By Kevin D. Williamson
Friday, June 28, 2024
In Russia, the trial—“trial”—of Wall Street
Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich is under way.
The “trial” is being
held in secret, though Gershkovich was displayed—locked in a glass box with
his head shaved—for the benefit of the press and the amusement of the Russian
people. U.S. Embassy personnel have
been banned from the proceedings, as have Gershkovich’s supporters, as
have reporters, as have all others who are not carefully pre-screened
participants in the show-trial pageant being put on by the state security
apparatus. Gershkovich is charged with espionage. There is no evidence that
Gershkovich was involved in anything other than journalism, but if you are
Vladimir Putin, journalism—real, honest journalism—is at least as much of a
danger to your regime as is espionage, and probably more of one.
Mark Leonard of the European Council on Foreign Relations
offers
a useful analogy: In the era of globalization, rival countries end up being
something like estranged spouses who use the things that link them together—the
children, the family home—as weapons against one another. We have seen this with
trade, with travel, with participation in multinational institutions, and
much else. And we have seen it with journalism. The foreign correspondent is as
ancient a figure in international relations as the diplomat, and it is an
increasingly dangerous occupation. Authoritarians fear journalists, for obvious
reasons. The so-called People’s Republic of China is a prolific jailer of
domestic journalists—half
of them Uyghurs—and Beijing has made a special example out of Hong Kong
media entrepreneur Jimmy Lai,
who is a British national. Like Gershkovich, Lai is accused of espionage:
“collusion with foreign forces” and “illegally supplying state secrets
overseas.”
As George Orwell doesn’t seem to
have actually said, news is what they don’t want you to print—the rest is
advertising. And those are good, bold, true words, but a tough credo to live up
to when the people who don’t want you printing things have a gestapo and a
gulag and Polonium-210.
The Russian show trial is an established national
tradition. It is a feature of whatever we want to call the form of government
practiced by Putin. It was a feature of the communist regime that preceded the
current era, and it was a feature of the czarist regime that preceded the
communists. Russia has had many revolutions of sorts, but wherever it has gone,
it has found itself there. As the Economist once put it:
“Peter the Great, tsar from 1682 to 1725, set out to modernise a medieval
theocracy, and produced a militaristic police state based on slave labour.”
Peter the Great would recognize what is being done to
Evan Gershkovich, as he, too, constructed special displays for his political
enemies: stone pillars with iron prongs radiating out from them, upon which we
hung the heads of those who got on the wrong side of the czar. His former
brother-in-law was decapitated and his head displayed on such a structure in
St. Petersburg for years; there was still some of it left when the deposed
governor of Siberia was pinned up next to it. These Russian “spectacles
of suffering” were not just manifestations of psychotic cruelty—they were
intentional strategies of statecraft.
And so it goes. Russia is not a failed state but a series
of failed (and failing) states, with something much more enormously failed
behind them.
The perversity of the contrast between Russian culture
and Russian public life should be held onto as a kind of civilizational memento
mori by those of us who have, over the years, made the profound error of
investing our hopes in intellect and high culture. Russia has those gifts in
excess: in literature, in music, in science, in philosophy—in almost everything
except creating the conditions under which ordinary life may be lived decently
and securely by ordinary people. It is as though Russian public life knows how
to create only geniuses and monsters, along with a few men who were both.
But Americans can no longer allow ourselves to be shocked
by that: If we did not learn the lesson of Germany—when the most cultured,
urban, and educated elements of Europe’s most intellectually advanced country
carried out the Holocaust—then we have our own contemporary example, less
monstrous but no less illuminating. Men of culture and intellectual achievement
have proven to be easily seduced by the scanty rewards—a little bit of money
and some transitory notoriety—that go along with being the house philosophers
of the Trump movement.
If not intellect and culture, then what is reliable proof
against illiberalism, tyranny, and monstrosity? Catholics could not be tempted
for a second to indulge the notion that our religion nurtures the kind of
civilizations that are resistant to that sort of thing—cf. Franco, Pinochet,
Salazar, Trujillo, Mussolini, etc.—but the heirs of the Reformation can hardly
have failed to notice that so many “neutral” Protestant countries (Denmark,
Norway, Sweden) found it relatively easy to establish a modus vivendi with
the Third Reich. Danish resistance to the Nazi occupation lasted only two
hours, during which time the Danes seem to have inflicted … zero casualties,
though they did capture two Germans.
So: Not intellect, not high culture, not religion. In
what should Americans trust? The Constitution? Maybe. But it is worth noting
that the same element in American life that cheers on Putin’s forces in Ukraine
is also cheering
on the effort to elect as the next president of these United States a man
who not long ago insisted
that the Constitution must face “termination” if its rules would keep him out
of office.
I think our best defense is the people in Evan
Gershkovich’s business—I mean the actual journalists, not the rodeo clowns who
play at journalism. (Putin has suggested
he is open to a prisoner swap for Gershkovich; the inconvenient fact is
that the best candidate for such a swap, a man who is much more valuable to
Putin than he is to us—I mean, of course, Tucker Swanson McNear
Carlson—is not a prisoner.) Thomas Jefferson thought so: “Were it left to
me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or
newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate to prefer the latter.”
There is a reason Vladimir Putin cannot abide Evan
Gershkovich and those who do that kind of work. God bless and keep them.
No comments:
Post a Comment