The Anatomy Of Putins Traditional Values

Shcheglova Olga (Boris Bidyaga)

THE ANATOMY OF PUTIN’S “TRADITIONAL VALUES”
 
On November 9, 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed Decree No. 809 “On the Foundations of State Policy for the Preservation and Strengthening of Traditional Russian Spiritual and Moral Values” (hereinafter referred to as the Putin Decree or the Decree). Source: http://www.kremlin.ru/acts/bank/48502

It is noteworthy that in the opening lines of the Decree, Putin transitions from the term “traditional spiritual and moral values” to a more general one — “traditional values,” declaring that these two concepts are equivalent in this document. Clearly, this is no accident: such terminology makes it much easier to substitute the original concept. Note that this terminological substitution is present not only in the Decree itself but also in public discourse, media, and official documents, where the clarifying part — “spiritual and moral” — has vanished from the original phrase, allowing for a broad and free interpretation. An exceptionally clever move: no one ever noticed how traditional spiritual and moral values transformed into “traditional values,” under whose guise anything can be imposed on the people. In this article, for brevity, we will also sometimes use the term “traditional values,” never forgetting that what is meant are traditional spiritual and moral values.

Let us turn to the Decree. In Section 1, Part 4, Putin defines Russian traditional values as “moral guidelines that shape the worldview of Russian citizens, passed down from generation to generation”. We fully agree with this definition and will proceed from it.
Here, Putin also explains what is included in the concept of traditional values:

Life, dignity, human rights and freedoms, patriotism, citizenship, service to the Fatherland and responsibility for its fate, high moral ideals, a strong family, productive labor, the priority of the spiritual over the material, humanism, mercy, justice, collectivism, mutual assistance and mutual support, historical memory and the continuity of generations, the unity of the peoples of Russia.

Of all these, only the following can be considered moral guidelines:
High moral ideals, the priority of the spiritual over the material, humanism, mercy, justice (as a trait of human character).

All the rest either have no relation to moral guidelines at all or are only very indirectly related with them. Moral guidelines are acquired by a person through upbringing (including self-upbringing) and spiritual development.
Well, what does Putin offer as “moral guidelines”?

— Life. But life is given to us by God; how we live it is a separate question, but life itself is not a moral guideline.

— Dignity. This is a person’s self-perception, unrelated to morality. A deeply immoral person can quite easily carry oneself with dignity and feel like a worthy member of society (for example, in a society that encourages immorality).

— Rights and freedoms. These are granted to a person by the state. Rights and freedoms are not personal characteristics of an individual but the collective will of society regulating the possibility of certain actions (activities) for all its members. Therefore, rights and freedoms cannot be moral guidelines.

— Patriotism. Love for one’s homeland is inherent in most citizens, both highly moral and completely immoral.

— Citizenship, i.e., awareness of oneself as a citizen of the country and readiness to contribute to the prosperity of society. This is too vague a concept; everything depends on the specific forms of this contribution. If it is successful business, there is nothing highly moral in this activity; if it is, for example, charity, that is another matter. In general, citizenship is not a moral guideline.

— Service to the Fatherland and responsibility for its fate are also very vague concepts. For example, Russian President Vladimir Putin undoubtedly believes that the war against Ukraine is service to the Fatherland and a manifestation of responsibility for its fate. In Putin’s opinion, both he himself has served the Fatherland greatly by starting this war, and all those who participate in it in any way (killing the “enemy” at the front, producing shells and guns, or weaving camouflage nets) — all these people demonstrate patriotism, citizenship, and serve the Fatherland. However, any sober-minded person with an objective view of events will agree with me that both the one who started this war and those who participate in it or in any way help its participants are absolutely immoral people for this is not a defensive war but a war of outright aggression; not a shield for the Fatherland, but a sword thrust against a sovereign state. Therefore, it is unacceptable to include “service to the Fatherland and responsibility for its fate” in the category of moral guidelines.

— A strong family is also not an indicator of high moral ideals; some families are bound together by domestic violence; in other “strong” families, the wife tolerates the husband’s infidelities. And the strongest families are those where adultery flourishes by mutual consent. So a strong family is merely an external form, not necessarily stemming from the highly moral behavior of its members.

— Productive labor? People work primarily to provide for themselves and their families; it is an economic necessity. At the same time, a huge number of people are engaged in fields that do not involve material production, such as the service sector, stock trading, or online advertising. Should we consider these people immoral? Of course not! But then, let’s remember those who manufacture such “products” as tanks and ballistic missiles — instruments used to kill people in a bloody war. How moral is that kind of labor? It becomes obvious that productive labor, in itself, cannot be regarded as a sign of highly moral behavior.

— Collectivism, mutual assistance, and mutual support are, in themselves, morally neutral concepts. They operate on the well-known principle: “You scratch my back, and I’ll scratch yours.” While socially beneficial, this exchange is not inherently moral. True moral quality emerges when help is given without any expectation of reward or reciprocation. In contrast, mutual aid based on a tacit agreement — however useful — carries no special moral weight.

— Historical memory and the unity of the peoples of Russia bear no relation to moral guidelines whatsoever.

— As for generational continuity, it cannot in itself serve as a moral guideline; it is merely a mechanism for transmitting accumulated life experience, traditions, and — crucially — moral norms from one generation to the next. However, these norms vary drastically across families. For every dynasty of talented musicians, there exists a dynasty of thieves and murderers.

This begs a pivotal question: why is Putin recasting patriotism, citizenship, and service to the Fatherland as spiritual and moral values? The answer lies in the Decree’s timing — November 9, 2022. Recall that on September 21, 2022, Putin announced a “partial mobilization,” prompting nearly a million young men to flee the country in a stark refusal to participate in the war against Ukraine. Recognizing that he had lost a generation, Putin promulgated this Decree less than two months later, explicitly framing participation in the war as the highest moral act. This is because the war is sold to society through narratives like “The Motherland is in danger” and “NATO seeks to destroy Russia and our traditional values” etc. Putin himself states it plainly: “It is they [the war participants] — the real, not fake, but genuine elite and pride of the country. The heroism of the warriors defending the vital interests of the country becomes a moral guideline for millions of our citizens…”

The ultimate aim of the Decree, therefore, is to enforce a rigid ideological dichotomy: those who oppose the war are traitors to be restricted in their rights and imprisoned. Those who support the war, fight, and help the army are true patriots of Russia, deserving of honor, respect, and glory. These postulates partly affect the adult population but, most crucially, target the younger generation, which the current regime seeks to mould into a docile flock, destined to be led to the slaughter in the name of Putin’s “ideals.”

Putin’s ambitions extend far beyond Ukraine. His campaign there has faltered not for lack of weaponry, but for lack of will — Russian soldiers’ weak motivation has led to negligible gains at a horrific cost. Yet this failure serves as a lesson. The Decree is a blueprint for creating a new army: a one-and-a-half-million-strong force of indoctrinated zombies, their critical faculties erased by patriotic dogma. It is for this army of the future that the “traditional values” are being engineered. The Decree’s designation as a “strategic planning document for national security of the Russian Federation” lays bare the cynicism: authentic morality is a private compass, irrelevant to state security. But patriotism, citizenship, service to the Fatherland — these are precisely the concepts from which Putin, with the help of his Decree, has made effective levers to mobilize the masses for any criminal enterprise he can brand as “defending the Fatherland.” The invasion of Ukraine was the first test. The next, with a more powerful force, will be on a far larger scale.

In Part 6 of Section 1 of the Putin Decree, one can read:
“Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, and other religions, which are an integral part of the Russian historical and spiritual heritage, have significantly influenced the formation of traditional values common to believers and non-believers. A special role in the formation and strengthening of traditional values belongs to Orthodoxy.”

Thus the Decree itself establishes Orthodoxy as the cornerstone of Russia’s “traditional values”. And indeed, Orthodoxy has undoubtedly exerted a profound influence on the moral fabric of Russian society. Therefore, let us clearly define these true and genuine Orthodox spiritual and moral values. They are quite unambiguously codified in foundational religious texts:
— The well-known 10 Commandments,
— The Seven Deadly Sins and their opposing Virtues,
— The Teachings of Jesus Christ,
— The key Doctrines of the Russian Orthodox Church.

The purpose of this article, however, is not merely to catalogue these Virtues — we will evaluate how characteristic they are of modern Russian society. And, above all, of those in power, for it is they who in their decrees and statements, as well as through their propaganda machine, declare the excellency of russian “traditional values”, and mark their (the Russian authorities’) own enormous contribution in preserving, protecting and multiplying these values. By their own logic, they must serve as the primary example and model for the common people to follow. They, first and foremost, should be the bearers of these notorious “traditional values”. Well, let’s figure it out and see if this is really the case. Let’s examine whether reality aligns with their professed claims.

As Jesus Christ teaches us, the main Christian commandment is: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.” The second most important commandment, similar to the first, is: “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:37-39).

From this commandment several derivative interrelated moral norms proceed.
First of all, from the 10 sacred Mosaic commandments (Exodus 20:1-17):
—You shall not murder;
—You shall not steal;
—You shall not bear false witness;
—You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.
All these commandments are connected by one idea — do no harm to your neighbor, be it great or small, even in your thoughts.

Closely related in content to the above commandments is the idea of peacemaking — the quintessence of Christian morality. In the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7), Jesus Christ says: “Blessed are the peacemakers…” And further teaches: “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” “Do not take revenge on someone who wrongs you. If someone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other one.” “Anyone who is angry with his brother or sister will be subject to judgment.” “Anyone who says to his brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.”

In the Christian moral “code,” peacemaking holds a crucial place. As we see, Jesus Christ calls for peacemaking at any cost — not only through compromises but also at the cost of self-denial and self-abasement. Recall Leo Tolstoy and his ideology of non-resistance to evil through violence — this idea grew out of the Christian Orthodox religion.

And now let us turn to the modern policy of the Russian state and the daily practice of Russian state institutions. What catches our eye? Of course, the war against Ukraine. This war is a clear, overt, and unambiguous demonstration of the violation of all the above Christian commandments and moral norms. To begin with, Putin and his associates coveted the national wealth of a foreign country.

Further. Putin and his propaganda machine lie that this war is a war of liberation, that NATO wants to destroy Russia using Ukrainian hands, that the “conflict” in Ukraine was started by Western elites, that the Russian Federation is the victim in this war, not the aggressor, etc. All this murky verbal stream is not the delirious raving of Putin’s inflamed imagination but conscious, politically motivated lies (false witness).

Putin and his officials, of their own evil will, arranged a monstrous bloody slaughter in Ukraine, in which hundreds of thousands of ordinary Ukrainians and Russians are dying and becoming crippled. In spite of the fact that there were no conflicts or disagreements between our peoples, nor the slightest pretext for the war. When the war started, the majority of citizens, both in Ukraine and in Russia, just could not believe it. But Putin’s propaganda has done its job — washed people’s brains.

What Putin and his army are doing in Ukraine, what Putin’s propaganda is doing in Russia, is as far from the concept of “peacemaking” as the North Pole is from the South. Putin has set two brotherly peoples against each other, sows hatred and enmity between them, he has been going on with this senseless slaughter and bloodshed for almost four years. It is noteworthy that Putin and his military leaders encourage their “warriors” to rob, rape and kill civilians, pursuing a policy of public denial of the crimes committed by the Russian army in Ukraine.

But what is even more disgusting and completely immoral is that decent people who refuse to fight are forcibly dragged to military enlistment offices, taken to the front, and compelled to kill Ukrainians under threat of death. The refuseniks are kept in pits for weeks, in rain and snow, without food or water, subjected to torture and abuse, tried and imprisoned, and often simply killed (as, for example, publicly, during formation, a commander shot 19-year-old conscript soldier Artyom Antonov after he had refused to go to the combat zone).

Likewise civilians who oppose the war or tell the truth about the Russian army’s war crimes are treated in exactly the same way. These people are subject to administrative and criminal prosecution!

That is, not only do Putin and his state bodies conduct a completely immoral, inhuman, unprincipled policy (which has nothing to do with the “traditional values” they proclaim), but they also persecute and destroy people committed to the ideals of humanism and high morality. Since the early 2010s until December 2024, the number of administrative and criminal cases for posts, comments, likes, and photographs on social networks had exceeded 30 thousand. And we recall that Putin’s list of Russian “traditional values” includes, among other things, “human rights and freedoms.” Meanwhile, the repressive laws adopted after the start of the war blatantly violate these rights and freedoms, primarily freedom of speech. There is no and cannot be any justification for this. Wartime censorship? It is applicable only in those territories where martial law has been declared, namely, in four occupied regions of Ukraine. Yet people are persecuted for personal opinions throughout the country. A remarkable case occurred in Tyumen, where nurse Marina Belozerova was fined for the words “Glory to Ukraine,” which were found in her personal notebook during a search.

How does the Orthodox Christian religion evaluate such actions?
Let us turn to the Gospel of Matthew (18:6-7): “Woe to the world because of temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes!” [i.e., the person who incites (and especially — compels) others to sin]. “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me, to stumble, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”

But this is exactly what Putin and his numerous advisors, supporters, and State functionaries are doing. The Security Council, the Ministry of Defense, the army command, law enforcement agencies, the judicial system, the penal system, and many other departments, as well as, undoubtedly, the Russian propaganda machine — through all these people, “temptation comes” into Russian society. With their lying propaganda and agitation, their repressive laws, their unfair sentences, torture, humiliation, inhuman conditions in prisons and colonies, the practice of pardoning criminals, and finally, promises of huge monetary rewards — Russian citizens are being provoked, pushed, and compelled into committing a grave sin: the unjustified killing of citizens of a neighboring country, the seizure of its territories, and widespread robbery and violence against civilians.

And on the other hand, those who dare to criticize this triumph of criminal immorality and the trampling of human rights face a systematic campaign of discrimination, imprisonment, torture, and death — all to force them to renounce their humanistic views, submit to the criminal authority, and be silenced.

All this devilish (Putin’s) host should remember: “it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea” (Matthew 18:6). So great and unforgivable is their sin.

Vladimir Putin is the antithesis of a peacemaker. On his orders, the very word “peace” and its symbols have been effectively outlawed, their public display equated with disseminating “fakes about the Russian army.” Even a foreign national — an Italian — was fined for displaying a flag with a white dove and the word “pace” (“peace” in Italian). The phrase “Peace to the world” is construed by Russian courts as a condemnation of the so-called “special military operation.” Any manifestation of peace as an antithesis to war appears to provoke a state of rage and paranoia within the Russian authorities. It seems that, to ensure their own political survival, they are intent on plunging Russian society into a state of perpetual war with its neighbors.

Mercy stands as a cornerstone of Christian ethics. The teaching imbues it with transformative power, exhorting believers to forgive their neighbors as they themselves have been forgiven by God (Colossians 3:13), and to extend compassion as a reflection of the divine mercy bestowed upon humanity. This ideal is crystallized in the Sermon on the Mount: “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.” It is followed by a direct imperative: “Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.”

It is noteworthy that Putin’s Decree itself explicitly lists mercy and humanism among Russia’s proclaimed “traditional values.” But what becomes of this virtue in practice?

The regime’s proclaimed “mercy” stands in stark contrast to several systematic practices. These include the brutal treatment of military refuseniks, who are held in torturous conditions or used in punitive “meat assault” waves. They extend to the judicial sphere, where over 30,000 cases have been initiated for social media activity — encompassing texts, photographs, likes, and even emojis. Since the invasion began, prosecutions for “treason,” “terrorism,” and “extremism” have surged dramatically. It is evident that these cases are largely politically motivated or represent the security apparatus fulfilling quotas for uncovering “spies” and “traitors.” Consequently, individuals sentenced to years or decades in prison are, at a minimum, subjected to grossly disproportionate punishment, while many are outright victims of fabricated accusations.

The nature of this state “mercy” is perhaps most starkly revealed in the sentencing of society’s most vulnerable: the elderly and the gravely ill, who receive draconian prison terms under conditions that amount to a death sentence. The systematic denial of medical care is standard practice, as evidenced by cases like that of cancer patient Igor Baryshnikov, who received surgery only after his defenders appealed to the UN, and Alexei Gorinov, a man with severe chronic illnesses who was subjected to punitive cold by having his cell’s heating shut off and his warm blanket confiscated.
This institutional cruelty extends indiscriminately. Teenagers are sent to jail, like fifteen-year-old Arseny Turbin, who distributed anti-Putin leaflets and received five-year sentence for that. Sixty-eight-year-old Nadezhda Buyanova, a practicing physician, was imprisoned for five years for the “crime” of stating the legal fact that soldiers on both sides of a conflict are legitimate military targets for each other.

To label this system “justice” is a perversion of the term. It is a machinery of sadism that finds pleasure in human suffering. The state’s so-called “correctional” institutions operate through torture, deprivation of medicine, food, and warmth, systematically violating fundamental rights. This is not correction; it is the absolute negation of empathy, pity, and compassion. These moral benchmarks do not register at zero in Putin’s community — they are at negative infinity.

This analysis of mercy would be incomplete without acknowledging its total absence on the battlefield: multiple executions of unarmed Ukrainian prisoners, violence against civilians, and the high command’s treatment of Russian soldiers as cannon fodder.

In conclusion, we remind Putin and his apologists of a foundational Christian tenet they so blatantly ignore: “Judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy” (James 2:13).

Christianity holds an unequivocally negative view of the vice of hypocrisy. In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ admonished: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?” (Matthew 7:1-3).

How then does the policy of President Putin and his inner circle measure against this Christian commandment? ? The record is damning. The regime relentlessly brands Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s government as “Nazi” and labels Ukraine a militaristic threat to Russia. Yet it categorically refuses to acknowledge that Putin himself has transformed Russia into a militaristic state founded upon a fascist dictatorship — the very “plank” in its own eye.

This hypocrisy was on stark display recently, when Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told Tucker Carlson: “We have no intention of destroying the Ukrainian people. They are brothers and sisters of the Russian people.” Let us examine this “fraternal love” through the lens of reality. Since the invasion began in 2014, Ukraine’s population has shrunk by more than 10 million. Since the full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022, the UN has documented over 12,000 civilian deaths. The collateral damage inflicted upon these “brothers and sisters” is immeasurable: cities razed, lives shattered, bodies mutilated, and fates destroyed. Thousands of square kilometers of land are now mined, rendering it uninhabitable and lethal. Restoring Ukraine to normality will require decades of labor and hundreds of billions of dollars — a task impossible without global external aid.
This is not the conduct of a fraternal nation; it is the strategy of an enemy who regards his neighbors with ferocious hatred.

Meanwhile, Putin’s propaganda apparatus works tirelessly to saturate the public consciousness with its poisonous, delusional fabrications. This relentless campaign of warlike and reckless rhetoric has so radically destabilized global security that the entire democratic world now rightly views Russia as an existential threat to the international order.

Simultaneously, his propagandists methodically drip poison into the minds of Russians, insisting that their nation is the innocent victim of a “collective West,” and that the brutal war in Ukraine is a sacred struggle for Russia’s “freedom and sovereignty.”

This blatant hypocrisy, born in the highest echelons of the Kremlin, has spread throughout Russian society like a cancer, metastasizing broadly and profoundly until it has struck at the very foundations of the nation.

In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ instructs his followers: “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth…” and warns, “No one can serve two masters… You cannot serve God and money” (Matthew 6:19-24). This is not a call for poverty; people need resources to provide themselves with everything necessary for life and raising children: food, housing, clothing. Christianity condemns rather the insatiable pursuit of wealth, the thirst for money as an end in itself.

This raises a key question for our analysis: what is the state of this virtue in contemporary Russian society?

The entire Russian power vertical, from Putin to the lowest levels, is characterized by an obsession with wealth and personal enrichment. This hypertrophied greed forces officials of all ranks to engage in bribery, squander state and regional budgets, and commit fraud — all in order to profit at the expense of the nation. The enormous fortunes of the ruling elite, mostly, have been acquired through criminal means. At the very top of this pyramid of kleptocrats plundering their own people is Vladimir Putin, widely regarded as one of the richest and most unaccountable people on the planet.

Emulating their rulers, the society has adopted a similar attitude. In modern Russia, wealth is not merely a resource; it is a fetish worshipped by the majority, an ultimate goal to be relentlessly pursued, and the universally recognized measure of a person’s success and life achievement. The populace invents ever-new schemes for enrichment, a process supercharged by the internet and social media. Now, any blogger with an audience monetizes it through advertising and donations; a vast assortment of online services is sold digitally; and from the comfort of home, anyone can speculate on stocks and currency rates. The appeal of the Kingdom of God has been supplanted by the allure of an “earthly paradise,” whose gates open only to those with a substantial fortune.

It is with this stark reality in mind that we return to Putin’s Decree, which solemnly declares “the priority of the spiritual over the material” as one of the Russian “traditional values.” Judged by this criterion, Russian society — and the Russian elites that embodie its worst excesses — stand exposed, their proclaimed values revealed as the height of cynical hypocrisy.

Within Christian doctrine, pride occupies a particularly significant place. But what is its precise meaning?

Christ inaugurated his Sermon on the Mount with the declaration: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3). The “poor in spirit” are the humble, those with a contrite heart who are acutely aware of their own shortcomings. The direct moral antithesis to this humility is the person consumed by pride. Pride manifests itself as exaggerated self-conceit, unshakeable self-confidence, a conviction of one’s own infallibility, and ultimately, self-worship. The prideful individual considers himself superior to others and attributes all his achievements solely to personal merit.

Scripture is replete with warnings about this sin’s perilous consequences. As the Book of Proverbs starkly declares: “Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall” (16:18).

Indeed, pride serves as the very bedrock of moral degradation. Consider Russia’s systemic and all-pervading official corruption. While undoubtedly fueled by an insatiable thirst for wealth, its moral license is issued by pride. The act of embezzling state budgets and shamelessly robbing one’s own nation and its citizens — the very people whose taxes constitute that budget — is only possible when officials operate from a place of profound superiority. They view the ordinary populace as cattle, a lower caste unworthy of honest service. This is one of the most pernicious manifestations of pride: a form of self-deification that breeds a sense of total impunity.

Let us recall a revealing episode: until public outcry forced a revision, the main church of the Russian Armed Forces featured a wall mosaic immortalizing the “sacred images” of President Vladimir Putin, former Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, and other top state officials. This transcends mere self-worship; it is an act of self-deification and self-sacralization that verges on blasphemy. For the Kremlin, the facade of triumphant electoral victories is insufficient. The regime’s ambition is to anoint Putin in the eyes of the populace as nothing less than a “divine emissary on Earth.”

Pride truly drags its victims into the abyss. Like an avalanche gathering mass and destructive force, it accumulates ever more reckless and sinful actions. Emboldened by impunity, Putin and his cohort now fancy themselves as demigods, arrogating the right to decide the fates and lives of millions across the globe — from Georgia and Ukraine to Syria, Africa, and South America. This is to say nothing of Russia’s own population, long reduced in their eyes to the status of despised serfs and rightless slaves.

Yet the avalanche does not stop. Its destructive path now targets Europe and the United States through a campaign of aggressive hybrid warfare: sabotage at factories and transport hubs, destructive cyberattacks, incitement of social panic and discontent, and brazen interference in electoral processes. This is the ultimate fruit of permissiveness, grown in the poisoned soil of excessive pride.

The internal motive of Russian aggressive policy has recently been defined with appalling frankness and precision by Mikhail Piotrovsky, the director of the state Hermitage Museum, a leading functionary in Russia’s cultural sphere, a staunch supporter of Putin, and a recipient of the Order “For Merit to the Fatherland.” Justifying the bloodshed in Ukraine, Piotrovsky publicly declared that war is “the self-assertion of a nation. And this is normal, for every person has a desire for self-assertion.”
This statement is more than just primitive savagery and extreme cynicism. It is the ultimate ideological product of a pride cult, which now openly champions mass death as a legitimate form of national “self-realization.”

The next item on Putin’s list of “values” is family and marriage, which his Decree qualifies as a “strong family.” It is crucial to note that this specific term is absent from Christian doctrine. Christianity speaks not of an abstract “strength,” but of sacred, inviolable principles: the inadmissibility of adultery and the indissolubility of the marital union. In this worldview, marriage is a sacrament, a bond sealed in Heaven and binding until death. Conversely, cohabitation outside of marriage is considered a life in sin, a form of adultery.
This establishes a clear doctrinal benchmark. Let us now examine the state of this virtue in Russian society.

Let us begin with the personal example set by the head of state. In 2013, Vladimir Putin divorced his wife, Lyudmila, thereby violating the fundamental Christian principle of the indissolubility of marriage. Subsequently, he began a relationship with Alina Kabaeva, with whom he has cohabited for years outside of wedlock and fathered children. From the perspective of Christian morality, this constitutes not a “strong family,” but a state of fornication and adultery, rendering the children illegitimate in the eyes of the Church.

Thus, the man who enshrines “the strong family” as a national value himself openly and continuously transgresses its most basic religious tenets. This is the foundational example offered to the nation.

And what of the society this example informs? Statistical reports paint a stark picture: over the past decade, Russians have been marrying less, while the divorce rate has soared to a record high. In 2023, for every ten marriages registered, seven ended in divorce. The notion of a “strong family” is thus a statistical fiction in modern Russia. The Christian regulations concerning the sanctity and indissolubility of marriage are largely ignored. Widespread cohabitation, frequent divorce, and adultery have become social norms, largely free from public censure.

Thus, core Christian virtues — peacemaking, mercy, humility, compassion, honesty, decency, and righteousness — are not only absent within the Russian political elite, they are systematically trampled upon. The regime’s foundation is laid with lies, hypocrisy, violence, aggression, cruelty, hatred, permissiveness, self-worship, and an insatiable appetite for enrichment. Putin parasitizes on religious rhetoric, replacing true Christian spiritual values with cynical propaganda clich;s.

There appear to be only two issues on which the Kremlin’s posture superficially aligns with conservative Christian morality: its opposition to abortion and the LGBTQ+ community. Yet it is crucial to discern the true motives behind these Putin’s ideological “zigzags.”

Christianity’s condemnation of abortion is rooted in a humanistic principle: it considers the termination of a pregnancy to be murder, a direct violation of the commandment “Thou shalt not kill.” The prescribed atonement for this sin — years of prayer — underscores the gravity with which it views the sanctity of nascent life.

Putin’s regime, however, “suddenly recalled” the issue of abortion only after the Russian army’s irrecoverable losses in Ukraine surpassed half a million men. This “concern” emerged concurrently with a catastrophic drop in Russia’s birth rate, which hit a historic low in 2024, and against the backdrop of justified fears that millions of potential conscripts would evade a future mobilization.

Thus, the abortion debate in Russia is not driven by compassion for the unborn. For the state, these embryos are not sacred lives but future soldiers. They must be born, indoctrinated, and drilled into an obedient army to be sent by the regime to conquer neighboring nations. On the issue of abortion, Putin’s regime stands in direct opposition to Christian humanism, advancing instead a purely utilitarian, cannibalistic logic.

The regime’s campaign against the LGBTQ+ community is a classic case of a minority finding itself in the crosshairs as “convenient object of persecution” for the dictator. For years, under Putin’s rule, the state maintained a posture of relative tolerance towards the LGBTQ+ community. It was only with the start of the war in Ukraine that a systematic crackdown began, perfectly aligning with a new national strategy: to seek out internal enemies everywhere, to ban relentlessly everything, and to expand lists of “foreign agents” and “extremists.” This serves a dual purpose: to direct public frustration into a safe, controlled channel of hatred, and to keep the population in a state of perpetual fear and obedience through continuous repression.

To equate this attitude with a Christian worldview is a profound error. Christianity views homosexual relations as a sin, a matter of personal morality. The Putin regime, in stark contrast, has no inherent objection to homosexual relations as such; instead, it has criminalized the so-called “propaganda” of LGBTQ+ relations — a deliberately vague concept. The difference is colossal: one addresses faith and conscience, the other constructs a legal pretext for repression.

Furthermore, the very notion of “LGBTQ+ propaganda” is a logical absurdity. Propaganda can only influence a mind capable of conscious choice. A person does not choose his sexual orientation; sexual orientation stems from his nature. No amount of “propaganda” can turn a heterosexual person homosexual, or vice versa.
It is therefore transparent that the Russian law banning “LGBTQ+ propaganda” is not a moral stand. It is a cynical, politically expedient tool. The Putin regime uses the LGBTQ+ community as a convenient scapegoat to distract society from real, pressing problems. This is not a defense of morality; it is the lowest form of political manipulation.

Therefore, these final two threads — abortion and LGBTQ+ community — likewise fail to connect Putin’s quasi-values with authentic Christian teaching. The bridge between them is nothing more than a propagandistic mirage.

Our analysis thus concludes with an inescapable verdict: Vladimir Putin, the Russian power structures, and a significant portion of society under their influence do not merely stray from Christian morality — they actively trample it underfoot. They are mired in the most shameful, blasphemous, and depraved vices inherent in unbridled human nature. Putin’s claim that Russia “protects and multiplies traditional spiritual and moral values” is a brazen lie and a cunning manipulation. The reality is a nation in a state of profound spiritual and moral decay. Russia has not preserved its historical Christian foundations; it has obliterated them, replacing divine commandments with the mafia “codes” of a bandit alley, elevating barbaric customs to the status of national policy.

Yet history’s arc, though long, bends toward justice. Regimes founded on lies and violence carry the seeds of their own destruction within them. And when this regime inevitably falls, all its hypocrites, criminals, and accomplices will face a final judgment — if not before a temporal court, then before the Supreme.