Phil Butler - Putin's Praetorians - Confessions of the Top Kremlin Trolls

The peoples of the former USSR rushed into the arms of the brothers from the US and Europe, who brought them light and a loaf with a traditional Russian outlet, called a “hamburger.” We had bread loaves with cutlets before, even healthier and tastier, but could these meals compare with those in a beautiful packaging imposed on us in outlandish advertising?

It took years, famine, wars and the disgrace of predatory privatization (the initial accumulation of capital, as Karl Marx would say) so that people would wake up and realize that they are still at war with the enemy who has the goal of destroying their state, the nation and the people, seizing wealth and territory of the country. And the most horrible and insulting thing is that the citizens of the USSR, by their own naivety and stupidity, turned their lives into humiliation and shame with elements of despair, allowed the crooks to seize power over themselves, and a handful of scammers to steal their people’s wealth during privatization.

Just think, the peoples of the USSR as children were meeting the American brothers, and now they hear in the new Hollywood movies and media interviews the bragging of the heroes of the US victory in the Cold War. Americans even issued a medal with the appropriate title, which, of course, was awarded to Mikhail Gorbachev.

In any case, the position of the USSR in the information war was weaker than the position of the United States. During the entire period of the Cold War, the Soviet State blackened the enemy, and was also forced to prevent the penetration of information from the West into the country’s territory, including suppressing the of broadcasts of “Voices”, not letting its citizens abroad, and, in the end, USSR has lost.

“Who does not regret the collapse of the USSR, he does not have a heart. And the one who wants to restore it in its former form does not have a head.”

But, what do we have now? As in any war, the USSR was waging in its territory, we retreated long and painfully, bearing heavy losses and gaining experience and strength. From the beginning of the 2000s, the situation began to change dramatically. We saw a path that could be taken in the creation of a new state if we did not submit to another’s will. We understood that could absorb all the best from the West, integrate into the world community without humiliation, wars, human sacrifices and the disintegration of a great country, which became the greatest tragedy for millions of people in the entire former Union.

The 21st century came — the information age. We suddenly realized and accepted for the rule that information no longer knows the boundaries, and the Internet does not allow to continue to live, dividing the world into zones of information influence.

Previously, politicians did not bother to explain to the people the reasons for their decisions — they limited themselves to simplified versions that left many delicate nuances in the background. Now, these invented simple versions immediately fall under the stream of criticism from the other side, are being questioned, broken, and, finally, turning against the one who invented them.

Before, the state could poke a finger at a neighbor, condemn it, say that it must be punished and get support for its actions. It does not work anymore. And it will never work again. But it seems that while the US State Department is still trying to understand this, Russia skillfully uses the new information landscape to achieve tactical advantages.

Vladimir Putin, from the first days of his work as President of Russia, understood that it was necessary to clarify his decisions, not to lie and not to leave the answers. A few years later, his open style of communication and many hours of speaking to journalists on the air have become a norm. He is friendly to many opponents because he is not afraid, to tell the truth. He is free in his decisions because he can hear and agree with the opposition without prejudice to his image, as he can discuss his decisions publicly from the point of benefits for the people even complicated for understanding.

A good leader is not one who is always right, but one who created a system that unites different people who think differently and have a wide variety of competencies and experience around a single goal. It is in the variety of thoughts surrounding us that we develop sound ideas that can improve our lives. I vote in the election of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin because the system he created allows Russian citizens to disagree with the government, to think in the way they want, and at the same time feel protected, to be a part of this society working for the benefit of own family and own country.

Comparing how elections in the US and Russia are held, what unimaginable and hypocritical claims the loser party makes to the new American president and our country, I understand that over the past three decades, Russia has become the leader of democratic freedoms, leaving the US far behind. And all the hysteria of the media and officials in the West look like a babble of an offended schoolboy who can no longer be considered the best in the class. I would like this schoolboy to draw conclusions and begin to pull himself up to excellent classmates, and not once came to school with a .223 caliber, indiscriminately shooting pupils and teachers.

War and politics are dirty work, and, as one of my little friend, said, “The princesses go to the toilet too.” I am far from thinking that our policy is an exception to the rules, and it smells like flowers, but when reading the English-language and Russian-language press, everyone can notice that, in fact, Russia’s actions are stronger, more honest and more humane, then often the foul-smelling newsbreaks from the transatlantic “The bulwark of democracy”.

The main thing that catches the eye is that Russia looks in all the media like a country living under the international law, by the arrangements, and the US increasingly manifests itself as a hooligan, a madcap, who violates the rules established by him because now those roles increasingly prevent them.

In order not to lie, you must be decent. Previously, politics needed to walk in expensive suits, make a smart face and not catch the eye of journalists, while having fun in expensive brothels. And now, in the age of Assange and WikiLeaks, one should behave well, even when no one seems to see it. Western politicians are not ready for this. Most of them are still trying to hide or veil the reasons for their decisions, they express their opinions in public and take actions that they really disagree with.

Russian media are often accused of bias. Can someone else believe in free journalism that does not depend on the roles of the market? It would be strange if the news agencies funded by State or any other party focused on judgments of the opponents.

At the same time, Russian media have an advantage over their Western counterparts. For a long time, the Russian press has not hesitated to cover the opposite point of view, to submit hot, even unpleasant news on the pages of federal publications to take the initiative into their own hands, telling about the opponent’s position with the simultaneous opposition of his own. At the same time, the journalist is given a chance to disclose his opinion in all variegated colors — that is what I see, what surprises and delights me as a reader.

Therefore, I personally am more impressed by the position of Russian media than the New York Post or the Wall Street Journal, which print a one-sided delusion, calculated that the consumer of information will never see the arguments of opponents. In one studio or one Russian federal edition, I can find out everything that concerns the issue, without resorting to studying the sites of opponents to clarify the whole picture.