The Poison of Sovietism

Protodeacon Herman Ivanov-Trinadtsaty | October 17, 2026

 

 

Yes, alas, we must constantly resort to yet another “revaccination”—if one may put it that way—against this most terrible disease.

What am I talking about?

The same thing as always: Russia is not the USSR, and the Russian Federation is not Russia. Even though, most happily, the Russian Federation is undoubtedly no longer the USSR, the fact that the Russian Federation is not Russia became clear very quickly, as soon as the hated Soviet regime “fell.” This was particularly evident during the famous days of August 1991, when the Russian flag and the red rag flew simultaneously over the roofs of the Kremlin, while the last General Secretary continued for a time to cling helplessly to his seat of power.

Very soon, only the Russian tricolor remained. And indeed, it became easier to breathe. But what was really concealed beneath that Russian tricolor, under which our grandfathers had fought and died?

Alas, this flag had absorbed all the achievements of the “Great October Revolution,” as it was called at the time. Our hopes, cherished for so many years, for the restoration of the true Russia were not fulfilled, and this became evident very quickly.

Yes, some felt nostalgia for the Russia of the past. This was characteristic of those who looked upon the White Emigration with adoring eyes, but this enthusiasm quickly faded. Alongside them were those who looked with even greater affection and hope toward America and its famous but vulgar way of life. These people emigrated abroad in successive waves, where they now constitute the “Russian emigration,” which has little in common with our own.

We shall not even speak of those who reminisce about the “good old Soviet days” and hope for their return, although such people are by no means few, and their numbers are growing with each passing day. One simply does not know what to think of them or what to say. It is beyond all imagination.

No, let us speak here of those who are unfamiliar with the epistles of the Holy Apostle Paul, who asked: “And what communion hath light with darkness?” — and who dream of uniting the irreconcilable, things that are fundamentally impossible to unite.

These are the people who took the first commendable step toward the truth, but then, frightened by their own boldness, immediately began mixing truth with falsehood. These are the people who stubbornly keep repeating that the USSR is the very same Russia, its natural continuation. “After all, this is our common history,” they say. One must be spiritually ill to assert such absurdity! One might ask: what does Russia have in common with anti-Russia, which even erased the very glorious and cherished name of Russia, replacing it with a monstrous four-letter acronym?! The Russian people disappeared—they were replaced by the Soviet people. Those who seized power in Russia themselves proudly declared: Russia is not the USSR. And they were absolutely right. How, then, can anyone today speak of Russia and anti-Russia as a single whole?

And yet, what do we observe today with sorrow?

In official symbolism, particularly military symbolism, this is immediately apparent. Take an officer’s peaked cap: on its upper part there is a more or less stylized double-headed eagle, and below it a cockade bearing a five-pointed star. True, the star is not red but golden, yet it is still a star—intended to demonstrate continuity and kinship! As the saying goes, whence it all began…

At today’s parades, one can see soldiers marching in step, some carrying the Red Banner, others the St. Andrew’s Flag. The “Defender of the Fatherland Day” is also solemnly celebrated on February 23. Defending one’s homeland, one’s fatherland, is a most noble undertaking, and it could serve as the impetus for a new life that has broken with the Soviet-Bolshevik past.

But the question arises: why was February 23 specifically chosen?

It turns out that this is the date on which the anniversary of the founding of the Red Army, created by Trotsky in his day, was formerly celebrated! Therein lies the rub! This is how a noble undertaking is transformed into something indescribably vulgar. This is the source of the continuity in the understanding of the defense of the Fatherland among those who wield power in the Russian Federation.

To combine, to merge into a single whole, the defense of the homeland and the celebration of that which made it possible to establish the bloodthirsty Bolshevik regime, which drowned tens of millions of its own children in blood! One could cite such repulsive absurdities endlessly, and they all come down to a single concept—the reconciliation of the Reds and the Whites. To this end, in 1994, a grotesque “Day of Accord and Reconciliation” was even proclaimed, which, strangely enough, was celebrated on November 7…

All these attempts are nothing other than a slap in the face of Russia. For true members of the Russian Church Abroad, the so-called reunification of the breakaway part of ROCOR with the Moscow Patriarchate was, and remains, just such a slap in the face.

So what plunged us into these gloomy reflections and prompted us to write this article?

For some time now, we have been receiving links from a certain Vladimir Nikolaev, unknown to us, containing his impressions of a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. His account is interesting and profound; it is clear that he is a man of convictions, kindred to us in spirit. Vladimir Nikolaev publishes his Pilgrim’s Diary on the popular website Russian People’s Line, widely known by its English name, Ruskline.ru. This portal proudly displays as its most noble motto: “Orthodoxy. Autocracy. Nationality,” adhering to Orthodox-patriotic and conservative views. Among its contributors are such authors as Archpriest Alexander Shargunov, Vladimir Nikolaevich Krupin, who did so much as editor-in-chief of the journal Moscow and other publications during the fateful 1990s, and others.

But let us return to Vladimir Nikolaev. In the fifth part of his Diary, entitled “Jerusalem Notes,” we find confirmation of our suspicions and of the reproaches we directed at those who, in the early 2000s, were preparing to betray the Russian Church Abroad. We also learn of a fact that has shocked us.

We remember well how, in the old days, every kopeck was carefully saved on the Mount of Olives and throughout the properties of the Church Abroad—unlike today! According to Vladimir Nikolaev, extensive restoration work is being carried out on the Mount of Olives, something that in the past could only have been dreamed of. Money, it seems, is now pouring in (from an obvious source), for in August 2027, solemn receptions are to be held for distinguished guests from Moscow and the Church Abroad on the occasion of the forthcoming 180th anniversary of the founding of the Russian Ecclesiastical Mission in Jerusalem. But, as everyone knows, nothing comes free. Money is money, and that is not even the most important thing. What is important and inevitable is that whoever pays is the master—or, as the saying goes, he who pays the piper calls the tune. And here we come to the shocking fact mentioned above.

From September 18 to 20 of this year, elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation were held. And here we learn from Vladimir Nikolaev’s account that, in connection with the elections, the recently appointed Abbess Judith announced that … “an electoral commission from the Russian Embassy in the State of Israel will be operating at the monastery for the elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation. The nuns and pilgrims of the monastery who are citizens of the Russian Federation have been instructed to come to the abbess’s quarters with their international passports in order to cast their votes”!

This is what one might call the symphony of Church and State in all its glory! One might ask: could this event not have been held in the embassy building? Is that not, among other things, what an embassy is for? How far our former brethren of ROCOR-MP have fallen! One can easily imagine what the nuns of the old school who had labored in asceticism in this holy monastery must have thought and felt. And just think—could such an outrage have taken place during the abbacy of Mother Juliana, our heroine and confessor revered throughout the Russian Church Abroad, who was expelled from the Holy Land for her steadfastness in the truth through the machinations of the notorious Metropolitan Mark Arndt … At the time, we were told that we were making unfounded accusations of evil intentions, that there would be no change in the Church’s course. Only the joy of “reunification” was to be expected. Let everyone judge for themselves.

But there is more to come, and this (and only this) upset our pilgrim Nikolaev, and rightly so. Here is how he describes coming to vote with his international passport: “When my turn came, I received a ballot paper, went into the private room (one of the rooms in the abbess’s quarters), placed the ballot on the table, looked at all the political parties, headed by United Russia, and … drew a large cross across the entire ballot, crossing it out completely. On the eve of the elections, our president had called upon us to come and fulfill our civic duty. Well, I fulfilled mine, and abroad at that—not one of these parties, headed by United Russia, has my confidence!”

Such was his response to the president’s appeal, and Nikolaev, as was his established custom, sent his account to the Russian People’s Line. But here he encountered an unpleasant surprise, which quite rightly infuriated him.

“Editor Mikhailova threw out an entire paragraph about the elections from my notes, falsifying its contents,” writes Nikolaev with understandable indignation. Let us therefore reproduce the text published by Ruskline.ru, then compare it with the original, and we shall see that the matter goes beyond merely omitting a paragraph: “When my turn came, I filled out an application, and the members of the electoral commission recorded the details of my international passport. I received a ballot paper from them and went to fill it out in secret in a separate room in the abbess’s quarters. For the first time in my life, I voted abroad. I had indeed fulfilled my conscientious, yes, precisely conscientious, civic duty! Just as President Putin had urged us to do the day before! And glory be to God! Amen.”

Judging by this fraudulent example, Ruskline.ru could add “Lack of Principles” to its motto, “Orthodoxy. Autocracy. Nationality,” since the text was not merely shortened or slightly edited, as is within the rights of any editorial board, but completely distorted. And not merely distorted, but deliberately distorted beyond recognition.

How are we to understand such a glaring contradiction: on the one hand, proclaiming a certain truth, and on the other, resorting to falsehood or professing what are essentially inhuman values? This is precisely the poison of Sovietism that we denounce. Let us explain this concretely, using a real-life example.

Anatoly Dmitrievich Stepanov is the editor-in-chief of Russian People’s Line, a historian, chairman of the Russian Assembly, and a member of the Writers’ Union of Russia. An undoubtedly commendable man, but … There is a significant “but.”

Let us quote a few gems from Stepanov, particularly when he openly presents himself as an Orthodox Christian: “It is time to stop dreaming about demolishing Lenin’s Mausoleum (with a capital letter! — G.I.-T.). It is time to stop demonizing the name of Joseph Stalin, who is revered in these countries. In general, it is time to put an end to Orthodox anti-Sovietism, which is already becoming an act of sabotage against Russia.” Astonishing, is it not, coming from the editor of an almost monarchist, right-wing portal?

Here Stepanov was speaking out against a broadcast on Radio Radonezh, accusing the station of wanting to “become a foreign agent.” In another article, bearing the unambiguous title “Anti-Stalinists Are Enemies of the Church,” he writes explicitly about “a certain portion of Orthodox priests and Orthodox publicists. Most of them, I hope, became anti-Stalinists because of their poor knowledge of history and inability to think independently.” One hardly knows whether to laugh or cry. Thank God, Stepanov intends to devote himself actively to reeducating them …

In yet another article, he touches upon a subject close to our hearts. As we recall, in June of this year, a “Statement of the Synod of Bishops Concerning the Return of Twentieth-Century Ideological Approaches in Russia” was published, to which we devoted an article entitled “Have They Come to Their Senses? No—They Have Acted Deceitfully.” Stepanov, utterly bewildered, likewise launched into a scathing article entitled “The ROCOR Synod Makes the Same Mistake Again,” in which, far from rejoicing at the apparent awakening of his brethren in the Church Abroad, he expresses bewilderment and harshly criticizes them for daring to oppose the course pursued by the authorities. The poverty of his arguments makes it hardly worthwhile to spend any more time analyzing his article. Thus, the Synod’s Statement, outwardly courageous but in reality deceitful, came under criticism from two sides, albeit for opposite reasons. Let us merely note that, since then, all has been quiet among the pseudo-members of the Church Abroad. The criticisms that briefly surfaced immediately died down.

The example of Stepanov says it all. A veritable watermelon: green on the outside (or, for our purposes, let us say white), but red on the inside. On the one hand, Stepanov is the editor-in-chief of a website regarded by many as the best White Russian website in present-day Russia, while at the same time he is an ardent Stalinist and an opponent of removing Lenin from the Mausoleum. Stepanov is by no means unique. A great many such Stepanovs, combining good and evil, mixing red and white, can be found among people who, at first glance, appear respectable.

Is it conceivable to reconcile such diametrically opposed approaches and convictions? This is precisely that most pernicious poison of Sovietism that seeps into the minds and consciences of seemingly the finest people, and which we seek to expose. This is the terrible inner division of the ordinary post-Soviet citizen, who has fallen victim to the Bolshevik experiment of creating a new man—Homo Sovieticus—and a new Soviet society, the fruits of which we continue to reap despite all the supposed “collapses” of the Soviet Union.

But God is merciful: a few individuals have survived unscathed, and everyone has the opportunity to free himself from the inner leaven of Sovietism. This is possible only through a complete rejection of everything Soviet and all its tares, and the categorical repudiation of any attempts to build bridges between Russia, Russianness, and Sovietism. Only in this way can one be cured of this spiritual malady, which afflicts so many minds and consciences. For “And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?”

 

Russian source: https://karlovtchanin.eu/index.php/belaiaideia/1243-yad-sovetchiny-protodiakon-german-ivanov-trinadtsatyj