The Network State Podcast #22 – Kamil Galeev

Date: January 11, 2026
Host: ns.com (A)
Guest: Kamil Galeev (B)

Overview:

In this episode, Kamil Galeev, widely known for his analyses on X and Substack under the pen name "Camille Kazani", joins the Network State Podcast to discuss the mechanisms of revolution, the myths and realities behind transformative social change, and the patterns of power in historical nation-states. This conversation traverses topics from the French and Russian revolutions to the collapse of the Soviet Union, decentralization, formalism, and the shifting definitions of power.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Introducing Kamil Galeev and His Focus on Revolution

• Galeev introduces himself, highlighting his background as a Tatar from Russia and current writing interests.
• Focus: Social institutions, especially revolutions as mechanical, not miraculous, phenomena.
  • "What I find interesting is... trying to parse it into a... more mechanic sequence of events just to see, like, how it is happening in real time." – B (00:41)

2. The Mechanics of Revolution & State Power

The Nature of “Revolution”

• Myth vs. Reality:

  • Common belief: Revolutions bring freedom.
  • Reality, as history shows: Followed by increased regimentation and loss of freedom (e.g., France 1789, Russia 1917, England 1642).

• Pattern Identified:

  • True revolutions occur in monocentric countries with a clear capital (Paris, Moscow, London).
  • Countries lacking a dominant center (e.g., China during the warlord era, US pre-Civil War) experience multipolarity and protracted chaos, not instant revolution.

• Quote:

  • "If we look at the countries where...great fundamental revolutions happened... we would see the pattern... revolutions really happen only in monocentric countries." – B (02:41)
  • "A better term then for revolution is really putting, perhaps from the corporate world, hostile takeover." – A (04:48)

The Risks of Multipolarity

• Multipolar breakdowns (anarchy, warlordism) can be even worse than despotic new orders.

• Sometimes, a “hostile takeover” (revolution installing new authority) is a better outcome than unending chaos.

• Quote:

  • "Is there some big boss, maybe good or bad boss? It's kind of better than when there is like hundred bosses and they're fighting each other." – B (21:43)

3. The Pre-Revolutionary “Old Regime”: Tocqueville’s Analysis

Decentralization in Medieval France

• Complex Structure:

  • Kingship existed, but real power often lay with nobles, cities, independent judicial bodies.
  • Cities often run as quasi-republics, highly autonomous.

• Quote:

  • "If a city is governed by a count, it is really governed by a count. But if it is governed by a king, it usually means it is not really governed by anyone. He's far away." – B (11:32)

Legal Fragmentation & Parallel Institutions

• Diverse local laws and constitutional systems existed pre-centralization.

• Kings responded not by abolishing these, but by building a parallel state (royal intendants) dependent exclusively on the king.

• Quote:

  • "You build a parallel government near the old one... So you have this traditional medieval constitution... and you don’t abolish them... but you are building a parallel set of institutions..." – B (15:41–19:13)

4. The Art of (Not) Noticing Power

Power, Perception, and Language

• Those in power avoid naming their power (e.g., “censorship”). Opposition uses sharper language to name and criticize power structures.

  • "The art of not noticing things and not admitting that you have power—it’s actually very good for those in power." – B (26:43)

• Historical examples:

  • French kings, Octavian Augustus, Stalin, all maintained formal or subtle denials of direct power to legitimize or camouflage authority.

5. Formalism & Rule by Law as Camouflage

• Even oppressive regimes relied on paperwork and appearance of legality (e.g., Soviet Union: formal trials, official reports, paperwork).

• Russian Bureaucratic Tradition:

  • Deep formality and documentation predates communism; a distinct cultural trait compared to Nazi Germany’s more oral rule.

• Quote:

  • "Much of what we see as Soviet tradition, for example, is formalism. It's not so much even communist thing as just Russian thing of doing everything formally and putting everything on paper..." – B (32:50)

6. The Soviet Union’s Multiethnic Reality and Collapse

• The USSR was far more multiethnic than Westerners often realize.

• The collapse was driven both by economics and ethnic/nationalist pressures from non-Russian regions.

  • Central Asian republics actually wanted to remain, but were politically “cut off” by Russians and others favoring separation.

• Quote:

  • "Central Asia, it was not one of them. Azerbaijan was not one of them. And I think... it was mostly Russians... that wanted to cut off Central Asia partially because they saw it as... economic... support." – B (37:47)

7. Russia’s Post-Soviet Transition vs. China’s Reforms

Russia’s Chaotic 90s

• After the USSR, Russians expected prosperity but faced hyperinflation, poverty, emigration, and internal conflict.
• Resulted in the rise of Putin’s "Siloviki" regime of security state figures.

China’s Gradual Success

• Both Russia and China faced hard transitions from communism, but China allowed more foreign capital and expertise, leading to a more successful modernization.

• Russia’s privatization was driven by defensive, zero-sum thinking, kept out foreign capital, and failed to create new competitive industries.

• Quote:

  • "For China, foreign companies and foreign investors... served not only as a major source of cash, but also as a major source of expertise, of knowledge... in China, foreign investors were allowed... in Russia they're absolutely excluded." – B (49:34)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the illusion of post-revolutionary “freedom”:
  "People think that what a revolution means is everybody's free ... but the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution were followed by extreme regimentation and a marked loss of freedom." – A (01:30)

• On hostile takeovers and revolution:
  "A better term then for revolution is really putting perhaps from the corporate world, hostile takeover." – A (04:48) "I think that is not bad framing." – B (04:56)

• On decentralization vs. centralization:
  "If a city is governed by a count, it is really governed by a count. But if it is governed by a king, it usually means it is not really governed by anyone." – B (11:32)

• On the danger of overt displays of power:
  "Center right is smarter on this than the quote, far right, because the far right is actually enamored with vibes and ... explicit displays of power ... if you have to keep saying how powerful you are, ... then you're maybe not in power." – A (28:16)

• On the aftermath of the Soviet collapse:
  "A superpower... lost territory that they had won in blood in days... It really sucked to be Russian in the 90s." – A (38:34)

• On comparisons to post-Soviet thinking:
  "One thing I'm indeed noticing in modern America that yeah, I think there's a little bit of post Soviet vibe here. A little bit of like zero sum and very defensive kind of thinking." – B (53:23)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Kamil introduces himself and his focus on revolution: 00:28
• Hostile takeovers as revolutions: 04:48
• Tocqueville and Old Regime France: 05:16–15:41
• Formalism, Stalin, and the camouflage of power: 26:43–34:37
• Soviet Union’s ethnic composition and collapse: 34:37–38:34
• Comparing Russia's 90s transition to China's reforms: 41:57–53:23

Recommended Reading & Further Exploration

• “The Art of Not Noticing Things” (Galeev’s essay, praised in this episode)
• Galeev's writing on the siloviki
• Works by Alexis de Tocqueville, especially regarding the French Revolution and Old Regime
• Further reading to be supplied by Kamil (He promises to send three book recommendations by email)

Tone & Style

The conversation is nuanced, reflective, and historically rich, with an undercurrent of irony and realism about both state-building and societal collapse. Both speakers challenge conventional wisdom about freedom, power, and progress, often drawing parallels between past and present.

Summary prepared for those interested in the forces shaping revolutions, state power, and the lessons of history for constructing future network states or post-nation-state systems.