Russian national identity

Should Russia become part of the West, or follow an Eastern path? This has been a centuries-old discussion among Russian intellectuals. For Westernizers in Russia, the " West " symbolized progress, freedom, democracy, civil society, normality, and a nation-state. Their opponents saw the West as representing moral decadence in the beginning and later capitalist exploitation. This paper attempts to lay out the foundations and the evolution of the 200-year-old discussion of Russia's place in the world. It briefly examines the period of Muscovite Russia, where the foundations of the authoritarian state tradition were laid and further strengthened. The paper then focuses on the period of Peter the Great's reign, in which educated Russians became increasingly acquainted with Western European culture and started having doubts about Russia's status in the face of perceived European superiority. Trying to summarize how the international and internal developments of the 1800s and 1900s have affected the debate about Russia's place between East and West, the paper then examines the current state of discussions in Russia under Putin's leadership and finally attempts to make predictions for the future.

The vast majority of historians and anthropologists unequivocally believe that Russia is a part of European civilisation due to a variety of common cultural features. Dispute arises mainly when Russia’s European identity is considered in terms of philosophy and politics. Once the Soviet Union collapsed, it looked like the public controversy over Russia’s identity had purportedly ended with the new Russian government’s decision to conduct democratic reforms and pursue membership in major European and international organisations. Therefore, the question is why didn’t this discourse subside under Yeltsin and Putin’s rule? Why does Russian society return to it over and over again? Why has Russia changed its strategic priorities in the 2000s, displaying little interest in European integration and gradually sliding into a confrontation with the West? Finally, what outcomes can we expect from the public discussions about Russia’s identity?

The article attempts to analyze and compare the historical periodization of Ukrainian and Russian national identity. The main problem of this research is a political and mentality specificity of both nations caused by the political and historical differences.

Diedush, O. (2017) The Periodization of Ukrainian and Russian National Identities: a Comparative Analysis. Folk Art and Ethnology, 6 (370), 45–50.

If the East built the foundations of its culture on the ruthless subordination of man on to a higher power, the supernatural, then in the West it was the opposite, man was left to his own invention, which allowed for a broad, self-generated creativity … Vladimir Soloviev (cited by Kapuscinski with approval)

This paper analyzes changes in regional electoral behavior and attitudes towards separatism and foreign policy orientation in Ukraine after the “Orange Revolution” and the “Euromaidan,” which turned into a violent internal conflict and one of the biggest international conflicts involving Western countries and Russia. The research question is whether the regional divisions concerning domestic politics, separatism and foreign orientation have changed significantly in Ukraine since the “Orange Revolution” in 2004 and the “Euromaidan” in 2014. This paper employs comparative and statistical analyses of voting results of the 2012, 2007, 2006, and 2002 parliamentary elections, and the 2014, 2010, and 2004 presidential elections, to examine effects of historical legacies, ethnicity, language, age, and economic factors on regional support for pro-nationalist/pro-Western and pro-Russian/pro-communist political parties and presidential candidates. The study also analyses support for separatism in Crimea and Donbas after the “Orange Revolution” and the “Euromaidan.” It uses a brief survey, conducted for this study by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) in April and May 2014, to examine determinants of pro-separatist attitudes. The paper also employs Razumkov Center and KIIS surveys to analyze changes in 2002-2014 in regional preferences for joining the European Union (EU), NATO, and a union with Russia. The analysis shows that Ukraine after the “Orange Revolution” remained divided along regional lines in terms of support for political parties and presidential candidates and attitudes towards joining the EU, NATO, and a Russia-led union. After the “Euromaidan,” such divisions in foreign policy orientation and, to a lesser extent, support for presidential candidates and political parties remained. A significant rise in separatist sentiments helped to fuel separatist takeovers of power in Crimea and Donbas and Russian military intervention in these regions.

Проспект книги, посвященной русскому национальному самосознанию, уникальным особенностям русской цивилизации и современному положению русских в России в связи с изменением Конституции. Книгу можно приобрести во всех крупных торговых сетях и на сайте издательства без наценки: https://kmbook.ru/shop/russkie-nacziya-czivilizacziya-gosudarstvennost-i-pravo-russkih-na-rossiyu/

The Mongol impact on Russian history, politics, economy and culture has been one of the most debated subjects not only among Russian historians, scholars and philosophers, but also the historians of Western countries as well. For the Russian historians with the traditional approach, Mongols brought nothing to Russia but destruction and bloodshed. The Westernizers approached the Mongol rule in Russia from the perspective of relations with Europe and thus perceived the Mongol impact as a very negative development as Russia was isolated from Europe during the Mongol rule which continued for almost 250 years. The Eurasian school, however, embraced the Mongol rule with the argument that it had a direct impact to strengthen the founding pillars of the Tsarist Russian State: Orthodoxy, centralization of political power, autocracy and serfdom. In an attempt to make an impartial analysis, this paper, first of all, briefly takes a look at the different interpretations of Russian and Soviet historians about the impacts of the Mongol invasion. The paper then focuses on the search of concrete evidences which obviously demonstrate the impacts of the Mongol rule on Russia in various fields. In the last section, the paper tries to lay out its own impartial assessment based on the existing evidences as well as unbiased interpretations.

This paper argues that nationalism is gaining strength in Russia. The recent demonstrations in Moscow and in various cities are revealing the fact that the growing nationalist tendencies in Russia are now deviating into a racist and xenophobic character. The paper defines Kremlin's policies to use nationalist ideas as tools to reconfigure general political discourse as being one of the most important factors in nationalism's recent resurgence in Russia. Thus, in an attempt to explore the main ideologies and concepts which shape Kremlin's nationalist doctrine, the paper takes a brief look into the development of the Russian idea, National identity and nationalism in Russia. Finally, the paper tries to make a clear definition of the ideology of state nationalism in Russia under Putin administration.

Riabov, Oleg. "Mother Russia": An Experience of Gender Analysis of Searches for Russian National Identity in Russian and Western Philosophy of History
The monograph is devoted to gender analysis of representations of Russia and Russianness in Russian and Western philosophy of history. It investigates reasons, forms, and functions of intersections of gender and nationalism. The author demonstrates how concept “Mother Russia” serves as a factor of national identity, legitimation and delegitimation of power, international relations, and gender order in Russian society.

Первая часть большого исследования "Идеология Солженицына" [полностью размещено в интернете здесь: http://100knig.com/ideologiya-solzhenicyna/]

Сборник «Из под глыб» является наиболее ярким продолжением веховской традиции. Более того, именно А.И. Солженицын оказался подлинным идейным наследником «Вех». Преемство закреплено уже в названии: «Из под глыб» это следующий шаг после «Из глубины». Не расставив верно вехи, Россия сброшена оказалась на самую глубину, в бездну революции, а затем большевицкий режим навалил сверху тысячетонные глыбы. ««Вехи» и сегодня кажутся нам как бы присланными из будущего» - подчеркивает А.И. Солженицын и дерзновенно осуществляет «реставрацию будущего» «Вех», притязая одновременно и на их антиреволюционное содержание, критическое по отношению к прогрессистским суевериям русской интеллигенции, и на их религиозно-философскую глубину. А.И. Солженицын выступает с последовательной и развернутой доктриной анти-Просвещения. Возвращение к Богу, добровольное самоограничение и самостеснение человека, память об обязанностях вместо разгула «прав», приоритет внутренней свободы и недопустимость принесения народной жизни в жертву не только ради тоталитарной утопии, но и ради разгула свободы. Доктрина Солженицына – одна из наиболее последовательных и политически чётких консервативных философий, сформулированных за последние столетия. Тем более, что дуэль Солженицына с призраками Вольтера и Руссо продолжается и после его смерти, причем счет, по-прежнему, в пользу русского писателя.

This paper argues that there is a trend towards authoritarianism in Russia. Some political analysts view this mass authoritarianism as a product of history, while others argue that Russia's turn to authoritarianism is not a cultural phenomenon but rather a result of the economic collapse and political turmoil that Russians faced in the early post-Soviet period. The paper, in an attempt to conceptualize Russian attitudes towards autocracy, briefly examines the foundations of autocracy in Russian history and tries to find the answer to the question of why autocracy has become an integral part of Russian political culture. The paper especially focuses on the periods of Muscovite Russia, Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, Lenin, and Stalin, during which the foundations of absolutism, despotism, and autocracy were laid and further strengthened. The paper then examines the period of Putin and examines the motives behind Putin's authoritarian turn. Trying to identify the political, economic, and social developments that were instrumental in determining the Russian nation's acceptance of authoritarianism, the paper finally attempts to make predictions for the future.

Sadržaj

UVOD: "Ruska ideja"?  (9) 

PETAR ČAADAJEV: Problem mesta i uloge Rusije u svetskoj istoriji (25)

IVAN KIREJEVSKI: Ideja sinteze Rusije i Evrope (61)

ALEKSEJ HOMJAKOV: Ideja sabornosti (111)

ALEKSANDAR HERCEN: Ideja ruskog socijalizma (161)

NIKOLAJ DANILEVSKI: Slovenski kulturno-istorijski tip (213)

KONSTANTIN LEONTJEV: Ideja vizantizma (257)

Napomena (303)

Review article on the books:
Black Wind, White Snow: The Rise of Russia’s New Nationalism. By Charles Clover. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2016.
The Gumilev Mystique: Biopolitics, Eurasianism, and the Construction of Community in Modern Russia. By Mark Bassin. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2016.
Eurasianism and the European Far Right: Reshaping the Europe-Russia Relationship. Edited by Marlene Laruelle. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2015.
Russia and the Western Far Right: Tango Noir. By Anton Shekhovtsov. Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2017.

Ce mémoire s'intéresse aux incidences de la double identité nationale russe à l'égard de l'islam dans la politique internationale de la Fédération de Russie. En effet, la littérature portant sur l'islam en Russie se divise en deux grandes tendances: la première présente une Russie intégrationniste et islamophile, tandis que l'autre présente une Russie tsariste, soviétique et fédérative répressive et islamophobe. À partir de ce constat, nous avons posé les trois questions suivantes: comment la Russie réitère-t-elle cette dualité identitaire, par qui et pourquoi? Ces trois questionnements initiaux nous ont menés à formuler notre problématique qui est celle du rapport entre les deux identités nationales russes envers l'islam dans leur liaison avec les intérêts nationaux de la Fédération de Russie et dans leur influence sur la formulation de la politique internationale de l'administration Poutine. Nous posons comme première hypothèse que la double identité nationale de la Russie à l'égard de l'islam se trouve en amont et en aval de certains intérêts nationaux russes. Nous posons comme seconde hypothèse que cette dualité identitaire influence l'élaboration de la politique internationale de la Fédération de Russie. Pour mener à bien notre recherche, nous avons défini le concept clef de notre analyse, soit celui de l'identité nationale selon le mouvement critique de la théorie constructiviste des Relations internationales, nous avons fait un survol des origines historiques de l'ambiguïté des relations russo-musulmanes et nous avons examiné les courants nationalistes et les doctrines de politique étrangère les plus influents dans la Russie post-soviétique. Nous avons ensuite parcouru les relations établies entre la Russie et différents pays du monde musulman en portant notre attention sur les intérêts nationaux russes qui y sont défendus. Pour terminer, nous avons étudié deux statuts proclamés par la Russie sur la scène internationale démontrant tant ses traits islamophiles qu'islamophobes. Grâce à l'ensemble de notre parcours, nous affirmons, avec un degré de précaution, que la double identité nationale de la Russie à l'égard de l'islam se trouve en amont et en aval de certains intérêts nationaux russes comme la préservation de l'intégrité du territoire, le renforcement de la sécurité, l'intégration dans l'économie mondiale, l'accroissement de l'engagement russe dans les différents dossiers internationaux, la définition de son statut international et le respect de celui-ci. La dualité identitaire influence donc l'élaboration de la politique internationale de la Fédération de Russie et ses relations avec le reste du monde.

Edinburgh University Press is one of the leading university presses in the UK. We publish academic books and journals in our selected subject areas across the humanities and social sciences, combining cutting-edge scholarship with high editorial and production values to produce academic works of lasting importance. For more information visit our website: www. edinburghuniversitypress.com

История становления единого русского народа в конце XVI века. Эпизод битвы при Молодях(1572), во время которой малое русское войско наголову разбило многочисленную турецко-татарско-ногайскую орду и отстояло суверенитет русского народа. В художественном романе выведены реальные исторические персонажи: царь Иван Грозный, князья Дмитрий Хворостинин и Михаил Воротынский, хан Девлет Гирей, Малюта Скуратов, Борис Годунов, Ермак и другие. Написан на основании данных летописей, архивных материалов и диссертационных исследований. Трактовка событий патриотическая. Предназначен для юношества. Написан простым языком, в жанре авантюрно-приключенческого романа.

Отношения России и Запада после 2014 г. находятся в стагнационной фазе, которая началась после участия Вооруженных сил РФ в противоречащей международно-правовым обязательствам России аннексии Крыма. В двусторонней повестке дня и до того хватало проблемных вопросов, однако для их урегулирования и поиска компромиссов на всевозможных уровнях имелись различные политические механизмы: Совет Россия — НАТО, саммиты Россия — ЕС, межпарламентское сотрудничество и др. Нынешний кризис оказался столь глубоким, что деятельность многих из них оказалась замороженной. Несомненно, говорить о новой холодной войне на Европейском континенте преждевременно. Но некоторые элементы тех времен снова находятся на переднем плане современных международных отношений. Например, в российском политическом дискурсе большое распространение получили идеологемы и смысловые конструкты, распространение которых еще совсем недавно было уделом маргинальных политиков, привычно набиравших свои политические очки посредством эксплуатации коллективных фобий, комплексов и постимперского синдрома. Между тем предметный диалог с западными партнерами был вытеснен риторическими приемами, характерными скорее для старой советской дипломатии, нежели для государства, стремящегося занять полноправное место в сообществе консолидированных демократий. Антиамериканизм и антизападничество стали привычным фоном выступлений российских официальных лиц по внешнеполитической проблематике. После подписания весной 2014 г. сомнительного с экономической точки зрения соглашения с Китаем о строительстве газопровода «Сила Сибири» в экспертной среде стало мейнстримом говорить об особом пути развития России и развороте на Восток, в Азию. Таким образом, как выстраивать сегодня внешнюю политику — вопрос не праздный.

In the midst of the Russian Federation's 2012 presidential election, Vladimir Putin expressed his support for the establishment of a functioning Eurasian Union by 2015. This article attempts to demonstrate that this Eurasian push, taken in context together with a number of other policies and programs pursued by Putin and Dmitri Medvedev, reflects a shift in Russian identity politics towards neo-Eurasianism. In doing so, the potential weaknesses of neo-Eurasianism as an identity framework for the whole of Russian society will be highlighted, indicating that the further centralization of political authority with the core (Moscow) will only exacerbate grievances in the regions of the periphery.

The focus of this paper is twofold. On the one hand, it outlines the geopolitical rationale behind contemporary Russian expansionism, as well as presents the asymmetric mechanisms utilized by Russia to solidify its authority in the post-communist space. The four commonly used theoretical frameworks explaining Russian expansionism were described and critically assessed. Apart from this, the Russian and foreign political philosophic thought of the 19-21 centuries was referred to, to trace the evolution of the Russian Byzantium-type governing tradition and national identity. On the other hand, the paper assesses the features of post-colonial Ukrainian political culture and unveils premises for the emergence of its statehood in the 1990s. The major differences between Russian and Ukrainian political cultures and identities are emphasized. Finally, the hypothesis tested is that a democratic Ukraine – strengthened by cooperation with its Western allies – will become an obstacle of Russian expansionism in the future.

Putin’s Russia suffered a bitter defeat in the first weeks of the Russian-Ukrainian war. However, the Kremlin will keep on trying to place Ukraine into its orbit, as well as project its influence further into the Western world. Unceasing and dynamic aggrandizement under strong leadership is one of the most functional approaches to statecraft in Russia, tested by history and implemented today. In this light, Ukraine has become the vanguard of the Western world. No European nation should feel safe, as there are no limits to the Kremlin’s appetites.

Introduction: “We Have No Motherland” 1
1 Repatriating Capitalism: Fragmented Society and Global Connections 15
2 The Russian Tragedy: From Ethnic Trauma to Ethnic Vitality 79
3 Exchange of Sacrifices: State, Soldiers, and War 130
4 Mothers, Objects, and Relations: Organized by Death 202
Conclusion: “People Cut in Half” 259
References 263

Why Galicia? The Eastern part of this region, now comprised in the oblasts of
Western Ukraine, today is a traditional stronghold of Ukrainian Nationalism,
with outspoken Anti-Russian feelings. But this identity was a product of internal
and exogenous conflicts, with other orientations and communities who were
present until 1945 in Galicia. The most important case is the Polish community,
who had a strong influence here, and majority in some important urban centers
like Lwow, a symbol of szlachta cultural hegemony in the Eastern Borderland of
Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Russian military aggression and diplomatic pressure against Ukraine stems from the neo-imperial thinking of Russian elites and ordinary citizens. This thinking requires a reproduction of expansionist patterns that once led Russia to its “historical greatness”: construction of a territorially large state, rich in resources and demographically diverse, with its own distinct voice in international relations. The human cost for “making Russia forever great,” however, has rarely been seriously considered.

Historiography During the Soviet Nation and State Building Process
The concepts of nation and state embody in themselves both normality and artificiality. It is firmly established by historical experience that the human, as the subject of the former as well as the object of the latter, frequently interferes with the content of these concepts. If this intervention stems from ideological reasons, the implication is that the mechanism for providing legitimacy is involved with its focus on historiography. At this stage, the engine of historiography becomes an office for the approval of political power.
Within that context, the fictionalization of history transforms the knowledge of the past to a reproducible product. This understanding means a neglect of the motive to attain the reality of the past; instead, the aim is to become the social engineering required for the continuity of the ideology. In this concise text, alongside the ongoing philosophical debates as to what history is and how it should be laid out, the instrumentality of history in practical terms will be examined with a special focus on the Soviet Union paradigm.
Keywords: Soviet historiography, Soviet nation-state, Territorial historiography, Soviet nationalism.

The article outlines the geopolitical rationale behind contemporary Russian expansionism, as well as presents the asymmetric and “hybrid” mechanisms utilized by the Kremlin to solidify its authority in the post-communist space. To do this, the article refers to the findings of American, British, Polish and Ukrainian intellectuals on the nature of the Russian political identity. The four commonly used theoretical frameworks explaining contemporary Russian expansionism are described and critically assessed (imperial, diversionary, divergent identities and “angry guy”). Apart from this, the Russian and foreign political philosophic thought of the XIX-XXI centuries is referred to. The latter was done to trace the evolution of the Russian Byzantium-type governing tradition and national identity. The article puts forward the hypothesis that Russian expansionism, alongside the Russian sentiment towards an imperialist worldview, are tested by historical patterns of national policy-making which bring the state to its civilizational glory. In this light, it will be futile to expect that Russia can fully democratize, build a Western type of a nation-state and start conducting open policies.

This paper argues that the two capitals of Russia, namely Moscow and St Petersburg, have each played a unique and defining role in the birth and development of the ideologies of Westernization and conservatism in Russia. With their distinctive characters and way of lives, the two cities constituted two poles in Russian political history as well as literature and art. The paper tries to give the reader a brief picture of the both cities from an architectural, cultural, historical and above all political and ideological perspective. Thus, in an attempt to explore the different roles the two cities played in Russian political history, the paper takes a brief look in to the history and dynamics which shaped the distinctive ideologies of the two capitals. Finally, the paper tries to make a clear identification and comparison of the character and roles of the two capitals in Russian political life and history.

This dissertation is articulated around a central motivation, focused upon the analysis of the cognitive processes that social actors develop in periods of historic transition. It is aimed at identifying the strategies created by social actors in their endeavour to provide intelligibility to society global changes, whenever the last ones are unfolding. Thus the choice of the Russian Revolution of 1917 as a study case is justified precisely because this revolution has grown as an historic transformation deeply invested by the will-to-know of the social actors.
The dissertation stands on two main theses. The first one considers that the Russian revolutionary process, from February to October 1917, did not witness a clear-cut definition and empowerment of a societal paradigm that was unmistakably dominant. This idea supposes that the autocratic tsarist paradigm collapsed without the simultaneous emergence of a social political model stuffed with consensual and everlasting solutions. It is also argued that most of the social and political challenges, which confronted the Bolsheviks after their seizure of the state apparatus in October, ended by revealing all the flaws and empty gaps in the so-called “Leninist” paradigm. The second thesis of the dissertation considers that this result can be understood only when we take into account the identity processes, of medium and long term, which are embedded in the Russian society. Such processes consist of frontier identities, partially conceived as cognitive reactions to Russia’s semiperipheral position in the world-system and its ambivalent inscription between Europe and Asia, the West and the East. The dissertation strives to show that, in such a country, this kind of ambivalence has shaped the perception of the historic events during the last two centuries, thus conditioning many of the political choices that have been made.