AMERICA AND RUSSIA

Nota bene: the following two Tocqueville entries must stay separate: the first being of a more general nature, with the original comment, whereas the second one is focusing specifically on the two underlined “trampled gems.” The first of them is sympathetic toward Russia’s historical experience, having to fight men, whereas America focuses most on fighting the elements; the other clearly predicts the path of capitalist development for America, whereas Russia is identified as a nation of natural totalitarian mentality.

Here is my comment on the two global superpowers America and Russia and their joint destiny of world leadership, centering around the celebrated prophesy of Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859), as formulated in his magnum opus Democracy in America [Volume I, 1835, Volume II, 1840]. This entry clearly falls under the definition of History Unknown, Ignored, and Misunderstood, above all, in its second and third components. It is therefore a bona fide Lady fare. The following are two especially significant quotes from Tocqueville’s work. The first passage concludes Volume I; the second one comes at the end of Volume II.

There are at the present time two great nations in the world, which started from different points but seem to tend toward the same end. I allude to the Russians and the Americans. Both have grown up unnoticed, and while the attention of mankind was turned elsewhere, they have suddenly put themselves in the front rank among the nations, and the world learned of their existence and their greatness at almost the same time.

All other nations seem to have nearly reached their natural limits, and they have only to maintain their power; but these are still in the act of growth. All the others have stopped, or continue to advance with extreme difficulty; these alone are proceeding with ease and celerity along a path, to which no limit can be perceived. The American struggles against the obstacles that nature opposes to him; the adversaries of the Russian are men. The former combats the wilderness and savage life; the latter, civilization with all its arms. The conquests of the American are therefore gained by the plowshare; those of the Russian, by the sword. The Anglo-American relies upon personal interest to accomplish his ends, the Russian centers all the authority of society in a single arm. (The underlining is mine, in order to make two important comments later on.) The principal instrument of the former is freedom; of the latter servitude. Their starting point is different, and their courses are not the same, yet each seems marked out by the will of Heaven to sway the destinies of half the globe. (From Democracy in America. Vol. I. Conclusion.)

And here is the final paragraph of Volume II, and of the whole book:

I am aware that many of my contemporaries maintain that nations are never their own masters here below and that they necessarily obey some insurmountable and unintelligent power arising from anterior events, from their race or from the soil and climate of their country. Such principles are false and cowardly, such principles can never produce anything but feeble men and pusillanimous nations. Providence has created mankind neither entirely independent nor entirely free. It is true that around every man a fatal circle is traced beyond which he cannot pass; but within the wide verge of that circle he is powerful and free; as it is with men, so it is with communities. The nations of our time cannot prevent the conditions of men from becoming equal, but it depends upon themselves whether the principle of equality is to lead them to either servitude or freedom, to knowledge or barbarism, to prosperity or wretchedness.

The two passages above have been quoted as a reminder of the immense importance of the understanding of the true nature of the American-Russian global contraposition, of its scope and extreme relevance in our day and age. There is a concerted effort, a mind-boggling conspiracy of sorts, to downplay its significance in the post-Soviet world. Tocqueville was writing his prophesy during the time of the Russian Empire, but it would have been a bad joke to suggest that its relevance had not transferred to Russia’s next incarnation, as the USSR. By the same token, it should be a bad joke, a crime against common sense, to suggest that Russia of today has somehow lost her importance on the world stage and within the two-superpower equation.

There are efforts to diminish the significance of Russia by raising the specter of China as the new, emerging to challenge the American supremacy, superpower of the future. This emphasis on China ought to be seen in the context of the simultaneous diminishment of the Russian factor, and within it, it is highly objectionable. China and Russia today have teamed up against the United States, and the perceived Chinese challenge can only be seen through the prism of the Sino-Russian relationship, within which Russia is demonstrably playing the role of the senior partner.

But leaving all such details aside, and reducing our geopolitical riddle to “missiles and sense,” there is only one nation on the face of the earth today capable of wiping the United States completely off the map, and it is not China, but… Russia. Quod erat demonstrandum.

(My next Tocquevillian America-Russia entry will “follow suit” tomorrow.)