Due to the fact that it was me who inspired the leader of the “Russkiy Obraz” (Russian Obraz) to write his article “Poturchentsy”, I felt unable to ignore it. Although, I confess honestly, the very content of the article is of such kind that in case it was not written by Ilya Goryachev, but, let’s say, Vasya Pupkin, I would just grin and that’s itl. But since it was written by the leader of one of the major nationalist organizations, also claimed about gaining of intellectual hegemony in the country - the situation obliges me to respond.
This article was written based on familiar to Ilya Serbian "field data" and dedicated to the Bosnians, who were exhibited as a sample of "traitors of the nation and race", "poturchentsy", to whom Ilya joined the Russian Muslims as well. But the problem is not even in strange sympathizers to "brothers-Serbs" for “right radikal” which are more appropriate for the "patriots" of the "Nash Sovremennik" magazine and the newspaper "Day". In the early 90's the flag of Bosnia's Republika Srpska was on the wall of my room, and I have the feeling of deja-vu, as if young Russian guys from the 2000th on their own transported themselves to a decade ago, ignoring the subsequent ideological evolution of Russian right idea, it’s awakening from rotten Pan-Slavic myths centuries old.
Actually, it is a matter of taste, and if there are still Russian patriots who want to shed bitter tears for the "long-suffering Serbian people", then why not give them that right? However, Mr. Goryachev is, as far as I know, the historian, on one hand, and theorist-nationalist, on the other. And all that obliges him to a qualitatively different level of analysis of various ethnic identities, than the level which he demonstrated in his article entirely based on speculations and legends.
Now we will not discuss the concept of early Bosnian ethno genesis. In accordance with the position of some Bosnian historians, the starting point is the focus on the territory of Bosnia future Christian dissidents and freethinkers, Bohumils, Unitarians of various sects, who normally adopted Islam at first contact on the entire range of distribution of the Arian version of Christianity. I believe this version of the most convincing, although, of course, know about the attempts of Serbian chauvinists to discredit it.
Either way, it is important today is not the question of “how” Bosnian ethnic group appeared (like, say, Ukrainian), but the fact that it appeared. And despite of Mr. Goryachev attempts to show the Bosnians as "artificial" and "self-styled" Turkish (poturchentsy), anyone who knows it not by legends and is familiar with the realities of ethnic Bosnians and Turks would never accept this. Below are some arguments that make the Serbian myth about "poturchentsy" untenable.
First. Bosnians are not Turks, but also ethnically not identify themselves with them. Below I will touch curious exclusions touched by Ilya, and explain their nature. Now we state the bare facts.
For example, among the substantial part of Azeri youth the identification of themselves as "Turks" is deeply spread, although its share within this ethnic group is not enough to cancel the Azerbaijani identity and make it part of Turkish. Among the Bosnians with whom me or my friends had to talk such sentiments were absent in principle. Bosnians – are the supporters of the Bosnian identity - do not consider themselves part of the Turkish people, the Turks as well do not consider them as such (in contrast to the same Azerbaijanis).
Second. Self Bosnian identity, no matter how originated, passed the test of time and today is demonstrating itself as such Bosnian identity. In Germany, I often faced clear evidence of this - in cities with strong Turkish diaspora and Islamic centers the Bosnians prefer not to adhere to them, and create their own. The same situation is in Australia and the U.S.A, where the strong Bosnian communities and the diaspora exist, independent from the Turkish ones. Even this fact completely disproves the myth of the "poturchentsy" - why would the Bosnians who consider themselves "Turks", ethnically separates from them, in the situation when it is much more profitable to assimilate? Well, of course, if the Bosnians consider themselves Turks, what is the sense to keep the national minority in Turkey, have you ever asked this question, Mr. Goryachev?
Third. About the described curiosities. It’s a pity that Mr. Goryachev does not understand that the word "Turk" in the Serbian media has little to do with objective reality and consciousness of Turks themselves. The fact is that until the twentieth century the ancestors of the modern Turks en masse did not consider themselves as Turks, identifying themselves either as simply "Muslims" or as "Ottoman". But the “Ottomans” are not ethnic, national but civilizational identity on the basis of which subsequently formed consciousness of the new nations: the Turkish, Bosnian, Albanian. For Serbs, the word "Turk" was a synonym for Muslims, it is therefore not surprising either that the Slavic Muslims used to be called them as "Turks" or "poturchentsy”, or the fact that some residents in their midst offspring per se, divorced from the territory of the ethnogenesis of the Bosnian ethnic , took this name for themselves.
But as I said, that the Bosnians are totally independent, Slavic Muslim ethnic group, and not "Turks" or "poturchentsy" how they are treated and called by traumatized Serbians, who simply can not abandon revanchist consideration of Bosnians and Croats as a "muslim" and "catholic" Serbs.
And again, when we talk about the Bosnians as the Slavic Muslims (they certainly are Slavic Muslims as I have already written), we must bear in mind that today, "Slavonic idea” in the Balkans is usurped by the Serbs, who have the minimum genetic rights for that. Therefore, the Slavonic Idea is not attractive not only for Slavs Muslims (Bosniaks), or Slavs Catholics (Croats), but for other Orthodox Slavs, like the Macedonians and Montenegrins.
Generally, you must be aware that "the Slavs" - this is an ethnographic material that does not created its own "Slavic civilization” or “cultural-historical type" notwithstanding of N. Danilevsky theories. Some of the Slavs (Catholics) perceived cultural form of the Roman-Germanic West, other (Muslims) - Ottoman civilization, others Orthodox - Byzantine. To consider someone to be real or unreal Slavs is the total absurd as well as to show the most Slavs to be a single cultural and civilization type, which they never was and never will be.
After being dismantled with all these misunderstandings of our historian-nationalist, there is a big question arises whether there is sense with such infantile perception of reality to argue with statements of Goryachev on Russian Muslims as traitors and “poturchentsy” taken by him from views of his backers Serbs on Muslim Bosnians? Again, we will do this only because of the status of Goryachev as one of the authorities of young nationalists.
In betrayal of what people he accuses Russian Muslims? If the "Russian Orthodox God-bearing people", not only us but also our parents have not seen it. Orthodox "Holy Russia", which can be considered as a specific cultural form of the Russian people, quoting V. Rozanov, in 1917 "faded in three days".
Actually, that is still a big question whether it was killed by the Bolsheviks, or they just finished off the cultural body, destructed in fact by Peter I. After all, he virtually destroyed the Byzantine Russian culture, and based on St. Petersburg the new center of civilization called Germanic Russian culture.
Spengler believed the latest to be metamorphosis, this question is extremely important, but controversial, and we will not discuss it now. But in any case it is obvious that since 1917 the Russian people finally ceased to be an Orthodox Christian nation (which is structurally, we are not talking about nominal affiliation to Orthodoxy of some part).
The collapse of communism opened up possibilities of self-determination for millions of Russian people. Goryachev and his associates prefer to believe in "Holy Russia" and mourn about the fate of "brothers Serbs" (who, incidentally, were one of the main reason for its collapse). But thousands of Russian already taken and continue to accept Islam. Including a growing number of former nationalists with a clear ethnic identity.
At the beginning of last century, they could be accused of treason of at that time still Orthodox Russian people. Today, after seventy years of communism and two decades of post-modern deconstruction to pretend that there is some sort of "Holy Russia", which they betrayed, is not more than just ridiculous. Today the Russian people - it is the same ethnographic material, which the Slavs are, and what cultural form it will take tomorrow and how they will be combined with each other - still a big question. Elements of the Orthodox culture to Russian ethnicity have today the same value as the elements of Soviet culture or the pagan pre-Christian and are the cultural heritage, but not a living culture.
In the dry residue today there is only Russian ethnicity which passed many transformations. Goryachev is sad that in the impending future it can dissappear "sink and dissolve the white race and the Russian people without a trace". But it is not the question to us, Russian Muslims, and generally not to Islam.
The European Christian culture itself (and Russian, as part of it) as a result of its own development ("involution" as defined it R. Guenon) has become a cosmopolitan civilization of the New Rome, inevitably involving multiculturalism. It drew and continues to involve the masses of mankind, including occupied Islamic world.
Let's be realistic - Goryachev and his right-minded people in the West, whom he advertises on his website are no longer struggling with any of this (anti-European and anti-Christian) civilization, nor with its two strike forces: capitalism and zionism. Incidentally, the famous "brothers" Karadzic and idol of Goryachev – Arkan were their great friends, and Goryachev himself does not hide his sympathy for the "Christ-loving Army of NATO”. Such a "right" ideologue ...
Obviously, that such "right" activists are standing on the Protection of New Rome, based on Zionism and the "Christ-host of NATO”. But not against multiculturalism, but against Islam.
The Western political establishment is continuously speaking that it is not against immigrants, but against Islam (the so-called "Islamic fundamentalism" or "Islamo-fascism") that prevents them to integrate into Western society and adopt its system of values.
And all the so-called "Right" who are admitted to politics (like “Russkiy Obraz” which is trying to be admitted), have been admitted there with the proviso that they would fight not against the cause of multiculturalism (capitalism and technocracy), and even with its consequence (immigration as such), but exactly against Islam. And Ilya is trying hard to do it in Russia with his "Russian Obraz ", projects “Ermolov Watch”, etc.
That is why I shall return the thesis to Goryachev. Yes, Islam has little prospect among such "right" activists, but genuine right activists who do not want to play the role assigned to Goryachev and Co., have perspectives in Islam. And a growing number have already realized that and will continue to realize that. And this fact so pisses out “right” subservient of the New Rome.
As for us, Russian Muslims, do we like or do not like demographic and cultural processes, but we are forced to live in the civilization - the Roman and Judeo-Christian. And in the chaos generated by its growing crisis. We are de facto preserve our ethnic identity on the basis of Islamic civilization, here and now creating the Islamic Russia.
Islamic Russia, inshaAllah, will preserve even inside “New Rome” in the framework of a certain association of Jamaats (as it is now), and certainly, in the form of the Caliphate in which the included white people fully preserved (from Bosnians to Bulgars) and, without doubt, will preserve those new that accept Islam in our days.
Does not matter if Goryachev and his followers like it or not: "They want to extinguish Allah's light with their mouths। But God will not tolerate this and complete the extension of His light, even if it is hateful to non-believers" (translated meaning of the Quran, Surah" Al-Taub, verse 32).
Harun Sidorov,
Chief of National Organisation of Russian Muslim's (NORM)
No comments:
Post a Comment