Is Russia the Better Brand?

By Robert Bridge

In the 1979 film, The Jerk, Steve Martin plays Navin R. Johnson, an imbecile white guy who does not know that he is an adopted son of a poor, black Mississippi family. On his 18th birthday, his mother decides to break the shocking news to him.

Mother: Navin, it’s your birthday, and it’s time you knew. You’re not our natural-born child.

Navin: You mean I’m going to stay this color?

Mother: I’d love you if you were the color of a babboon’s ass.

If only life were so simple, and people naturally accepted each other despite their superficial differences. After all, even members of the same race have remarkable distinctions that set each one of us apart as unique individuals.

Russia – unlike the United States, which was built upon the elusive “American Dream, ” an idea that continues to attract millions of immigrants to our shores every year – is strikingly uniform in composition, and this probably best distinguishes the main cultural differences between America and Russia.

The United States is diverse and multicultural; while Russia is much more homogenous as a people (Russians who argue this point have probably never visited the Big Apple or London). There are tremendous advantages and disadvantages to both types of societies. As for American-style multiculturalism, it is fascinating to experience such wild diversity, especially in the larger urban areas. But America has many miles to travel before it becomes a bona fide “melting pot” (the country could best be described as a cold tossed salad, with a mix of strange ingredients). At the same time, it is difficult to imagine how such a diverse society – with its myriad differences of historical pasts, memories, religions, customs, even languages – can continue to thrive as a single, dynamic entity. After all, the United States of America is the first massive experiment in multiculturalism, at least since the biblical account of the Tower of Babel (a brazen architectural effort to breach the heavens, it failed due to a ‘confusion of tongue’).

While a nation of extreme cultural diversity encourages the influx of talent from around the globe, problems naturally arise when these diverse peoples must assemble and address national issues. Today, American businesses are able to flaunt foreign labor – both at home and abroad – at the same time that America’s deplorable public school system fails to provide a decent level of education. So the next generation, like the present generation, will fail to beat out foreign competition in the battle for future jobs. This is a huge issue that continues to be ignored, basically because it is the media and politicians, as opposed to the people, who determine the “big issues.” It is far cheaper to import workers, or outsource them, than invest extra money into your own society. In short, America opted to invest in high-security prisons, when it should have been banking on schools. On this point, Russia must be applauded, since it provides the highest possible level of education to all of its citizens. And an educated populace is the first vital step to any legitimate democracy. After all, the “power of the people” will be nothing more than an empty slogan if the people are intellectually incapable – or simply too diverse – to forward intelligent decisions.

This leads to the question: who is an American? Today, a person born in Pakistan, India or Israel, for example, can tomorrow just as easily be the proud holder of a US passport. This is not necessarily a problem, but every glass has its limit. Red wine is great until it starts spilling over the lip of glass and all over your carpet.

But what is the super glue that binds all of these diverse peoples together? Is there a common silver thread, besides purely economic considerations, that keeps this marvellous cultural quit from unravelling?

America is no longer a nation that is held together by heroic ideas or deeds; it is a disparate group of increasingly cultural strangers held together by a series of big bland corporate events.

To be American increasingly means to be a consumer; a shopper of everything from entertainment to French fries. And our original idea of “rugged individualism, ” which forged our nation’s resourceful character from the start, is no longer remotely recognizable amongst the maze of fast food outlets, strip malls, and sport complexes. How we inherited this sad state of affairs is another story, but I believe it has everything to do with the global franchise and the global consumer. In short, everything is on fire sale to the highest bidder, even our sacred identity as a nation.

And then there is Russia. Personally, I must applaud this country for demonstrating to the world that national and cultural values can take precedence over ephemeral designer labels and the latest soda pop. Though all the tumultuous change and flux associated with globalization and the hyper 24/7 economy, Russia – and a handful of other nations – has proven that cultural identity does not need to be sold out for a nation to succeed. (Abridged)

From Moscow News, 2008, № 28