Homo Sovieticus

I've been reading about the Russian Revolution lately, and one feature of radical revolutionary thought has stuck with me: they believe that changing the environment in which people live will create a new type of person, the "New Soviet Man", or whatever name they give the particular flavor of new man their ideology will free humanity to become. This is in contrast to the conservative and reactionary idea of humanity, where there is a human nature that is constant, and the best a new environment can offer them is a different way to express their essential humanity, with all its typical virtues and failings. I personally think history bears out the latter view pretty well, but even if you don't find either convinces you, it's a valuable way to view the aspirations of the two schools of thought.

Personally I prefer geostrategic determinism over kitchen sink sociology.

"From the Russian point of view, creating a sphere of influence that would return Russia to its relatively defensible imperial boundaries is imperative."

https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/geopolitics-russia-pe...

[https://web.archive.org/web/20220301131639/https://12ft.io/p...]

But what is really interesting is, everybody knew that. But nonetheless let it happen, for one reason or another.

I don't see anything distinctly Soviet about it other than them coining the term. The description seems like a very good fit for various swaths of western demographics. When people grow up surrounded by "you're part of a machine/system" ideologies they tend to exhibit these qualities regardless of whether the machine is portrayed as good (for all their faults, the USSR did try had to convince people they were part of something meaningful), neutral or evil.

a soviet is not a russian

the modern russian has traits of a soviet but is a different person

plus the actions of a country’s leaders do not represent the entire will of the people

Secondhand Time: The Last of the Soviets by the Nobel Prize Literature winner Sveltana Alexievich who also wrote Chernobyl Prayer is quite a good insight into what a Soviet person is: https://www.amazon.com/Secondhand-Time-Soviets-Svetlana-Alex...

This "homo sovieticus," has echoes in a few places, as it seems like problem that as always been with us. Most recently, it matches the (a bit vicious, imo) right wing "NPC" meme fairly closely, which refers to "non-player characters," a feature of role playing games and videogames whose dialogue and action are rote, and describes people whose ontology is defined by dominant narratives. Arendt talked about them as "Little Eichmanns," in reference to people who think in clichés to justify participation in atrocities and organized crimes against humanity. The existence of the middle class is a fairly modern development, where previously they would have been called the "mob," and mob rule, and the role they played in the French revolution was that of the "sans coulottes." It's a reocurring theme.

What's notable about the archetype is that it is independent of class because it is an identity that is the effect of an orientation and alignment to power without a guiding principle. The term I have used for this archetype has been "banal nihilist," but I've come to suspect the idea is conceptually closer to something that some evangelicals are talking about when they talk about "spiritual warfare" (big thing with many of them) where there is essentially a force that seeks to separate the individual from the basic human dignity provided by a belief in God, which elevates humans above animals because we can take moral instruction. This evil wants to spiritually enslave people. A similar evil force comes up in other world religions as well. The idea that we are just animals, and our ethical and moral systems are only material and immediate and accountable to other men is seductive and even liberating in a limited sense, but it deprives life of the possibility of meaning from beyond what we can materially percieve in the moment, as though our purpose could be no greater than that of a cow or a chicken. Whereas, to make anything new, necessarily, you need to believe in the possibility of something you can't yet see, and so a belief in a God as representing something greater than your material circumstances ensures this possibility is always in mind. Without it, you're just a cog, etc. There's probably an evolutionary reason for it, but it seems unreasonably effective.

This Homo Sovieticus seems to have analogies to the New Man, the Last Man, and other states of subjugation, and perhaps the lesson from the general theme is that we should be critical of people and ideas that attempt to moralize individual subjugation.

Many of the characteristics described in the reference are totally suitable to government bureaucrats in Homo Capitalisticus population I think.

Characteristics.

1. Indifference ... fits most people around the world.

2. Avoidance of taking any individual responsibility. Sounds very western to me, but it's not the state that's supposed to provide. It's everyone else who's expected to accept demands and wishes.

3. Chauvinism. The dominant cultural influence in the EU is the US. News are biased towards the west and rarely ever contain anything substantial from outside, unless it's to bash someone. No matter how much people travel to other countries, they're still the same domesticated apes when they've returned.

4. Obedience. Oh boy, europe got plenty of that and people don't even realize.

5. Heavy drinking. Well, that's actually typically Austrian. Though "heavy" is relative, of course. Someone drinking three beers daily might not be drinking vodka, but it's still alcohol and it's still daily. They'd not be considered a "heavy drinker" there, yet, of course they are.

This submission is just mindless bashing. There's no point in attacking the russian people like this. You should look at how stupid and degenerated your own people are. I can assure you that, without knowing where you're from, you're living in a massive blob of them.