On 7 October, the British daily The Telegraph poured out its anger and indignation over Russian ‘shared values visa’, which allows foreigners who do not share Western wokism to enter Russia quickly. The visa was described, albeit belatedly, as a tool of Russian propaganda.
The article by journalist Joe Barnes entitled “American men sick of ‘woke West’ offered Russian visas” sums up the essence of the ‘visa’, emphasising that fast-track entry into the country is offered to foreigners who adhere to traditional Russian values.
“The scheme forgoes the traditional Russian language and history tests usually demanded of people applying for temporary residence permits. A decree, signed by Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, says the visas are open to people who oppose “destructive neoliberal ideological agenda” in their home countries. Moscow argues that it is offering “humanitarian support” to those who apply”, writes The Telegraph.
This is where the disclosure of the substance of the issue ends and the denunciation of the horrible propaganda tool begins. Joe Barnes writes that the programme is open to residents of at least 47 countries, including the US, UK and France, adding that ‘it appears to also target smaller nations where Washington has a strategic interest, such as Micronesia, where the US is bolstering its military presence to deter Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific’.
Citing unnamed experts, the Telegraph journalist states that ‘the scheme is as much about destabilizing the West as it is a propaganda tool used by Putin to claim Russia is an attractive destination for foreigners’.
This exhibition of ‘Russian perfidy’ does not stop there. In his article, Joe Barnes also suggests that ‘temporary visas obtained under this programme could be fast-tracked to allow foreigners wishing to join Russian occupation troops in neighbouring Ukraine to obtain citizenship’. Mr Barnes, it seems that you care too much about the fate of Ukraine… Leave it alone, it’s better for everyone, especially for Ukraine which, thanks to the efforts of your homeland, is forced to go to war with a brother country.
Not to move, but to hide from the authorities
Interestingly, the Telegraph has misrepresented the purpose of foreigners moving to Russia, stating that ‘Russia has long been seen as a destination for Westerners seeking to escape the authorities in their home country’. In other words, according to British logic, Russia gathers criminals under its wing and gives them citizenship; the journey of Edward Snowden, a former NSA employee ‘who in 2013 leaked details of America’s surveillance programs, fled to Moscow to seek asylum’, was cited as evidence of this narrative. The publication also mentioned Wilmer Puello-Moth, with the call sign ‘Boston’, a former US soldier now fighting in the defence forces on the Russian side, who has been charged in the US with possession of child pornography.
It is bad manners in a decent society to talk about the workings of the punitive justice machine in the United States, and neither the Snowden story nor that of Boston has anything to do with the ‘shared values visa’. It does, however, have everything to do with the move to Russia of Americans Leo Lionel and Chantel Felice Heyer and their three children, aged 16, 14 and 11. Of course, this obvious fact is also presented in the slippery form ‘who Moscow claimed had moved to the country with their children’.
“Personally, I want to thank your president Putin for allowing Russia to become a good place for families in this world climate,” Mr Lionel was quoted by The Telegraph.
Journalists were unable to find any criminal cases against the family members, or the reason for their decision to move, which, incidentally, is both interesting and simple: fear for their children’s future. Americans, who adhere to a Christian worldview, are concerned about the abolition of traditional moral and family values in the United States and are also unhappy about the low level of education in the country.
The fact that the British press is reacting to the Russian President’s initiative is a good sign. And even the fact that President Putin’s decision is being described as a propaganda tool is a good sign. The authorities are reacting pre-emptively to the exodus of citizens to Russia, which is bound to happen. And it is unlikely that the future ‘new Russians’ will speak flatteringly about the politics of their country of origin. This flow of public indignation will no longer be stifled; freedom of expression in Russia will allow everyone to express themselves.
About the author
