Breaking the stereotype on Cold War

“There are two great nations on earth now…I mean the Russians and Americans. Americans battle with the hardships created by the nature; while the hardships faced by Russians are the people. First one challenges nature and wildlife while the other challenges civilizations by using it’s weapons. The primary goal of Americans is freedom, while Russians seek for slavery. Even though the fact that their starting point, path of improvement are different; some divine enactment seems to have chosen them in the domination of the half of the world.”
Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1835

The spiritual environment of the 20^th century shaped the Cold War as hostile and alien in a considerable degree. Unfortunately, liberal Western thought, which divided the world into two opposing poles in this process, succeeded in overshadowing two fundamental points in our point of view, and was able to draw a limit to the mind of humanity.

First point acknowledged by nearly all political entities is the pre-admission of the fact that there are no historical, cultural, geographical similarities between USA and Russia.

The second point is however, the claim that a single and homogeneous Western civilization exists, with the Americas ‘historic and savage’ incorporated into the cultural circle of old continental Europe to the extent that America and Russia are shown in antagonism.

With the latest Ukraine crisis, Western media and it’s intellectual population tries to capture people’s attention on the strict understanding of the Cold War by using the hostile attitude towards Russia.

This intentionally revived fear on the Cold War, obviously casts a shadow on the extreme crisis experienced by the Capitalist system and lack of solutions. On the other hand, it also takes the attention from the conflicts between Europe and America, which emerged as a result of the disintegration of the ‘solid’ Western hegemony.

At this point, one needs to check historical and literacy sources and not only geopolitics in order to find historical, geographical and cultural similarities between the USA and Russia.

In order to achieve at finding these similarities it needs to be presented that though there are nuances between these two nations, they also have a significant and deep difference from the European civilizations.

Thus, the flaws of now dissolving Western domination become more visible, the prejudices of both the Eurocentric view and the traditional West-East opposition, which is the product of this thought, can be overcome.

If this century-old paradigm is the subject, it can be seen more clearly that the causes of the crisis are not the “ancient enemies” Russia and China, but Western capitalism itself.

 Russia and America: Forgotten historical and geographical similarities  

At the beginning of the 19^th century, these two countries were lack of strict borders in their vast lands opposed to Europe. Indians in America, warrior-like population in the Caucasian region at Russia, Kazakhs and Volga-Don people advocating the Old Belief were causing strikes in the borders of the two countries. Hence this situation caused an unstable geographical union.

Fragile institutionalization process and newly established political government foundations were observed in both of the countries.

Both parties were lack of historically connected provinces that will enhance the social consciousness towards cultural heritage. Baltimore and Petersburg were so new that their foundation could be remembered by people of these two countries and also, these cities were pretty man-made and shallow in cultural terms.

The similarities in question are present in a parallel line also in the historical tragedies. Reforms upon abolishing of helotism in Russia at the date of February 19^th 1861 created extreme political crisis in the country; while America also suffered from civil war at the date of April 1861.

On the other hand, American and Russian artist clearly draw a line between their country and Europe in terms of culture.

Even Henry James, an artist accepting the Classical European culture as a milestone stated at the time: “Being an American is a very complicating situation, one of the responsibilities it brings is to fight against the exaggerated European domination.” through which he meant to stress the tension between American artist and European culture.

According to Dostoyevski, the classical European culture using measure and balance as a reference is unable to comprehend the unique Russian characteristics and artistic reforms destroying different and classical patterns: “…First, I don’t think that European can understand our national values at all (which means all our art).”.

Dostoyevski reasons this situation by emphasizing that Europe sees itself as an upper entity in an “exaggerated” way: “Europeans know very little of Russian lifestyle since they have not bothered to get to know it in an extended way. Indeed, Europe has never had the special need to understand us in details.”  

European inertia of ideation  

Contrary to Dostoyevski’s criticism, America and Russia were the two mysterious symbols in gigantic sizes, located in far away, tempting, extending the dreamers mind in the 19^th century European mentality.

Especially, opposed to the different political attitudes in the second half of 19^th century, there were instinctive philosophers themselves visited these countries or examined them thoroughly to get to know the lifestyle.

Agenda of philosophers such as Astolphe de Custine, Alexis de Tocqueville, Matthew Arnold, Henry Adams was the fact that they have similarities which differs them from Europe. Astolphe de Custine, a French aristocrat and a writer, visited Russia at 1839 and transferred his observation in the book named ‘La Russie en 1839’ and published at 1843.

Tocqueville visited America in the dates between May 1831 and February 1832 to observe prison systems. He published the observations he noted. The first volume of this book by Tocqueville is published at 1835 upon his returning and the second volume is published at 1840, he observed American social structure in details while examining traditions and cultural habits.

Tocqueville mentioned that the relation between civil society-government is different from Continental Europe in the way that America has whole another type of legal system and governing organizations.

Also, Henry Adams’, in his political novel titled ‘Democracy: An American Novel’, written in 1880, published in 1918 after his death, discussed the future of civilization upon the expected conflict of these newly fragile countries through the subject of Europe.

Though he was the one with the most extensive study related to America, Tocqueville weren’t able to predict the civil war. In the meantime, his observations on Russia were no better than an observer’s.

The person who observed both of these countries in terms of history, economy, their difference from Europe in an extensive and serious way is Karl Max, without doubt.

Marx wrote for the journal New York Tribune for a considerable period of time, he was following the fast and unique development of American capitalism. Marx did not want to write the next volumes of Das Capital without analyzing the capital increase in that new geography.

Similary, Karl Max spent a considerable amount of time of his last year for the examination of Village Communes in Russia called “obsçina”. Marx examined the valid proof for the thesis of the Russian democrats, especially Çernişevski, provoking a transition to directly to Socialism without adapting Capitalism.

Marx learned Russian to read first hand sources, he hesitantly mentioned that there is a possibility that Russa may see a different path rather than West European historical development in that very “historical moment.”

It was Marx who again showed that these two countries went separate ways in different social systems just before the world war, though they are shown to have significant similarities throughout the 19^th century.

A desperate need for new perspectives

An unconditional trust towards their civilization hindered the view of European philosophers in seeing their problems, crisis in their social structure. They could not see these two nations gaining power by following a different historical path than Europe because of this blind trust.

Throughout the 20^th century, European conservative-liberal people even the left parties advocated for “American Freedom”, “Totalitarian Russia” by the movement of Tocqueville, it is the same people today who does not see rising power China.

 By using this move, certain people claim that China has no democracy, and has been rising in power because of its discipline caused by the authoritative regime; while other people state China is rising because they declined their Socialist aspects and turn to Capitalism. Meaning all these assuming people were making a mistake of explaining the world by comparing with European liberal-capitalist system.

People who stuck with the rhetorical conditions of the Cold War are not able to comprehend the world-shaping dynamics and contradictions.

The world we live in is in a situation which is called ‘interregnum’ by Gramsci, where the old is dying and the new is about to be born.

In this transition period, it is necessary to break the old intellectual patterns and reveal new perspectives in order to come to terms with the old world radically and to embrace the newly occurring world clearly.

It is highly unlikely to expect such new perspectives from the Western world judging by the near history.