortunate. Those arguments are well-known. It
is a recognizable trade mark: to set the things
up on the edge so that there is always room for
doubt and denial. Of course the stupid students
with the posters “I am proud of my country”
against the background of the place of the
murder did not know what it was and probably did
not even know who Nemtsov was. However, the
organiser of those many-days of show knew – it
is so funny to play with the human puppets
making them to say “I am proud of the murder”.
“They, those small human puppets, do not see it
but I, who is above them, see it all.”
Actually, I think the following.
The murder was done where it was done because:
- it gives a very good photo shot: the cathedral
over the small body, first – carelessly
semi-naked, then – packed in black plastic, an
inhumane object to be deposited;
- it is a symbolic desacralization of the space;
the association “church – dead body” stays in
the mind;
- it is a symbolic murder of the truth because
St Basil the Fool was known for speaking the
truth to the tsars including to the
tsar-murderer Ivan the Terrible;
- only such a place can convey maximum idea of
the invincibility of the murderer;
- it is the heart of Russia – it is the symbol
of desecration of Russia or the soul of the
nation;
- finally, because it was necessary to make it
very close to the conclusion, “the communion”
with the masses occurred during the following
celebration.
It does indeed look like the modern parody of
the Passion and the Easter events. Nemtsov is
murdered on Friday night. It also was “the
official day of the forces involved in special
operations” or “the day of polite/ green people”
established by Putin a year ago. Then, just like
after the murder of Christ, there is fear and
confusion; then Putin disappears and the fear
and confusion increase. During this period of
anxious waiting for Putin to appear (alive or
dead), in the minds of the people, Nemtsov is
swapped with Putin the Absent – the victim is
forgotten. Just as it was with Nemtsov’s murder,
now there are countless speculations about
Putin’s death. Some mockingly say “he will
rise”. The documentary about “Putin the saviour’
is shown on Sunday proclaiming that “he is
alive” – just like the myrrh-bearing women
proclaimed in the Gospels the resurrection of
Christ (speaking about women, the same allusion
was made on the 8th of March by
playing the recording of “Putin meeting with the
women”). Then Putin makes some limited
appearances “to a few”.
Eventually he
appears “to all”. And almost immediately after
that he appears practically on the place of the
murder of his rival – of the person who played
the role, only by the virtue of being
truthful and calling others to do the same,
of the Christ-like figure in this postmodern
drama. Before Putin’s appearance the recorded
slogans “Christ is risen, God is with us” are
played. Then there is the appearance to all,
almost over the grave, the crowds give the
impression that the whole nation is ready to
march with and for Putin.
He is literally hailed as “saviour”. All the
values Nemtsov held (anti- war in Ukraine, free
Russia etc) are symbolically overthrown by the
opposite slogans chanted almost over (and
actually over) the site of his murder. Then
“communion” takes place: as the whole nation
symbolically joins with the murderer by the
implicit and explicit approval of the murder and
of the ideas of the murderer. So Putin makes the
ritual sacrifice then the whole nation
(represented by those who came to the Red
Square) partakes of the spilled blood of the
innocent victim. Now it is prepared for its’
mission and ready to go forwards.
The question of symbols
My understanding of the events is
based purely on their symbolic meaning. I
deliberately do not consider strategic
calculations like “how beneficial the murder of
Nemtsov was for Putin” because in my opinion
such analysis is secondary, and only adds to the
fog which obscures that which is hidden in plain
sight. I will explain my “medieval” way of
thinking.
It is an
accepted fact that immediately before beginning
the process of the annexation of Crimea they
were visited by a Russian delegation bringing
the so-called “Gifts of the wise men to Christ”
for veneration to Sevastopol and Simferopol.
These gifts came from Mount Athos (the Holy
Mountain in Greece) just like the belt of Our
Lady years before came to Russia for veneration.
Among those who surfaced at the time the Gifts
were in Crimea were the “Orthodox benefactor”
and multi-millionaire, Malofeev who was later
involved in financing the war in Donetsk and
Lugansk, Girkin-Strelkov, (Russian intelligence
officer and later commander of the pro-Russian
forces which shot down flight MH17) and several
others who are closely connected with the
Russian invasion of Ukraine. Thus the bringing
of the Gifts is interpreted by many as “a cover”
for secret preparations of the later operations.
I agree – it is a legitimate albeit entirely
strategic account of the bringing the Gifts. It
is most likely to be true as well. However, to
stop on this obvious level of explanation is to
see only the first layer of meaning. The next
layer is that Putin and Co (no one can seriously
doubt that any significant event in Russia must
have the approval of Putin; also, ROC MP
which is effectively part of the Putin apparatus
of suppression and curated by him personally)
“organized” bringing the Gifts from Athos not
just for the purpose of “a cover” (many other,
less extravagant, methods can be used for a
cover) but such a cover, the Christian cover
is particularly pleasing for Putin. First, it is
pleasant to bring the relics to Crimea and then
to steal the land; “gift – stealing” is a
particularly delicious mockery. Second, to use
the Gifts which were given to Christ
as a symbolic beginning (and a cover) for the
campaign is blasphemy.
So, what does seeing the actions of Putin as
blasphemous and mocking add to the first layer
(a cover) of understanding? Quite a lot; it
provides the general feel/ grasp of his
movements and purposes. The knowledge that the
Gifts were used just as a cover does not really
give much; it is highly unlikely that such a
cover will be used in the future but the
knowledge that there is a strange desire to make
a use of the attributes of Orthodox faith
(relics, icons, dates of important Christian
feasts), especially before the significant
events (like the annexation) and thus to
blaspheme on the grandest scale does provide the
understanding of the direction the man is going,
his purposes, and his values. To know that Putin
serves the evil is to know the possible
scale of the events. Possible because to know
that someone is a puppet of the dark forces does
not mean that one must attribute to any action
of the puppet an apocalyptic scale. By no means;
the puppet can reach the status of Antichrist or
he may not but the character of his actions in
their essence is the same as of Antichrist. It
is true for anyone who walks the path of evil.
Thus even if Putin will never realise the
purpose towards which he seems to gravitate now,
keeping this purpose in a mind is indispensable
for the understanding of what is happening. The
proof of this is the fact that since a certain
moment of a time in the past those analyses of
the actions of Putin which miss their
metaphysical aspect tend to fall apart or look
somewhat impotent. Something is missing in them,
and the sense of the miss is increasing. It was
especially noticeable when the analysts were
dealing with the recent events, the murder of
Nemtsov and the disappearance of Putin. Those
words “ritual murder” and “mocking of the Easter
events” put it all together, including the very
bizarreness of the murder, disappearance, and
the release of propaganda documentary. The
extravagance of the explanation matches the
extravagance of the events perfectly.
I am not saying that Putin is an
“official” follower of the evil as the common
imagination paints them, someone who conducts
hidden rituals and takes every private minute to
spit on the Cross – I simply do not know this.
However, judging by the fruits of his deeds, I
am quite convinced that his projects and
operations thrive thanks to the aid of the
inferno, simply because of the law of the mutual
attraction of the similar things. The evil gives
him the ideas and symbols which he uses even if
he is consciously unaware of that. Nevertheless,
they are still very potent ideas and very potent
symbols. The symbols, being “released” into the
public space, inevitably begin acting on their
own gathering around themselves those whom they
positively stir. For example Christians are more
likely to have a theological conference in a
room with the Crucifix then one with a statue of
Ganesh. The destruction/ remaking/ discrediting
of the symbols of the opponents prove that
even if political observers do not take symbols
seriously those who attempt to remake the world
do. An obvious example is the remaking
Christian Cross into swastika which literally
replaced the Cross in churches across Nazi
Germany. Whether Hitler deliberately bent the
ends of the Cross or simply replaced it with the
swastika taken from India is absolutely
irrelevant. The fact is that in the Christian
churches the eye sees the bent cross placed into
the church, and the heart partakes of the
unconscious meaning, a mockery of the Cross of
Christ. But there is still the room for
reasonable doubt aided by an unreasonable logic:
he did not offend the Cross, he simply changed
it with swastika because he liked it more, it
had nothing to do with Christ of Christians.
I hope I managed to demonstrate
how the game with symbols/ symbolic gestures, if
skilfully done, always leaves the room for
another, as a rule more “reasonable”
interpretation, than the “primitive thinking” of
the “religious nuts”. Only here the “religious
nuts” have the courage to see events through the
framework of meaning, which includes their
feelings and values and not just strategic
calculations. And just like them, the relatives
of Nemtsov had the courage to state, without
paying any attention to the various speculations
of the observers, that it was Putin who murdered
Nemtsov. The observers were too busy applying a
form of ‘logic’ which generates endless
possibilities and failed to see or state the
obvious because they did not have the faith in
God or the mad thirst for justice and truth
which make even an atheist a believer.
What I am saying here is that
logic and reasonable doubts are good as tools
but they are hopeless if they are the only tools
we have, using them without faith in God or at
least active faith in the highest possible
ethical and moral values. The evil is an
excellent theologian – please see the temptation
of Christ in the desert, in the Gospels.
Actually, the episode is so telling that I will
quote it here.
Then Jesus was led up by the
Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the
devil. And when He had fasted forty days and
forty nights, afterward He was hungry. Now when
the tempter came to Him, he said, “If You are
the Son of God, command that these stones become
bread.”
But He answered and said, “It is written, ‘Man
shall not live by bread alone, but by every word
that proceeds from the mouth of God.’
Then the devil took Him up into
the holy city, set Him on the pinnacle of the
temple, and said to Him, “If You are
the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is
written:
‘He shall give His angels charge over you,’ and,
‘In their hands they shall bear you up,
Lest you dash your foot against a stone.’
Jesus said to him, “It is written
again, ‘You shall not tempt the
Lord
your God.’”
Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly
high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms
of the world and their glory. 9 And
he said to Him, “All these things I will give
You if You will fall down and worship me.”
Then Jesus said to him, “Away with you, Satan!
For it is written, ‘You shall worship the
Lord
your God, and Him only you shall serve.’”
Then the devil left Him, and behold, angels came
and ministered to Him.
Here the devil tempts Christ
quoting the Scriptures and using the formal (out
of context) logic. One may say that Christ
respond to him the same way, also using the
Scriptures. There is one difference however
which makes it all: all the statements of Christ
are God-centred. Unlike the devil who uses the
name of God as a tool, every answer of Christ
proclaims God to be the refuge, the stronghold
beyond the doubts of a purely formal logic.
Christ’s answers if you like convey the only
spirit which can carry a human being over the
traps of the rooms of ambivalence and doubts. It
is of course the spirit of faith. One must note
also that Christ is being very far from
denouncing logic as a tool for faith; he
renounces and overthrows the devil’s formal
logic only i.e. the logic which derives its
strength in itself only.
In the light of this quote it is
becoming more understandable why Putin messes up
the ROC MP so much. On one level, he is expected
to do so because he is “the leader of the
Orthodox country”. On another – ROC MP gives him
moral credibility in the eyes of many, including
the Orthodox abroad. On yet another one – it is
his tool of choice for mocking. And further more
– it is the tool using which he is hoping
(consciously or unconsciously) to destroy
Christianity. The situation is truly
tragi-comical: the more Orthodox believe in
Putin the more he is mocking them, the Church
and God; his mockery brings in more participants
and their sincerity (albeit stupid) turns into
the mockery of God as well by participation.
It would not be so if the Orthodox believed
first and foremost in Christ – nothing can
pollute such a faith – but they, unfortunately,
believe in Russia = Putin = Orthodoxy. This is
how the metaphysical black energy of evil is
growing being fed by the participation of
others. So, by encouraging people to conduct the
acts of faith (veneration of the relics etc)
Putin and Co together with the ROC MP are in
fact degrading those acts of faith via by using
the sacred for the purpose of evil, blaspheming
and enticing the people to join in with their
blasphemy.
I leave the reader to draw their
own conclusion about how conscious Putin is in
his games with the devil. The results of this so
far are Russia morally/ spiritually destroyed;
the fake church ROC MP which truly should have
been excommunicated out of the Eastern Orthodox
Church; the corruption of world Orthodoxy via
the spread of pan-Putin moods with the heresies
attached to them; and the spiritual fall of
Athos; the defeat of Europe – still in spirit
only but it will eventually fall; the war in
Ukraine with thousands lives lost for nothing on
both sides; the coming overthrow of the
Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and
the total control of the fake church ROC MP over
world Orthodoxy; bringing to nothing the
dialogue between the Eastern and Western
Churches about their intercommunion as a
fulfilment of Christ’ prayer/command at the last
supper, “that you may be one”; the strengthening
of the radical Islamic groups fed by Putin and
Co; the activation of neo-Nazi and neo-fascists
elements across Europe, etc. And the most
important, the tool for this and the outcome of
this which are one: the palpable evil poison,
the discrediting of the “moral law within” and
the making of souls to become insensitive to it.
I know very well that this
article will not be understood or that it may be
understood only by a few of the “religious
nuts”. The room for ambivalence is far too well
designed. Human pride is too high to push aside
that logic and attempt to listen to the strange
logic of the heart. To me the very fact that I
will not be heard gives some ground for
believing that I may not be mistaken in my
understanding; that Orthodoxy is now sleeping
with the devil’s puppet; that the West is too
rational/ too proud/ to accustomed not to take
anything said from the position of the faith
seriously. The more infernal, under the banner
of Orthodoxy, the behaviour of Putin becomes,
the less possible it will be for the both camps
to understand it. The moment looks ripe for
something truly dreadful to break in.
22 of March 2015
--------------------------------------------------------
other articles
home