The reason and the dream

Unlike other languages, in Spanish the word "dream" designates the act of sleeping and also the imagination of events while sleeping.

Goya's famous caprice

is often interpreted in the second sense.

However, there is something that invalidates that version: the bats surround the sleeper's head and, above all, a bug is taking over his feather.

That is to say, when reason sleeps, the monsters take over the word.

Something like this happened initially as the invasion of Ukraine approached, although it was later suffocated by the general chorus of commiseration and condemnation, inevitable as images of the crime spread.

But, before the first missiles fell, there was an inexplicable reluctance to call things by their name, a propensity that later reached even Pope Francis.

“Ukraine is not popular”, a journalist friend confessed to me and, in fact, the collaborations announcing the invasion met with reluctance.

Let us hope that Putin keeps his word not to invade, such was the idea underlying so many apprehensions.

More information

Follow live the last hour of the war in Ukraine

But Putin invaded, and he did so in keeping with his previous declarations that Ukraine was Russia and that he was ready to end its independence at all costs.

Through Russia Today and other broadcasters on an international scale, he planted a series of

and threats designed to achieve remarkable efficiency: of course, he was not going to invade;

his purpose was to denazify Ukraine and stop NATO's aggressive expansion to Russia's borders.

Finally, the most shocking: Russia was willing to use nuclear weapons against anyone who opposed its reasonable purposes.

It was necessary to take him seriously, but it was one thing to analyze his lies and threats and another to accept them as a premise to justify passivity and the abandonment of Ukraine.

The objections, signed by Pedro Sánchez, to favor the country's future entry into the EU go in this direction.

If this attitude is consummated, it would open the door to Putin for a new offensive, this time directed against NATO in the Baltic countries.

Among us, the most used formula of anesthesia came from qualifying Ukraine as a Nazi country (Putin), almost always adopted indirectly, by warning that a resistance to Russia would be carried out by local Nazis, and, above all, returning the ball to the supporters.

These would become unconscious pro-Nazis for turning to help the Ukrainians, "white, blond and blue-eyed", while forgetting the Syrian tragedy (Jordi Évole).

An immediate reply is to warn that it is lawful to look back there, denounce the insufficiencies, but not to nullify the value of the aid to the Ukrainians.

Humanity today is Ukraine.

Furthermore, for decades, many of us citizens were far from closing our eyes to the oppression of Palestinians, Syrians, or people of color in the United States.

And in the face of Bush's invasion of Iraq.

The effectiveness of such disqualification has been remarkable, used by many "progressives" to justify passivity.

There seemed to be plenty of demand for alibis to take refuge in inaction.

A curious complement to the above was the symbiosis between Russia and Putin.

Before the 24th, there were those who attributed the military siege of Ukraine to fear of Putin.

The witness went on to humiliate Russia, even citing Dostoevsky.

Russia would be able to bear the suffering, and is therefore deserving that when the West wins it does not plan its destruction.

Total fallacy, because those who condemn the invasion, like the Ukrainians, are aware that the agent of destruction is called Vladimir Putin, not a Russian people suffering from the criminal oppression of a KGB state, although the majority supports the tyrant.

An unlikely defeat of Putin in the Ukraine would be the signal of the difficult and necessary liberation of Russia.

The great alibi was Putin's rejection of the undue expansion of NATO.

Here it is not only official progressivism, with Podemos at the forefront, that reproduced the view that NATO is Evil — “it is genocidal,” said an anonymous Podemite in a Russia Today happy with the group's attitude.

Was

the same day he livestreamed the massive troop transfer to Belarus for the Ukraine picnic.

Therefore, it was necessary to denounce everything that this conglomerate did against Putin as an instrument of imperialism.

Pablo Iglesias' programs in

script for the convictions of Ione Belarra, rested on that supposed primary truth.

Did NATO have to stop its expansion, which until now not only did not attack Russia, but tolerated Putin's aggression against Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine?

First, there was no written commitment to Gorbachev.

Second, the Russian interventions of the 1990s in the “near circle” (Abkhazia, Transnistria), then the ferocious recovery of Chechnya, more than justified the entry of Poland or the Baltic countries into NATO as a protective measure.

Yeltsin and Primakov, let alone Putin, were not Gorbachev.

Pablo Iglesias asserts that his trials are presided over by "objectivity" in the face of "propaganda" that characterizes others and, in particular, his declared enemies, an expression of the sewers.

The former vice president thus provided the means to disavow Sánchez's policy.

His mindset was that of the Soviet campaigns for peace, since 1950: whatever it does, the West embodies war.

Putin wields the nuclear threat: he does not condemn, but retransmits the warning.

A final trait of such objectors was the preference to disqualify from the outset those who put Putin in relationship with Hitler.

They were irritated by the comparison, the work of Hillary Clinton.

And it is not that Putin is strictly a Nazi or a fascist, although his logic of language inversion, by insisting on the genocidal Ukraine, fully coincides with the

of Auschwitz, seasoned with mafia touches (the "I'll fuck you, beautiful, like it or not”, addressed to Ukraine).

Putin stands at the convergence between the great master, Stalin, and the currents of Slavophile nationalism that, since the 19th century, start from Karamzin and Danilevski to crudely reach the service ideologue, Alexander Dugin, with his Holy Russia, his Eurasia and the false anti-USA multipolarism.

Hitler is there as an antecedent of a warmongering irredentism, supported by the nostalgia of the lost empire (Reich or tsarist/USSR), and also as a pattern of a mode of action to advance a new step towards the great Russia, added with Ukraine and Belarus. , and surrounded by vassals in their fight against Europe.

Lukashenko, as esteemed as Putin by our communists, explained it clearly in Russia Today.

There we are, on the verge of a tragedy soon consummated.

The conformist turn, moved by a short-term capitalist vision, now changes face and calls itself "neorealism."

It assumes the criticism of the "warlike" expansionist NATO that irritated Putin —citing Georgia and Ukraine, which never joined—, as well as the alternative to the "unipolarism" of the United States from the "multipolarism" of the Beijing declaration —in fact, a Russia-China

US (West) bipolarism—, as the basis of a new balance.

Putin's overly visible expansionism, outside of analysis, nor Taiwan, and Europe could act as a mediator or arbitrator between "the two superpowers" count for nothing.

The reason here truly dreams.

Antonio Elorza

is a professor of Political Science.

Exclusive content for subscribers

read without limits

subscribe

I'm already a subscriber