Image
© Presidential Press and Information Office
Putin at meeting of the Security Council, 20 November.
Russian President Vladimir Putin recently spoke about countering extremism in the next decade at an expanded Security Council meeting in the Kremlin. As usual, he had some interesting things to say. Here are some highlights, with commentary.

On the inhumanity of extremism
I do not believe there is any need to prove how dangerous the very nature of extremism is and how destructive its ideology is - the ideology of intolerance, hatred and animosity. In all its manifestations, extremism is aggressive in nature, seditious and often violent and linked to terrorism.

It infringes on the rights and freedoms of citizens, often even endangering their very lives; it is a threat to national security, capable of cardinally unbalancing the political, economic and social systems. Such types of extremism as nationalism, religious intolerance and political extremism are especially dangerous for society and for the state. Every crime of this type (usually resonant and heinous in itself) can provoke mass violations of public order.
The western puppet masters also know how dangerous and destructive extremism is, which is why they foment it in regions they wish to control. They also know that ordinary people also know how dangerous and destructive it is. But unlike their leaders, they see this as a bad thing, which is why their governments make a big show about 'fighting terrorism'.

What none of them seem to know, or what none of them wish to reveal, is that extremism has a very real cause, not to be found in its specific ideology per se. There is nothing inherently ponerizing about an extremist ideology. The reason they work is because 1) they are created by individuals with certain psychopathologies with tendencies to see the world in anti-social, anti-human, doctrinaire, black-and-white, us-and-them ways, and 2) similar people gravitate towards those ideologies, either because they share the same emotional deficits or because they are simply ignorant of what's really going on and get riled up by the revolutionary aspects. Andrew Lobaczewski laid it all out in Political Ponerology. If only the world would listen.

On color revolutions
I would like to add that in the modern world extremism is often used as a geopolitical instrument to rearrange spheres of influence. We see the tragic consequences of the wave of so-called 'colour revolutions', the turmoil in the countries that have undergone the irresponsible experiments of covert and sometimes blatant interference in their lives. We take this as a lesson and a warning, and we must do everything necessary to ensure this never happens in Russia.
Yep.

What to do
This should not be piecemeal involvement, but a unified front, so to speak, which should act to prevent extremism, jointly educate people, including via the Internet, and create conditions for stronger peace and accord in society.

Once we achieve such coordination in every region, in each municipality, then we will have overall results in countering extremism. People would know that on their territory, there are authorities and there is a proactive and concerned society and together they can effectively resist any manifestations of extremism and maintain calm and stability.

In such conditions of trust and support, it is much easier to create an atmosphere of renouncing extremist propaganda. At the same time, the recognition by the citizens of the danger posed by extremism guarantees the efficiency of the measures taken by the authorities.

... I would like to reiterate that one of our key priorities is to breed public rejection of and civic immunity to the dissemination of extremist and radical ideas. For this purpose, we must unite the efforts of the authorities, society and all state and social agencies.
Education is certainly important. As is a centralized effort to combat the ponerogenic process in such groups. The people need a central authority, otherwise foreign agents would be free to create and rile up existing extremist groups (ponerogenic unions). But that authority needs to be informed as to the exact causes and dynamics behind the process.

The weak spots
I would like to single out some priority areas of our work. We should pay special attention to interethnic and inter-religious relations and fully support the culture, traditions and identity of the peoples living in a given area, town or city. This is a very delicate job, but you know what can happen if it is left undone.

The second area is work with the younger generation. It is among them that the leaders of extremist organisations are trying to find followers and conduct their propaganda, primarily using the internet. Extremist ideology is gaining momentum in the virtual world, spilling out into the real one.
Putin is correct in that ponerogenic unions propagandize to youths (often those who are disenfranchised, who don't feel they have any purpose, who feel powerless in the face of a national or global system that doesn't give a shit about them) and exploit ethnic and religious differences. Most, if not all, religions have some degree of ponerogenic material, ripe for exploitation. The only solution is education, and a big part of that education is instilling real values into youths.

Illegal immigration
The third important area is the improvement of the migration policy. We still have quite a few problems here that have to do with illegal, uncontrolled migration. We know that this breeds crime, interethnic tensions and extremism. We need greater control over compliance with regulations covering migrants' stay in Russia and we have to take practical measures to promote their social and cultural adaptation and protect their labour and other rights.
Whereas the U.S. seems to be against illegal immigration simply because it is a totally xenophobic and racist society, it can be a real problem. The Central Asian region of Russia's border is largely uncontrolled, making easy entry for foreign mercenaries, drug traffickers, human traffickers, and smugglers. The U.S. has been exploiting this fact for years.

Conclusion
...countering extremism has nothing to do with intolerance towards dissenters. Russia is a free democratic country and its citizens have the right to their opinion, the right to voice it and to be in opposition to the authorities. Moreover, no national leadership could ever be effective without society playing this role. ... It is important that they exercise their rights, express their political preferences, positions and views in a civilised and legal manner.

As we assert our freedom of choice, the right to hold meetings, marches and rallies, we should not forget that we are responsible for our words and deeds. We must know and bear in mind that breeding conflict between people of different ethnicity and religion, propaganda of nationalist ideology, mass violations of public order on these grounds and particularly calls for a violent overthrow of the existing regime are direct manifestations of anti-national thinking and extremism. ... Leaders of public movements should remember this; they should know that such actions are punishable by law.
Those who cry "censorship!" should remember that freedom is not the same as free license. There are lines that should not be crossed, lines crossed by groups like ISIS, Ukraine's neo-Nazi battalions, the U.S. government, NATO, etc.

On Jerusalem
I have mentioned developments in the world. Life keeps teaching us new lessons. Sometimes this happens far from our borders; however, we should still be aware of them. The latest atrocity in Jerusalem, where praying people were attacked with an axe - this is beyond comprehension. Knowing this, realising the danger of such manifestations and having analysed their causes, we must make timely decisions that would save our country from such things.
Putin is no doubt aware of the extent of Mossad operations in Israel. But he plays by the rules. In this case, if Mossad had a hand in the recent attack (it almost always does), it has given Putin the opportunity to use it as support for his own policies that run directly counter to the actions of countries like Israel, who foment extremism in countries they don't like.