Russian's guide to western naiveté: Belief in a good Tsar

A Facebook friend mentioned today that Russians often see westerners as naive in political matters. This is a very rich subject, and I hope that I will have inspiration to write more about it in the future. For now I limit myself to only one aspect.

Proposition: Westerners believe that honest politicians exist and that the politics in their countries is done honestly.

This is something that Russians refer to as a "belief in the good Tsar" ("Вера в доброго царя.") The story behind this is that Russians for centuries held a belief in a loving and caring Tsar, attributing their privations and poverty to the abuse by the government officials, who supposedly disobeyed their sovereign. Thus, if only the Tsar could be made aware of the Russian people's desperate situation, things could be straightened out: the Tsar would punish crooked officials and reward hardworking and honest people.

The expression is used nowadays as derogatory to describe those seeking solutions in changing political personalities while leaving in place the system that encourages the abuse. That is, the root of the problem in pre-revolutionary Russia was not corrupted officials standing between the Tsar and the Russian people, but the autocratic system that inevitably produces such a situation.

Most Russians nowadays are likely to believe that "all politicians are crooks" - something that westerners know as "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Yet, very few of my European or American friends seem to think that this maxim applies to their countries and/or their favorite politicians, which makes me think of them as naive. (Yes, I mean people like Barack Obama, Justin Trudeau, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, etc. - no political personality is holy for a disgruntled Russian. More about this in a minute.)

So, let me provide you with a bit of a practical advice: if you happen to discuss politics with a Russian, don't start with an emphatic proposition, such as "George Bush is a war criminal./Obama is very smart./Trump is a bigot./Hillary Clinton is competent." Instead of showing empathy, the Russian may ask you: "WHY DO YOU THINK SO?" and you will be in an unenviable position of having to provide logical reasoning for your feelings.

OR they may come hard at you with a bunch of facts demonstrating that your statement is wrong. This doesn't mean that they side with the other political side, but simply that they read newspapers and they judge your statement as technically incorrect. Alas, the maxim "Plato is my friend but truth is a better friend" still matters for Russians. ("Платон мне друг, но истина дороже."/"Amicus Plato, sed magis amica veritas")

OR they may say nothing. And this is the worst thing, because they probably think that you are too naive/ignorant/stupid to take seriously.

Instead, try another approach. For example, explain why you think that the US should continue spending money on defending South Korea and Japan, and why you think that leaving these countries to defend themselves and allowing them to develop their own nuclear weapons is a bad idea. Don't forget to mention pros and cons. The Russians may not agree with you but they will think you are thinking. And intelligence is something that they respect more than political correctness: "He is rude, but he is a good person" ("Он хам, но человек хороший.")