One of the last interlocutors of Maxim "Tesak": "for governments we are not people, but pawns"

March 16 marks six months since an important and symbolic event for the Russian ultra-right environment - the mysterious death of Maxim "Tesak" Martsinkevich, a neo-Nazi blogger, "pedophile hunter" and showman, one of the most famous Russian ultra-rightists of the last 2 decades. We wrote about this in our introductory material on the Kremlin's repressions against the Russian right-wing. This event was covered in sufficient detail by many resources, including the liberal Meduza and BAZA, popular in the Russian opposition. The latter even published an "investigation" about Tesak, his life and media path and (allegedly?) murders he committed in his youth - which, however, raises many questions - both from the point of view of verification of the stated "facts" and from the point of view of general bias of the author (who actually does not hide his “antifa” views and gloating over torture, castration and (suicide?) murder of the “Nazi” in a Russian prison). We will not assess the theses about the involvement or non-involvement of "Tesak" in a series of bloody crimes in the early 2000s - it is not the long-ago, but the most recent past of Maxim that is important for us, and even more important is the cannibalistic system built in Russia that imprisoned him on ridiculous accusations (because of the "wrong" review of an idiotic film about the war), but in fact out of fear of his uncontrollability and passionarity, and as a result the system brutally tortured and killed him - as it does in relation to thousands of other Russian people.

Mikhail Oreshnikov is one of the last (in absentia, by mail) interlocutors of Tesak, he corresponded with him until his death. We deliberately did not "coax" Mikhail for a more detailed or "necessary" coverage of certain events (at some points his views on the state of affairs are clearly at odds with ours). This can hardly be called a "standard" interview – at least because it begins with a rather large introductory part, which we formulated for Mikhail (in order to clearly define the purpose of our request to him) and which in the end we decided not to remove, as well as from for the obvious "inconsistency" in the coverage of various topics - from a detailed story to a minimal answer. In any case, we hope that this dialogue will be informative and interesting for you.

Orange: Thank you for responding and agreeing to answer our questions.

First, a little "preface". As part of our new (started in January) project, we tell a foreign-language (primarily Western) audience about the real state of affairs in our “raw-stuff federation”. We oppose, as far as possible, Putin's pseudo-right “ideologies for export” (according to which, Putin is the main “defender of European civilization, a Russian nationalist and conservative”, and a “white warrior-Aryan hero”).

Why is this important for us - 1) at least a reputational aspect: it's pretty nasty when your enemies (who robbed and humiliated you) are “pushing” outright nonsense about your country (and, accordingly, about you) to your like-minded people, and you don't even try to do anything against it, 2) we still believe that the foreign policy factor is important for changes in Russia itself, and the less there are political rifts and “fifth columns” inside Europe, the more attention it will pay to pressure on the Kremlin (which, we must admit , at least has an important deterrent value). In the future, we would like to achieve something else: 3) that those of the "Western" nationalists who really love Russia, support (including actively) the "Russian underground", and not the current neo-Soviet kleptocratic regime.

Unfortunately, even in the Russian right-wing segment - in connection with the elimination of a number of talented and experienced actors by the state machine and, in general, the fear of the "old" and experienced right-wingers in front of a wave of repression - in recent years, a whole segment of fools has also formed who simply do not know the history of the movement, nor the essence of the current layouts, and are still being caught in the Kremlin’s traps and projects.

For us (unlike the mainstream media), as you probably understand, in this interview it is not the style, syllable or catchy headline that is important, but rather the amount and usefulness of the information that we can share with our audience. Therefore, we hope that you, as our interlocutor, will be able to make your contribution to this undertaking with your meaningful answers.

Let's say right away - your persona is interesting for us in several qualities at once: 1) a Russian right-wing political activist who faced repression and was forced to emigrate from Russia, 2) one of the few people who communicated with Tesak shortly before his death (and I think you will agree that this event last year was one of the most significant incidents for the currently "half-dead" Russian right-wing radical environment). There is also a third, also important, point - the evolution of your views, but I think you yourself will tell about this in more detail during the interview.

At the same time, it is quite difficult to clearly identify any thematic tracks, so I think the topics will periodically overlap. Let's start with your biography. Perhaps one of the most famous media outlets that told about you was the left-liberal Meduza. How do you generally assess their approach to coverage of a) you, your life path and views, b) your relationship with Maxim? Is everything correctly stated or did they distort / missed something?

M. Oreshnikov: Meduza has reduced some of what I said, taking from the context what they thought was important. This did not add much distortion. Howeverm they made the emphasis that "profit" on pedophiles was made - specifically to give my words a likely “falsity”.

Orange: Could you - for our English-speaking readers (we are uneager to translate that publication of Medusa into English), in the most general terms, talk about the main aspects of your conscious social life, and about the conclusions and results that you came to in today's intermediate the result of your life trials?

I'm talking, first of all, about such milestones as a) the beginning of your struggle and the first prison term, b) Restruct [a right-wing public organization founded by Tesak. Subsequently, it was eliminated dur to the work of the embedded agents of the police and special services - Orange] and "Occupy-Pedophiliai" [popular in 2012-2013 Internet show of "pedophile hunters" - approx. Orange], etc., c) support for Ukraine, emigration, "AZOV" "[the regiment of the Ukrainian National Guard, known both for its high level of training and its serious ideological platform - Orange], d) correspondence with Tesak, e) your current realities and plans. Tell us more about your views. What is the correct name for them? Racial capitalism? Libertarian monarchy? What do you think is wrong with modern society (take, for example, both "West" and Russia)? How can we change it? What should we come to?

M. Oreshnikov: I started as a skinhead. It took place, like everyone else, in an atmosphere where violence was gratifying. And it itself was justified by ideology. Although, I now understand that this was essentially self-deception and an attempt to endure rejection of my life in the form of aggression. It ended with a 1,5-year term because of the Molotov cocktails I had thrown into the police department.

I engaged into "Restruct" and "Occupy" because I wanted to show my organizational skills within the framework of the ideology I adhered to. Prove to myself that “I can”. I support Ukraine, because the truth is behind it in this conflict. The Russian Federation slandered what was happening in Ukraine so brazenly and upside down that it seemed to create an alternative reality that exists only in the Russian media and the minds of their viewers. Of course, this had nothing to do with the real state of affairs in Ukraine. But, setting out the truth about Ukraine, it is impossible to create hatred of Russians for it, and support for the seizure of its territories…

I have always had a desire to fight for the truth. Therefore, he was primarily engaged in counter-propaganda, including interacting with "AZOV". Now counter-propaganda is no longer needed. Stopping the brainwashing mechanism about Ukraine allowed the Russians to independently discover the truth and stop supporting the separatists. Although some part of those “living in the alternative universe” still remains.

After studying the economics and biology of human behavior, it became not interesting for me to further invest in politics. It became clear that political views are biologically and socially determined. And the political methods of "struggle" do not bring even 5% benefit in this. Therefore, it became more interesting for me to educate people on the topic of economics - so that people support specific reforms, and not parties. And education in psychological growth, so that people change their attitude to life for a more environmentally friendly one. Become happy and less destructive. And it doesn't matter to me what political views these people have - if they are satisfied with their lives, their views will not harm others. People will look for constructive and socially useful ways to realize their views.

I corresponded with Tesak to support and entertain him, and it is always interesting for me to communicate with an intelligent person. We came to common thoughts, it is clear that self-education was not the only one that influenced me in one direction. Unfortunately, he was killed. When you find something new in a person and his attitude, you discover his new sides, it becomes even more sad that the world has lost him. And what a pity for him from the purely human side, and there is nothing to say. Everyone here understands it anyway.

My current life has nothing to do with politics. I love educating people and influencing their lives so that they, like me, find ways to improve their quality of life and be happier. In my opinion, people's lives will be much better and more pleasant in a capitalist state. Traditionalism easily fits into this and does not create problems of coexistence with a different worldview. The point is that people, regardless of their purpose in life, have a way to realize them without harming others. The self-regulating system of the free market and private institutions easily solves this problem. We will come to this in any case. I will write an article soon about why this is already inevitable. It's a question of time. We will no longer be able to influence this in any significant way. Social behavior of people, unlike the weather, is more predictable.

Orange: A separate topic is the current right-wing environment (we mean, first of all, the Russian one, but if there are considerations for other countries, then also - welcome): what are its vices and weaknesses? How to cure them, what needs to be changed?

M. Oreshnikov: The weakness of the right environment today is that people tend to sympathize with the right-wing [views] during the period of accumulation of aggression from a large amount of stress. The peculiarity of the work of the psyche. And even if it becomes a mass phenomenon - as it is now, in a pandemic - states have monopoly of violence to exploit the inclination for hierarchical systems for the sake of “political patriotism”. So the right-wing should not fight with the left-wing, their target audience is still different, but to engage in discrediting the governments who "mimic" the right-wing: so that anti-right-wing bureaucrats do not use ordinary right-wingers as pawns through believing in the "rightness" of these "leaders."

Orange: Tell us about your social, educational, etc. projects.

M. Oreshnikov: Now I have three educational projects. Economic - national capitalism. To teach people to work with their psyche - VMANTRE. And socionic - for a better understanding of people of the peculiarities of relationships and a better understanding of others.

Orange: Back to the Tesak topic: What do you think of the recent publication by BAZA? To what extent do you think it is a) impartial, b) relies on an evidence base, and not speculation, c) is it logical from the point of view of conclusions? Well, the most obvious and banal, but also the most important and burning question: regardless of whether he was killed or forced to commit suicide by savage torture, why did they [the “system” - Orange] do all this so brutal and precisely towards the end of his [Tesak's] term? And why did they continue to torture (and possibly kill) him even after he gave all the necessary evidence?

M. Oreshnikov: I have not read the BAZA publication. Tesak was for them a piece on a chessboard, it could only be used while he was doing his time. Previously, there was no need to do this, then. And in the end, either it became a pity not to use it, or the need arose. Alas, for governments we are not people, but pawns.

Orange: There is an opinion that this could be connected with the Belarusian protests in the summer of 2020 - they say the Kremlin after them completely went crazy and began to furiously press all the political dissidents, including those in dungeons ... How true is this assumption, including from a chronological point vision?

M. Oreshnikov: Fear pushes people to inappropriate actions. Putin's fear of protests - even more so. He can do anything to keep from losing power. The protests in Belarus could easily increase his fear and push him to new inappropriate actions. And not only him, but also smaller bureaucrats.

Orange: Another point is the transformation of Tesak's views: from a "Nazi-skinhead glorifying Hitler” and hating the liberals (until the last prison term) to the "libertarian" revising many of the "foundations" (the last few years). How profound was the change? By the way, are all his “suicide notes” genuine, do you think? If we proceed from the fact that this world outlook transformation took place, then in your opinion, which of the 2 “Tesaks” was more dangerous for the current Putin regime? How could he — if he were released — could “spoil the blood” of the current regime’s servants?

M. Oreshnikov: The change of Tesak is “semi-fundamental”. On the one hand, the goal remained the same - the search for fairness and efficiency. On the other hand, a complete revision of approaches in connection with new knowledge. I think the "NS-version" of Tesak was more dangerous for the authorities, as he could entice supporters of radical values with him. And libertarians have a different target audience; libertarian propaganda does not reduce the number of Putin's patriots.

Orange: What do you think are the chances of those who are now trying to be anyhow “active” in Russia, if not to repeat the fate of Tesak, then at least to go to jail? How to protect yourself? How uncontested is emigration now? What advice can you give to a potential political emigrant? Share your experience, please.

M. Oreshnikov: I think that there is no point in ruining your life for the sake of trying to smash a moving train with your body. An ineffective system will ruin itself perfectly. And the brain will speed up this process if you do it from a freer country. I would advise migrants to learn how to make money remotely, and then live wherever they want. Although I would recommend it to all people. Limiting your life to one country is a clear omission in the quality of life.

Orange: And now, a question on the topic, which, in fact, is primarily devoted to the above-mentioned series of publications on our resource - about the Western right-wingers. What do you think is the reason for the ease with which many of them are "led" to outright Kremlin enticements (after all, there is the Internet, there are many years of contacts with Russia, Ukraine, etc., you can at least try to verify the information)? Why does the leader of "Alternative for Germany" assent to the Kremlin’s Telegram Channel "Nezygar", the Serbian nationalist takes pictures with the riot police in Moscow, and Casapound glorifies Putin? What is more here - a) the Kremlin’s "shadow" money, which is used to buy right-wing populist politicians and create fake resources? b) some super-"professionalism" of propagandists from RussiaToday? c) the idiocy of Western institutions that follow the lead of the leftists and incite their people against themselves, forcing them to look around frantically, seeing any enemies of Europe (like Putin) as “friends”? d) maybe the matter is in some kind of "insufficient education" of the right environment, their susceptibility to mythologization and conspiracy theories?

M. Oreshnikov: With regard to the Western right - if a person sympathizes with the hierarchical system of social construction, then he will sympathize with those who use these methods. Even if not as beautiful as the supporter of a hierarchical society fantasizes. After all, the decay of such a society is not visible from the outside. You can see a beautiful cover, and that's what people buy for. The quick grasp of information and the simplicity of theses based on basic feelings creates the illusion of truth. Any advertiser-seller knows how to “sell” information and an idea, more easily by influencing emotions. And PR people and political strategists even more so.

Orange: Could it be the fault of ourselves, the Russian right-wingers, who for many years, to put it bluntly, did not give a shit about this problem and focused almost exclusively on our internal agenda, strife and subcultural wars, limiting international contacts to concerts and the sale of T-shirts and CDs?

M. Oreshnikov: Well, the Russian right-wing has not really created competition for the Kremlin in matters of propaganda in the West. Therefore, the Kremlin gave them the whole picture of "Putin's right-wing Russia".

Orange: Do you often have to communicate with western right-wing audiences? Do you often encounter misunderstandings or some kind of outright pro-Kremlin clichés / fakes from their lips? Be honest, do we generally have a chance to turn the tide and reach at least some significant part of the duped right-wing "Westerners"?) If so, what can you advise on and what is better to pay priority attention to?

M. Oreshnikov: I have not communicated with the Western rightists for a long time. The duped Western rightists will begin to understand something when Putin runs out of money for the RT. If we talk about a mass phenomenon, of course.

Orange: What do you think about the concept of the Intermarium [the idea of an alliance of the Central and Eastern Europe countries as a "bulwark of European civilization" - as opposed to both the "left-liberal West" and "neo-Soviet Eurasia" - Orange]? How popular and feasible is it now? Is there a place in it for any "Beautiful Russia of the Future"?

M. Oreshnikov: I don’t take Intermarium and other concepts seriously, because such options for the future are simply not foreseen. There is no incentive for this, neither for nations nor for governments. It's like fantasies about "What will happen if aliens arrive?" And the latter is more likely.

Orange: Would you like - after the change of power, of course - to return to Russia? What should happen for this change, how real is it and in what time frame?

M. Oreshnikov: If I did, I would return to the Russian Federation only as a visitor. I don't feel the RF as my home. The power in the Russian Federation will not change for good for the first time. Maybe, only in a super lucky scenario. But each change of power will increase the chance that a good one will finally come.

Orange: What is more realistic for Russia in the medium term - complete disintegration, or decentralization, or, on the contrary, cementing hypercentralization for many years?

M. Oreshnikov: The future of the Russian Federation is the eternal struggle of feudal lords. With each other - in calm times, with an external enemy - in less calm ones. The presence or absence of an external enemy will depend on a set of random rulers' mistakes. Much of what happens in politics happens through stupidity or accident. And not by virtue of a cunning plan.

Orange: Wishes / parting words to the readers?

M. Oreshnikov: I wish the readers to look more for problems not in the external world, but in their perception of the external world. Then there will be less desire to “fight the windmills”. Well, I wish everyone high-quality self-realization.