© AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty/TASS

In my personal opinion, the life of a person who is trying to rationally comprehend reality beyond his/her position is simply unbearable, in evaluative and ethical terms. As our democratic poet Nikolay Nekrasov wrote: " I took the book awoke from sleep, // And read the following in it: // «This world had seen much worse epochs, // But this time saw the meanest one»".

Earlier, in the worst of times, soldiers ran amok, and diplomats spoke about things nobly, without any punchfests. They determined the fate of the world, or rather, the fate of the world’s most powerful. Today, a pilot dropping some kind of bomb on an enemy can hardly be called outrageous. He is only discharging his military duty. Life has changed, and in Western civilization, outrages and backstabbing are now entrusted to diplomats who carry out violence against hostile personalities under the guise of diplomacy, soft power, civil diplomacy, and development of civil society institutions.

Let's make a reservation right away that we are in no way seeking to demonize American diplomats or make a travesty of them. These are honest hard workers, bureaucrats and surely patriots of their country, who fulfill their professional duty by implementing policies developed by politicians. The present-day line of action (relatively speaking) is to demolish Russia. This necessity is a separate topic to discuss. The military, economists, strategic propagandists or information warfare experts cannot destroy our state or make us surrender, as opposed to "soft power enforcers" or "sports, folk, cultural, historical, children's, etc. diplomats". This has been repeatedly recorded during the most deplorable moments of our recent history.

We will not stress out the reader with theory. Let's say right away that one of the most effective strategies for achieving victory of the West in "Cold War 2.0" (the one in full swing) is a system of various measures coordinated in time and goal, in order to ensure "a steady load on Russia’s existing regime". The presence and scope of the "load" is most clearly manifested in the fact that Russian politicians, including top officials, get constantly exposed to some irrational, often simply unmotivated campaigns like the Pussy Riot punk prayer or the Skripal poisoning case, which featured Vil Mirzoyanov, the head of the "Free Tatarstan" government in exile, as the key expert. Today, the Russian President is often accused of oppressing the LGBT, with natty and jeasely singer Dolly Bellefleur (actually a Dutch lady boy) having even presented a stupid song about this. Add to this the doping scandals, accusations of simulating a nuclear attack on Stockholm by our planes, bunches of personal and sectoral sanctions, etc. According to our estimates, every day witnesses the foreign information space hype 5 to 15 alternative reasons of the kind, marking pressure on the regime.

With the beginning of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine, American diplomats supplemented the "people's" line with a loud cry to the Kiev moon. The Moscow-based embassy website started posting texts as if from the most inadequate and untethered Telegram channels. Here's a sample: "According to eyewitnesses, Russian servicemen tortured and killed people suspected of helping the Ukrainian military. Despite the danger, the locals are determined to continue living their lives. One of the Izyum residents called the liberation of the city by Ukraine music to his ears." Or this one: "Children are separated from their parents and forcibly taken to Russia for adoption as part of Russian filtration operations. Some residents could not leave their homes even to arrange funerals of their deceased family members."

But "people's diplomacy" or "soft power" is not laughing gas or mindbender: it doesn’t make everyone rush to protect our civil society. People's diplomacy is created by the hands and languages of relevant subjects. These exalted subjects used to be objects of manipulation or brainwashing by other subjects of a higher systemic level, most often American diplomats. The State Department system does actually work. Substantial money is allocated for its functioning to encourage specific people to become civil right defenders and tear off masks from the authoritarian Kremlin regime’s attack dogs. The main thing here is actually to carry out primary communication with the potential democracy knights. And this certainly causes issues with diplomats. They are closely watched.

But one can also adapt. For example, by organizing an altruistic program like the Ambassadors Fund for Cultural Preservation. Seven projects have been implemented in Russia within this kind of framework. It's a drop in the bucket, but still. The projects are different: odious ones like "Preservation of the former Perm GULAG", and good-for-nothing ones like "Preservation and training in traditional crafts of the indigenous people of the Mansis". The latter are a small people accounting for a mere 10 thousand and being brothers of the Hungarians. Let's be honest, they are not preoccupied with crafts and live a modern life. Yes, to please ethnographers they do decorate their traditional clothes with stylized deer horn ornaments. Why don't we invent a similar thing for the American Aleuts? Well okay. And here is a project with good PR potential: "Restoration of the three Raphael school frescoes at the State Hermitage Museum". In all these cases, there is a perfectly legitimate reason to take a bundle of dollars, a ticket to a little out-of-the-world place and quietly negotiate with regional and local authorities, the neighboring excited intelligentsia with fiery eyes, cunning entrepreneurs seeking to restore the camp towers, etc. And don’t forget to scrutinize real life, study and attract people to your side, and probe their sentiments. This is what forms the basis of the work. And I personally accept this understandingly. But we still have our own interests and our own problems regarding national security.

Let's establish that all the people's diplomats (from crazy girls to academicians) have a common feature of intellectual deviousness, a perverted norm of self-consciousness. These “propaganda”-affected people have begun to feel part of two societies at once, embracing dual moral and ethical citizenship. This is where they fell into an existential trap, since it is said: "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." (Matthew 6:24). So, why the hell do we need this thorn in our foot at all?