Russian Archeofuturism

Philosophical Sobor "The Great Russian Rectification of Names"

Session 10 “Russian Theology of War”

I will try to cover some important points that were not visible during Vladlen Tatarsky's (Maxim Fomin's) lifetime. It often happens that such things become a kind of "farewell gift" and are realised only when a person passes away. It's very interesting to me that we are discussing Vladlen in the context of the Great Russian Rectification of Names, as I saw him as a living embodiment of that concept. He used simple, easy to understand Russian, which did not need any rectification, and he never entered the field of hostile liberal discourse. This is an interesting phenomenon: his messages aimed at young ones and understandable to them, did not contain reflections on gender, self-centerism, and other concepts which, in our opinion, must be revised. This is necessary because we are to think authentically and not in the format of philosophical concepts accepted in the West, that brought us to the problematic, acute point where we have been for a long time and which opened up like a boil at the beginning of the special military operation.

The Great Russian Rectification of format or genre, of which Maxim Fomin was the petrel, is the second concept I'd like to discuss. In a recent dialog with someone, I came to the conclusion that the language of tradition, the format of transmitting the fundamentals of traditional society, needs certain changes. For example, a person can be a believer and a philosopher, and gratefully accept the heritage of their ancestors. But unless they are open to society, they cannot share their knowledge. This is especially true for various technical gadgets. Nowadays, TikTok and the social media are very helpful in getting through to the young ones, in conveying of a philosophical concept or a religious vision.  It's essential to speak to young people in their language, and we often forget about this. We don't think about it and we don't use it. We have problems on the information front, e.g., older and younger generations have very different understanding of the meanings of war.  In my opinion, the problem is purely technical, and, perhaps, linguistic. We don't employ those means of delivering ideas that are in use today. This is why, for me, Vladlen emodies a concept of archeofuturism – preservation of traditional values backbone plus a modern form of their integration into society. Vladlen was one of the breakthrough stars of the format. He was able just pick up his phone and record a simple, clear, compelling and authentic video on Telegram. His videos were considered to be more valuable than official briefings from the Ministry of Defense.  This was an authentic Russian experience. For me, Vladlen is a reflection of the Russian way of being – a little wild, not afraid of war, thirsty for it, but fair at the same time. He was in search of a language able to describe all this, and, as Aleksander Dugin said, was not afraid to be wrong. We have to learn all of these things.

Returning to the theme of archeofuturism, it should be noted that Vladlen was, of course, a warrior, a man who sacrificed himself, but, at the same time, he used the cutting-edge technology, i.e., operated UAVs and promoted the idea of massive introducing this technology in the army. This is the archetype of the warrior who keeps up with the times. This is very important. On the one hand, Vladlen was extremely clear and concise in expressing of Russian meanings, and on the other hand, he was looking for a form of delivery appropriate to the current moment. This is essential to me, as I'm a person who comes from the field of media. What matters is he was what he was, never posed himself to seem anyone else. He was a man of the people, lived with them through thick and thin. He had a tremendous amount of credibility and people identified with him. This is what makes him different from official speakers. They do try to connect with the people, but are not authentic to them at all.

Vladlen was not one of those who come to the front to take a photo in the third front-line and say "I'm with you!" in order to get some political points. No, he embodied what it means to be Russian. His was an incredible life of adventure - the hero's way. A kind of a Jünger type, in my opinion. But at the same time, he was Russian.

Now a huge part of the information front has bared, and this gap urgently needs to be covered: we need new projects, more effective than before.  We should learn from Vladlen. I find myself thinking that every time I address an audience, I will mentally address Vladlen as a mirror of that audience, a mirror of the Russian World, its critic and censor.  "Do you get what I was trying to say? Doesn't that sound too complicated, too dull? Have you lived through it?" – these are the questions I'll hear in my head. I think everyone needs such an internal censor. Especially when you deal with the kind of audience Vladlen worked with.

Translated by Daria Seregina, edited by Tatyana Kamyshnikova