“Prodotta e Imbottigliata in Russia” – Folha de S. Paulo, July 1, 1973
by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira
In the latest article, I raised a question: how could the psycho-political barrier of horror at communism have been so weakened in the West that the free world now tolerates the Soviet-American rapprochement, which five or ten years ago would have stirred even the stones in the street to indignation?
In other words, at the very moment when Russia, undermined by the incurable distortions of its collectivist economy, prostrates itself before Western capitalism, begging for gold, wheat, know-how, and technicians, the capitalists save the communist regime from ruin by forming an idyllic alliance with the Kremlin and granting it everything it asks for. And huge crowds accept this aberration with indifference.
At first glance, the current lack of interest in ideological issues among Western opinion leads to indifference toward the capitalism-communism controversy and apathy. In reality, this explanation is insufficient.
What does “ideological disinterest” mean? It means indifference between truth and error, and between good and evil. It is the cynical deification of mere material values. This raises another question: how did such indifference arise in public opinion that, not too long ago, was excited by the gigantic doctrinal clash between religion and atheism, private property and collectivism, and private initiative and dirigisme?
This question is all the more pressing because it raises another, even more acute one: given that communism is the only beneficiary of the West’s cynical ideological indifference, to what extent are its mentors responsible for that indifference?
This whole issue is shrouded in fog. Let us examine other aspects.
The West’s salvation of communism is absurd even to non-ideological people, regardless of their economic status.
Indeed, the survival of the communist regime in Russia is deeply harmful to the rich and well-off, whose situation is continually shaken by red propaganda. It is also harmful to the poor, who, once communists take over the West, will experience firsthand the charms of the “Marxist paradise”: shortages of everything, queues, police repression, etc., as in Cuba and Chile.
How, then, can we explain that non-ideological people at all levels view with sympathy the restoration of the forces of the red dragon, which threatens to devour them all?
* * *
Western man does not lack intelligence, culture, or erudition. How can we explain his lack of vision?
In the sphere of private life, we often see similar aberrations in the behavior of people of undeniable intellectual resources.
For example, some patients are advised to follow a specific regimen if they do not want to die. Some, bowing to the facts, foresee the catastrophe their situation may lead to and accept the sacrifices necessary to avoid it. Others, on the contrary, are inconsistent and short-sighted. They accept the verdict of science as certain yet hope that “by some fluke” what the doctor has predicted will not happen to them. They feel the symptoms of the growing disease but do not want to interpret them properly. And so they sink into death.
The former are temperate. They know how to control their appetites and impulses. The latter, in their own way, are addicted. An addict’s behavior in the face of catastrophe is always marked by illogicality and improvidence.
In recent decades, the habit of living in the delights of consumer society has become increasingly addictive. But to enjoy these delights to the fullest, it is essential to be carefree.
Since the communist bogeyman causes concern, the bourgeoisie adopts the attitude characteristic of all addicts. They don’t think but keep waiting for some “stroke of luck” to free them from imminent danger, and they close their eyes to the symptoms of the advancing evil.
As a result, communist propaganda faces no major obstacles as long as it is carried out without excessive fanfare.
The leaders of international communism have understood this perfectly. Today, they smile, appear poor, and, to a certain extent, harmless. They speak only of disarmament and peace treaties. In the past, they exported hirsute demagogues and bomb-wielding rioters worldwide. Now they send ballets, circuses, and technical exhibitions.
So, as the vice “de-ideologizes” the hedonist West, it keeps gaining ground.
* * *
In a recent issue of Milan’s Epoca magazine, José Carlos Castilho de Andrade, an excellent friend for all times and a brilliant TFP director, showed me an example of how communist propaganda works on consumers of the Western establishment. It is a full-page advertisement for “Moskovskaya” vodka, “prodotta e imbottigliata in Russia” (produced and bottled in Russia).
A large photograph shows the Winter Palace of the Tsars, guarded by troops. A caption reads: “Armed revolutionary soldiers and sailors stand guard in an armored car in front of the recently captured Winter Palace.”
This is followed by the comment: “No bread, no milk, no meat, but never without rifles and vodka. Closely linked to its brightest and darkest days, and particularly to its hardest battles for survival, vodka represents more than just a drink for the Russian people.” It is a discreet way of remembering that vodka-fueled drunkenness contributed to the outbreak of the revolution that drenched the vast Russian soil with blood. And that, according to its manufacturers, this drink’s main connotation today is its revolutionary and bloodthirsty meaning.
The ad continues: “Vodka has become a symbol of the Russian people’s love for the land they plow and the grain they sow, as well as for the rifle they wield and the bullets they fire when necessary. In those days in Petersburg, it was necessary.”
A consistent and far-sighted non-communist consumer typically refuses to buy a drink to which this ad attaches such sinister symbolic value. But a non-communist addicted to consuming whatever pleases him is quite different. If “Moskovskaya” is within his budget and appeals to his taste buds, he buys and drinks it voluptuously.
If someone criticizes him for his inconsistency, he will say cheerfully that he has no ideological prejudices. If they show him that he is feeding subversive propaganda by buying the drink, he will say the communist threat will only materialize in the long term and that some unforeseen event may ultimately prevent the worst. Or he will say nothing and drink another glass. If someone insists, he will call them intolerant, inquisitorial, medievalist, etc., and drink another glass. He will talk about the good sides of communism and the need to help the poor.
If someone shows him that communism leads the poor to abject misery, he will tell the objector to go plant potatoes. He will drink another glass.
In the end, he will still consider himself modern, understanding, and lucid.
* * *
It should be noted that the ad does not claim that implementing communism in Italy today is necessary. It merely recalls an event that occurred in Russia fifty years ago.
This vodka episode is just one example of veiled communist propaganda about the little pleasures of everyday life, carefully calibrated to avoid being overly aggressive and thus to prevent the bourgeoisie from waking from their apathy and addiction to the thousand innocent and not-so-innocent delights of consumer society. And so, skillfully exploited, addiction to delights gradually weakens the barrier of horror to communism while the West vegetates in abundance.
* * *
How can the situation be resolved? By opening the eyes of the “addicts” to the catastrophe their addiction is dragging them toward.
This is what I have tried to do in this article, within the limits of my ability.
