Putinism

• Personality cult[13] of Putin as a "national hero", through glorification in the media,[14]
• strong presidential power,[15] strengthened even in comparison with Yeltsin times,[16]
• strong state control over property,[15]
• "Sovereign Democracy", i.e. a system where Putin works with the "oligarchs created by chaotic, free-market, crony capitalism", who in turn show "absolute fealty".[17]
• elements of nepotism (cooperative “Ozero”),
• reliance on siloviki (people from several dozen security agencies, many of whom worked with Putin before he came to power),
• selective application of justice,[18][19] subjectively selective application of the law (“Everything is for the friends, the law is for the enemies”),[20]
• relatively liberal but non-transparent financial and tax policies,[2]
• “manual control” mode:[21][22][23] a weak technical government that does not have any political weight, with real control of the country from Presidential Administration,[21]
• utmost secrecy of power and backstage making of key decisions,[21]
• "conservative resistance" to the Western 'decadence' of irreligion, "same-sex marriage, radical feminism, homosexuality, mass immigration", that is being "globalized" under the cover of democracy and human rights;[17]
• embrace of the values of Orthodox Christianity against liberal cosmopolitanism, but also support for other anti-liberal hard right authoritarians outside of Russia;[17]
•  using the claim of protecting “our common Fatherland, Great Rus,” as a "spiritual cover for ... kleptocracy,”[17]
• the authorities' dislike of freedom to express their opinion, censorship,[24]
• strategic relations with The Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, they say, the property interests of the church[25] and a policy of promoting clericalization of society.[26][27]
• Pan-Russian variant of ultra-nationalism, shifting the Russians to the position of the dominant Aryan nation.[28]
• In the international arena, Putinism is characterized by nostalgia for Soviet times and a desire to regain the situation before 1989 when the Soviet Union competed on a strong footing with United States in international affairs. Energy is used as an instrument of international politics (so-called “pipeline diplomacy”).[29]
  • More recently, in response to the Russo-Ukrainian crisis, Putinism has been characterised by Western politicians as "authoritarianism, ... imperialism, ... ethno-nationalism"[30]

M. Urnov and V. Kasamara established among political scientists “direct signs of the departure of the current political system of Russia from the basic principles of competition policy”:[31]

• centralization,[32] strong presidential power,[15] weakening of the political influence of regional elites and big business[31]
• establishment of direct or indirect state control over the main television channels of the country, censorship;[31][33]
• the ever-increasing use of the “administrative resource” in elections at the regional and federal levels;[31][33]
• the actual elimination of the system of separation of powers, the establishment of control over the judicial system;[31][33]
• non-public style of political behavior[31][33]
• monopolization of political power in the hands of the president[33]
• priority of state interests over the interests of the individual, restriction of the rights of citizens,[33][32] Reprisals against civil society[32]
• creating an image of a "besieged fortress", equating opposition activities with hostility[33] and ousting it from the political field[34]
• Putin's personality cult,[35] the embodiment of state succession in it after a serious injury from the collapse of the USSR[34]
• bureaucratic authoritarianism,[36] the presence of the ruling party merged with the bureaucratic apparatus[33][36]
• state corporativism[36][35]
• strong state control over property,[15]
• aggressive foreign policy (jingoism)[32]
• focus on order and conservative values[34]
• ideology of national greatness[34]
• Anti-Western sentiment[34]

Russian political scientist Andrey Piontkovsky argues that the ideology of Rashism is in many ways similar to German fascism (Nazism), while the speeches of President Vladimir Putin reflect similar ideas to those of Adolf Hitler.[37][38]

A sociological investigation unveiling the phenomena was done in 2004 by Olga Kryshtanovskaya, who determined the proportion of siloviks in the Russian political elite to be 25%.[1] In Putin's "inner circle" which constitutes about 20 people, the amount of siloviks rises to 58%, and fades to 18–20% in Parliament and 34% in the Government.[1] According to Kryshtanovskaya, there was no capture of power as Kremlin bureaucracy has called siloviks in order to "restore order". The process of siloviks coming into power allegedly started in 1996, Boris Yeltsin's second term. "Not personally Yeltsin, but the whole elite wished to stop the revolutionary process and consolidate power."[1]

When silovik Vladimir Putin was appointed Prime Minister in 1999, the process was boosted. According to Kryshtanovskaya, "Yes, Putin has brought siloviks with him. But that's not enough to understand the situation. Here's also an objective aspect: the whole political class wished them to come. They were called for service... There was a need of a strong arm, capable from point of view of the elite to establish order in the country."[1]

Kryshtanovskaya has also noted that there were people who had worked in structures "affiliated" with the KGB/FSB. Structures usually considered as such are the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Governmental Communications Commission, Ministry of Foreign Trade, Press Agency News and others. "The itself work in such agencies doesn't involve necessary contacts with special services, but makes you think about it."[39] Summing up numbers of official and "affiliated" siloviks she got an estimate of 77% of such in the power.[1]

With Putin's signing an executive order on 3 July 2020 to officially insert the amendments into the Russian Constitution, they took effect on 4 July 2020.[40]

Vladimir Pastukhov, a Russian political scientist, advocate and honorary senior research associate of the University College London's School of Slavonic and East European Studies, and Alexander Podrabinek, a Soviet dissident, journalist and Russian human rights defender, state that Russia has been taking on the characteristics of a totalitarianism as a result of the constitutional amendments. This is reflected in incremental but steady and aggressive process of the seizing of full control over public and private life, and de facto criminalization of any opposition and dissidence.[41][42]

According to former Securitate general Ion Mihai Pacepa, "In the Soviet Union, the KGB was a state within a state. Now former KGB officers are running the state. They have custody of the country's 6,000 nuclear weapons, entrusted to the KGB in the 1950s, and they now also manage the strategic oil industry renationalized by Putin. The KGB successor, rechristened FSB, still has the right to electronically monitor the population, control political groups, search homes and businesses, infiltrate the federal government, create its own front enterprises, investigate cases, and run its own prison system. The Soviet Union had one KGB officer for every 428 citizens. Putin's Russia has one FSB-ist for every 297 citizens."[43][44]

"Under Russian Federation President and former career foreign intelligence officer Vladimir Putin, an "FSB State" composed of chekists has been established and is consolidating its hold on the country. Its closest partners are organized criminals. In a world marked by a globalized economy and information infrastructure, and with transnational terrorism groups utilizing all available means to achieve their goals and further their interests, Russian intelligence collaboration with these elements is potentially disastrous", said politologist Julie Anderson.[8]

Former KGB officer Konstantin Preobrazhenskiy shares similar ideas. When asked "How many people in Russia work in FSB?", he replied: "Whole country. FSB owns everything, including Russian Army and even own Church, the Russian Orthodox Church... Putin managed to create new social system in Russia".[45]

"Vladimir Putin's Russia is a new phenomenon in Europe: a state defined and dominated by former and active-duty security and intelligence officers. Not even fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, or the Soviet Union – all undoubtedly much worse creations than Russia – were as top-heavy with intelligence talent", said intelligence expert Marc Gerecht.[46]

Andrei Illarionov considers the political system in Russia as a variety of corporatism. According to Illarionov, a former advisor of Vladimir Putin, this is a new socio-political order, "distinct from any seen in our country before". He said that members of the Corporation of Intelligence Service Collaborators took over the entire body of state power, follow an omerta-like behavior code, and "are given instruments conferring power over others – membership “perks”, such as the right to carry and use weapons".[47]

According to Illarionov, this "Corporation has seized key government agencies – the Tax Service, Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Parliament, and the government-controlled mass media – which are now used to advance the interests of [Corporation] members. Through these agencies, every significant resource of the country – security/intelligence, political, economic, informational and financial – is being monopolized in the hands of Corporation members".[47]

Members of the Corporation created an isolated caste. A former KGB general said that "a Chekist is a breed... A good KGB heritage—a father or grandfather, say, who worked for the service—is highly valued by today's siloviki. Marriages between siloviki clans are also encouraged."[48]

Russian politician Boris Nemtsov and commentator Kara-Murza define Putinism in Russia as "a one party system, censorship, a puppet parliament, ending of an independent judiciary, firm centralization of power and finances, and hypertrophied role of special services and bureaucracy, in particular in relation to business".[49]

Political analyst Andrei Piontkovsky considers Putinism as "the highest and culminating stage of bandit capitalism in Russia”.[50] He believes that "Russia is not corrupt. Corruption is what happens in all countries when businessmen offer officials large bribes for favors. Today's Russia is unique. The businessmen, the politicians, and the bureaucrats are the same people. They have privatized the country's wealth and taken control of its financial flows."[51]

Such views are also shared by politologist Julie Anderson who said the same person can be a Russian intelligence officer, an organized criminal, and a businessman.[8] She also cited former CIA director James Woolsey who said: "I have been particularly concerned for some years, beginning during my tenure, with the interpenetration of Russian organized crime, Russian intelligence and law enforcement, and Russian business. I have often illustrated this point with the following hypothetical: If you should chance to strike up a conversation with an articulate, English-speaking Russian in, say, the restaurant of one of the luxury hotels along Lake Geneva, and he is wearing a $3,000 suit and a pair of Gucci loafers, and he tells you that he is an executive of a Russian trading company and wants to talk to you about a joint venture, then there are four possibilities. He may be what he says he is. He may be a Russian intelligence officer working under commercial cover. He may be part of a Russian organized crime group. But the really interesting possibility is that he may be all three and that none of those three institutions have any problem with the arrangement."[52]

According to political analyst Dmitri Glinski, "The idea of Russia, Inc.--or better, Russia, Ltd.--derives from the Russian brand of libertarian anarchism viewing the state as just another private armed gang claiming special rights on the basis of its unusual power." "This is a state conceived as a "stationary bandit" imposing stability by eliminating the roving bandits of the previous era."[6]

In April 2006, the effective privatization of the customs sphere infuriated Putin himself, where businessmen and officials "merged in ecstasy".[53]

Marine Le Pen and Vladimir Putin in Moscow on 24 March 2017

A number of far-right politicians and parties in the European Union have been linked with Putin, including Marine Le Pen,[61][62] Matteo Salvini,[63] and parts of the Alternative for Germany. Putinism has also received support from a number of American far-right figures.[64][65]

Richard Shorten of the University of Birmingham has stated that Putin "has been appealing, not just for extreme “manosphere” white supremacists, but also for more “mainstream” western reactionaries attracted by an unapologetic social conservatism."[66] Jason Stanley of Yale University argued that Putin was "the leader of Russian Christian nationalism" and "has come to view himself as the global leader of Christian nationalism, and is increasingly regarded as such by Christian nationalists around the world."[67]

Robert Horvath of La Trobe University has stated that Putin has cultivated far-right extremism in Russia as a pretext to introduce anti-extremism legislation that could be used to target pro-democracy and left-wing activists and to "co-opt and mobilise radical nationalist militants" to fight against opposition.[68]

Some commentators have described Putin as wishing to restore the Russian Empire.[74][75][76] James Krapfl of McGill University has suggested that Putin may be in part inspired by Catherine the Great, stating that "parallels with Putin’s strategy are striking."[77] Several commentators have also described Putinism as in part an attempt to revive the Russian Empire's doctrine of Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality.[78][79] Faith Hillis of the University of Chicago has argued that Putin "wants to reconstitute the Russian Empire and its guiding ideologies, which were orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality—except now, under the power of a very sophisticated police state."[80] A 2014 paper in the Journal of Eurasian Studies argued that "Putin has emphasized patriotism, power, and statism to justify centralization of power and authoritarian policies. Putin's policies and rhetoric are strong analogs to those of Nicholas."[81]

Richard Shorten of the University of Birmingham has stated that "what Putin retains from the Soviet era is not its utopianism but its late-period security obsession."[66] Tom Parfitt of The Guardian has said that, according to Richard Sakwa, Putin's Soviet patriotism "had little to do with promoting communist values and more to do with besting the enemies surrounding the motherland."[82]

Putin has made a number of comments referring to the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, often blaming it on the creation of federal republics for national minorities within the Soviet Union and on the reforms brought by Mikhail Gorbachev in the late-1980s. In 2005, he referred to it as "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century."[83] In a documentary released in 2021, he referred to it as "a disintegration of historical Russia under the name of the Soviet Union."[84] In his 2022 "Address concerning the events in Ukraine", he referred to it as the "collapse of the historical Russia."[85] He has also said that "Anyone who doesn’t regret the passing of the Soviet Union has no heart. Anyone who wants it restored has no brains."[86]

Some commentators have argued these statements show that he wishes to restore the Soviet Union. After the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine begun, American President Joe Biden stated that Putin "wants to, in fact, reestablish the former Soviet Union. That's what this is about."[87] However, that claim has been disputed by many commentators.[88][89] Mario Kessler of the Centre for Contemporary History has stated that Putin is rather "taking up the imperial desires of tsarist Russia" and that "Lenin’s internationalism and Putin’s Great Russian chauvinism are, indeed, incompatible."[90] Cihan Tugal of the University of California, Berkeley has described Putin's view of history as one "where Ukraine and the other nations of the USSR are communist artefacts, and only Russia is real and natural."[91]

Naomi Klein has argued that Putin has been motivated in part by "a desire to overcome the shame of punishing economic shock therapy imposed on Russia at the end of the Cold War."[92]