Santa Anna Putin

The lessons of history to Putin
Keep going! Blog Igor Kabardino, Jan. 5th, 2016 at 12:57 PM

(Click to enlarge)

The question of who the historical figures like the current President of the Russian Federation continues to haunt the nation. Vladimir Vladimirovich for some, unknown to science reason, clearly prefer to see themselves as Alexander II or Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the courtiers, the flatterers compared him with Stalin. However, there are other opinions.

Say, Maxim Kalashnikov said that Putin looks like Napoleon III. I, a modest historian and author of a little-known blog, found another more suitable from my point of view character. So…

History knows many rulers-losers, to the end of his reign brought his country to a complete collapse, ranging from such well-known as Nicholas II, ending as odious as Francisco Nguema. When Mexican dictator Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna rarely mentioned in Europe and in Russia, although his identity is a landmark for the history of the world to a much greater extent than identity of many European rulers, the names of which we know by heart. Despite the fact that Mexico never could boast political stability, Santa Anna managed to submerge her in full chaos, nearly put a point in the history of the country.

Santa Anna came to power on 1 April 1833 on a wave of military-Patriotic hysteria and popularity that he earned a few years earlier, when he was able to inflict a decisive defeat on the Spaniards who have made the final effort to bring rebellious territory under his dominion. I must say that the Spaniards had weakened so much that you can knock them over on the field of battle was simple, and the whole nineteenth century was a century of crumbling Spanish colonial Empire.

Once at the top, Santa Anna quickly discovered their penchant for conservatism and dictatorship. Freedom of thought and federalism were replaced by Catholic obscurantism and extreme centralism. In addition, Santa Anna adored flattery and loud nickname: “Napoleon of the West,” “Savior of the Fatherland”, etc., and all his reign was marked by two disastrous extremes – amazing foreign policy adventurism (in part about this feature says and ardent love of the ruler for gambling and love intrigues) and a tendency to “tighten the screws” within the country. Tyrant surrounded yourself in luxury and women, and loved, when it is flattering to be compared to Napoleon Bonaparte, the similarity with which he tried to emphasize.


The authority of Santa Anna collapsed to zero and during the next rebellion, he was again overthrown by Mexican liberals – this time permanently. Chances to return to power he was no longer himself, and he died in poverty and oblivion.

Santa Anna is a unique example of political survival and return to the top post on the background of the terrible results of the Board. This is due not only to a particular combination of circumstances, but the influence of conservative circles, which are constantly repeated something like “horses in midstream does not change and if not Santa Anna, then who?”


In this sense, Vladimir Putin is almost the spitting image of Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna. Since his arrival to the top post five times there were situations that could literally erase the former employee of KGB in the powder. But Putin cleverly he called trace of difficulty, and even with the huge political benefit for themselves. And Kursk, and the war in Chechnya (when military victory turned into political defeat of the Russian Federation in front of former fighters), and Beslan, and numerous man-made disasters and also deliberate dumbing down of Economics to the level of financial and raw material appendage of the West. How can you not remember “ever-returning” Santa Anna?

Putin even in military terms almost repeated the “exploits” of their Mexican counterparts: with a relatively small and partial victories in Chechnya, Georgia and Crimea, a major defeat – Putin lost Ukraine as Santa-Anna – Texas. If now someone will be able to return to Russia, then certainly not the elderly narcissistic macho in which stigma put nowhere.

Other elements are also recognizable: corruption and economic failures; the cult of personality, absolutely not corresponding to real merit; authoritarianism; bragging rights; the betrayal of national interests and defeatist before the US – strictly for Patriotic rhetoric. The man doesn’t so long ago accused the non-system liberals that those “jackals at the embassies”, now on six months worth in the pose of a supplicant, waiting for an audience with Obama to get the new package of directives on how to quickly implement the Minsk agreements, deep enough to get into Syria, I do not want to uhlopat the Russian economy.

By and large the difference between the two rulers, the Mexican XIX century and Russian twenty-first century, is only one. What had been done with his country, Santa Anna, we already know, but what Vladimir Putin will do to unfortunate Russian people, alas, we will learn.

(Click to enlarge)

One line translation – fourth line from bottom:
– Sacks contained sugar.

The answer to the riddle:
* RDX aka Ryazan Incident
* Explanation attempts for the Russian apartment bombings

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s