Shevchenko depicts the West as a unified entity in which many citizens embrace neoliberal views which he describes as ‘criminal in nature’. It should be noted that his perception of the West has changed since he emerged as a public intellectual in the mid 2000s. Perhaps this relates to the changing focus of the Kremlin’s political discourse in this period. In 2004, in response to interventionist US policies in the Middle East, Shevchenko called for a union with Europe against US domination (Buntman and Shevchenko, 2004). However, by the end of the 2000s in his speeches he was portraying the West as a single hostile entity. In support of Putin’s turn away from the USA and Western Europe during his third presidential term, Shevchenko published an article with the telling title We are not Europe? And thank God! (My ne Evropa? I Slava Bogu!), in which he drew a clear distinction between Russia and the West: ‘There is a growing feeling that most Western people belong to a different humanoid race from us’ (Shevchenko, 2013c). Shevchenko insisted that Russia had to defend herself from the corrupt spirit of neoliberal thought, which was focused solely on consumption and sexual promiscuity; in contrast, Russia’s adherence to traditional values would save the world.
Like Narochnitskaia, then, Shevchenko combined demonization of the USA with the negative image of a so-called ‘liberal opposition’ alien to the Russian nation. This opposition, funded by the USA, was relentless in its attempt to create numerous nation-states on the territory of Russia. US policies were allegedly carried out by disloyal ‘fifth columnists’ in Russia, who possessed dual citizenship and lacked a sense of national identity (Shevchenko, 2012a). The reference to dual citizenship serves as another marker of the otherness of the opposition. Shevchenko’s attempt to divide the world in this way was strengthened by reference to anti-Semitic conspiracy theories which were popular in the Imperial and, even more, in Soviet times, and which encouraged fear of a small but powerful group of people within the state.
This use of anti-Jewish attitudes in his speeches and articles marks Shevchenko out from other public intellectuals who are involved in the dissemination of conspiracy discourse and loyal to the Kremlin. As a self-proclaimed spokesperson for Muslims in Russia, Shevchenko provides his audience with a particular interpretation of the Middle East conflict which paints Israel as a ‘fascist state’ committing genocide against the Palestinians. In trying to promote solidarity between Muslims in Russia and in the Middle East based on a common hatred of Jews, Shevchenko utilizes the narratives traditional to anti-Zionist conspiracy discourse which is popular in the Middle East (Pipes, 1998; Gray, 2010). For example, he depicts Israel as ‘a purely virtual state’ which was created by the USA with the sole purpose of achieving global domination in the Middle East (Shevchenko, 2012c).
However, Shevchenko’s anti-Israeli conspiracy mythmaking has a peculiar rhetorical twist aimed at the Russian domestic audience. He depicts the Russian-speaking community in Israel both as the most vitriolic in its attitudes towards the Palestinians, and the most mercantile. He contends that Jews left the Soviet Union when times were hard, and went to Israel in search of the good life. Settling in Israel, they criticized interethnic relations in Russia and made clear their hatred of the country’s Muslims, thus challenging the possibility of peace between nationalities in Russia (Shevchenko, 2012b). Shevchenko maintains that Russian Jews who oppose Putin are responsible for triggering interethnic conflicts between radical Islamists and Russian nationalists in the south of Russia. He also asserts that the Israelis will soon cause the disintegration of Russia and will build a new state on its territory to replace Israel in case the latter collapses (Goncharova and Shevchenko, 2012).
Shevchenko’s use of anti-Jewish conspiracy theories is an important development both in the nation’s discourse, and in its interethnic relations. Drawing on the extensive corpus of anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish writings, Shevchenko turns the Jews into the conspiring ‘Other’, determined to hinder the development of interethnic peace in Russia and to instigate conflicts in the North Caucasus. The connection between Israel and the USA allows Shevchenko to embed anti-Jewish discourse within the body of anti-Western conspiracy theories.
Shevchenko’s use of anti-Western and anti-Jewish narratives in a discourse about national cohesion is an interesting case of how conspiracy theories could be applied. By addressing his speeches to ethnic and religious minorities who are suffering from the growth in xenophobic attitudes on the part of the general Russian public, Shevchenko incorporates various minorities into the category of ‘the people’ who supposedly share a common ‘glorious past’ with the ethnic Russian majority. The promotion of conspiracy theories thus helps explain the growth in interethnic tension; they point to supposedly treasonable actions on the part of the opposition, corrupt authorities and external powers, while at the same time distancing the Kremlin from the conflicts. Shevchenko’s charisma and rhetorical skills, together with the support of the Kremlin, enable him to act as an efficient agent of conspiracy mythmaking and a contributor to the official political discourse.
Conclusion
This chapter has demonstrated the significant role performed by public intellectuals in spreading anti-Western conspiracy theories in Russia. The intellectuals’ efforts to develop their own conspiracy theories or borrow them from foreign sources has played an important part in strengthening anti-Western attitudes in the country. The fact that they focus so much on Russia’s geopolitical domination as a superpower in the past demonstrates how strongly they resent their country’s loss of international influence in the 1990s. The political elites’ inability to cope with the changing system of international relations after the Soviet collapse has, paradoxically, stimulated, rather than constrained, this ‘great power’ mentality (Lo, 2003, p. 74).
The popularity of anti-Western conspiracy theories explaining Russia’s loss of superpower status and the uncontested domination of the USA could be interpreted as a manifestation of the inequality in relations between Russia and the USA after 1991. Public intellectuals’ criticism of the West, as expressed through conspiracy theories, helps to present a more positive image of Russia. Despite socio-economic upheavals, public intellectuals have managed to portray the country as a great multi-ethnic state, which resists the West’s attempts to control the world and take over Russian territories and resources.
What distinguishes Russian from US conspiracy mythmaking is the engagement of public intellectuals in the politics of the ruling elites. The anti-elitism of conspiracy theorists in the USA indicates that they belong to ‘the people’ (Kay, 2011) and strengthens the populist aspect of their rhetoric. It is likely that US conspiracy theorists aspire to becoming part of the political elite and influencing the political agenda, but this is not how they represent themselves. Furthermore, in the USA, unlike in Russia, public consensus regarding the boundaries and rules of permissible types of political rhetoric significantly reduces the chances of conspiracy theorists gaining high social and academic standing. Even if they do, they generally do not remain in office for long.
Unlike their counterparts in the USA, some Russian authors of anti-Western conspiracy theories are ranked among the most influential public intellectuals; they publish books and have access to the mainstream media, particularly those controlled by the state. The articulation of even the most bizarre conspiratorial ideas does not lead to exclusion from mainstream politics. Indeed, as early as the late 1990s, the ruling elite of Russia understood that anti-Western conspiracy discourse could lead to the achievement of social cohesion. This has allowed top-ranking officials to put the work of conspiracy theorists to use for both domestic and international purposes.