By Soumya Ghosh
Knowledge in the form of an informational commodity indispensable to productive power is already and will continue to be a major – perhaps the major-stake in the worldwide competition for power - wrote the French Marxist philosopher Jean-François Lyotard in his book, The Postmodern Condition.
In his book, Lyotard asserts that the metanarratives interlaced with modernism had been succeeded by an atomisation and fragmentation of ideological narratives in a postmodern society precipitated by the technological progress, particularly in the realms of mass media. This effectively rendered the absolutism of metanarratives extraneous and obsolete in this postmodern epoch.
Lyotard further contends, that it is the duty of a veritable communicator to, in essence, transcend the existing status quo and design works that are inexpressible and transmutable, and by virtue of this indefinable to their target audience. The supposition over here is that the communicator must manoeuvre from outside the apparatus he or she is seeking to influence. By contravening the existing metanarratives through defamiliarization and subterfuge, the influencer now emanates an aura of control.
‘Political Technologist’ of all of Russia
Enter: Vladislav Surkov. Surkov, the former Deputy Prime Minister of Russia and now a personal advisor to Vladimir Putin was single-handedly instrumental in defining the political panorama of Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. A graduate of Theatre at the Moscow Institute of Culture, Surkov exported avant-garde ideas from the world of theatre and injected it into the heart of Russian politics. This seemingly incompatible and oppugnant set of ideas formed a unique synthesis which all but strengthened Putins grip on power.
Surkov successfully mastered the art of political technology. Operating out of the offices of the Kremlin, Surkov coopted and funded political ideologies of all types, from Nazi skinheads and Russian ultranationalists to human rights activists and Communists. Surkovs primary objective was to develop a hollow simulacrum blurring the lines between reality and fiction. By funding contradicting political groups, Surkov successfully enabled his grip on public discourse.
Unlike Soviet authoritarianism, where the State has absolute control of the political landscape or lack thereof, Surkovs control of public discourse is far more subtle and seraphic. By disseminating self-contradictory and abstruse messaging and controlling the political opponents by proxy, the target audience is subliminally manipulated. This peculiar amalgamation of political repression and postmodernism has given birth to a stratagem which is unassailable because it is indescribable.
The theatre of political absurdity
A theatrical display of politics where the fringes of the political spectrum fight it out as proponents of Putinism promulgate a message of ideological stability. Surkov, furthermore, coined terms like sovereign democracy or suverennaya demokratiya to explain the sui generis nature of Russian democracy. In sheer Orwellian doublespeak, Surkov pointed out that due to the incessant criticism of Russian democratic institutions through public demonstrations and online protests by Russian citizens, democracy is alive and well in Russia, as unlike in totalitarian states like North Korea or the erstwhile Soviet Union, where public gatherings and demonstrations against the ruling class were strictly forbidden.
In Ukraine, Russia deployed a strategy which Surkov referred to as non-linear warfare. Camouflaging its military involvement in Eastern Ukraine, Russia unlike in the conventional wars of the preceding centuries implemented non-military and military tools to disrupt the hitherto power-structure in Ukraine. This resulted in a fragmentation of the Eastern Ukrainian Oblasts and the pro-Russian forces exploiting the existing political sensitivities of the area, soon took control of it.
This pioneering strategy of modern warfare is revolutionary in a number of ways. Conventional warfare is fought by deploying sequential military tactics, whereas a non-linear war is a hybrid mixture of nonsequential tactics deployed by regular and irregular forces along with techniques like economic coercion, psychological manipulation, and political sabotage.
A cognoscente of rap music, modern art, and the Beatnik movement, Surkov has also allegedly authored novels under the pseudonym Nathan Dubovitsky. This eclectic and enigmatic individual referred to as the Grey Cardinal of Russian politics of whose private life is little known has beyond a shadow of a doubt extended the political perpetuity of Vladimir Putin by designing an absurd theatre of politicswhich he controls and obfuscated Russian involvement in Eastern Ukraine.
The rise of the reclusive ideologue
Thousands of miles away from the Kremlin, shaping the political ideology of the Communist Party of China in Beijing, is another Grey Cardinal named Wang Huning. Operating behind the shadows of power, Wanga former university professor turned party-ideologueis key to understand the power dynamics of modern-day China. Unlike the incessant shapeshifting deployed by Surkov, Wang is resolute and inflexible in his political convictions. A proponent of neo-authoritarianism, Wang believes a strong State is imperative in order to implement wide-ranging economic reforms.
In Wangs opinion, a strong State would provide political stabilitya necessary facet for economic growth and development, whereas concepts like democracy can take a back seat as it would invariably impede the proposed economic reforms. Quite tellingly, Xi Jinping, the President of the Peoples Republic of China recently had his term-limits removed, making him the de facto President-for-life. Wang, now a member of the powerful Politburo Standing Committee has theorised and penned the cornerstone ideologies of three succeeding Chinese administrations.
Born in the coastal province of Shandong in Eastern China, famous for being the birthplace of Confucius, Wang, an incredibly gifted student, completed his studies at the prestigious Fudan University and later became a University professor there. Navigating from the world of academia to politics, Wang initially formulated the socio-political theory ‘Three represents’ of the Jiang Zemin administration in the late 1990s.
In Xi, Wang finds an ideological bedfellow and helped design several of his slogans and ideologies, the standout being the Chinese Dream. The recurrent theme of the Xi Jinping thought, which Wang helped to compose, is the fixation on governing China with a tight fist and rule of law, mirroring the ideological desires of Wang in extending the Chinese States grip on power.
A Bodinesque sovereign State
To properly dissect the ideological tropes of Wang, one must understand the doctrine of Westphalian sovereignty. The doctrine of Westphalian sovereignty essentially states that each nation, irrespective of its size has the right to govern its people without any external intervention or internal subversion. The underlying theme of this sovereign state was a powerful central figure (the sovereign) whose authority was absolute, corresponding to the theory proposed by the French philosopher Jean Bodin in his treatise, the Six Books of the Republic (Les Six Livres de la République).
According to Wang, incidents like the violent protests at Tiananmen Square in 1989 were by-products of Western interventionism in the domestic politics of China and the tribalistic instincts of individuals misguided by foreign propaganda. Thus, it was quintessential and indeed imperative for the state to reestablish its dominance by quashing the protests.
Much like Surkov, little is known about Wangs private life. A recluse, Wang rarely interacts with the State-controlled media. As a deeply ingrained ideologue etched in the landscape of the Communist Party of China, Wang will unquestionably play a pivotal role in shaping the future dictums and policies of Chinas new President-for-life Xi Jinping.
The diminishing democracies
In conclusion, although Vladislav Surkov and Wang Huning enjoy comparable power in their respective nations, their methodologies in preserving the power-structures couldnt have been more startlingly different. Surkov, the political technologist, implements Lyotardian approaches to counter the prevalent metanarratives and formulates a fragmentation of political discourse by controlling all the opposing political narratives. A classical act of internal subversion while consciously using the façade of sovereign democracy to vindicate any allegations to the contrary. An empiricist at heart, Surkov is the antithesis of an ideologue with oscillating political convictions.
On the other hand, Wang is a staunch proponent of neo-authoritarianism with the metanarrative of positive Statism. Even the notion of a façade democracy by virtue of utilising internal subversion is heretical. Wang not only wants the Chinese Communist Partys dictums to be the exclusive narrative but also uses the wide State machinery to arrest and arbitrarily detain political dissidents and detractors advocating anything else, thus, fulfilling the Bodinesque version of a sovereign state.
As the winds of populism engulf much of the Western world, the liberal concepts of a more transparent and accountable government dissipate in the dust of authoritarianism. The Grey Cardinals of the modern era, often unelected, operate behind murky power structures not to promote the well-being of the ordinary citizens-at-large but rather solidify their leaders stranglehold on power. A sad testament in a rapidly evolving world where the noble concept of democracy is either debauched or disparaged.