There is something fascinating happening in Russia that, I think, also has applications on how we can interpret current affairs in the USA.

A quick summary:

On August 23, Alexey Navalny publishes an analysis of corruption in the procurement of foodstuffs for the Russian National Guard. It’s impressively detailed, meticulously sourced, brilliantly presented (they even included good English CC:subtitles for those who don’t speak Russian). In a normal system, this level of well-researched accusation would require some sort of response. At least a statement, but given the detail of the investigation, it should probably end with several important people behind bars.

But we are not living in normal systems.

So, on September 11, Viktor Zolotov – the head of the Russian National Guard – publishes a 7 minute long threat to Navalny, in which he claims that his officer’s honor has been impugned. He challenges Navalny to a duel – yes, really – and promises to beat the crap out of him. Predictably, this utterly unhinged response from a government official spreads like wildfire around the Russian internet and then, later that same day, into the international arena. I myself tweeted about it probably half a dozen times because, realistically, I love the idea that duelling is actually somehow magically a thing again.

In time, however, I started to abstract from my initial reaction and tried to look at the larger patterns. And it occurred to me that this ridiculous scenario was actually a beautifully executed ploy to control the narrative. Only once in Zolotov’s response does he even make the slightest attempt to respond to the allegations, and even there it’s hardly worth mentioning. No, instead his reply is belligerent, threatening, and devoid of any data.

Whereas Navalny’s report was laden with facts – like the actual prices per kilogram that the National Guard was overpaying. Moreover, Navalny’s video was addressed directly at ordinary people serving within the National Guard, the military, and other police forces. It was clearly a plea for the soldiers and cops to join the people in their protest, and it was backed up by data.

So I see Zolotov’s bonkers response serving two functions.

The first is an obvious set of instructions to the soldiers under his command: “this is how you respond to anyone who dares insult our honor by talking about corruption.”

The second, I think, is an effort to derail the narrative overall. Instead of debating the very real corruption here, all of a sudden everyone – myself included – is talking about the crazy guy who wants to duel Navalny. Success: we’re not talking about corruption anymore.

Relating this to the USA, I think this is something we’ve seen out of the Trump playbook. In the USA, we are so overwhelmed by the daily tweets of increasing lunacy that, too often, we miss the quieter legislative agenda that will shape developments in the USA for generations. For all his obvious flaws and incompetence, Trump is a master at controlling the narrative. He commands mindshare through ridiculous antics. Just like Zolotov challenging an anti-corruption activist to a duel, in 2018.