Modern concept of Eurasianism. Eurasia Political Party Eurasian Idea
The article discusses in correlation with data modern science and relevant geopolitical trends, key ideas of the founders of Eurasianism P.N. Savitsky and N.S. Trubetsky. The ideas developed by the Classics of Eurasianism on the Turan cultural type and belonging to it eastern Slavs should be recognized, especially in connection with the discoveries in the field of genealogy DNA and the development of linguistics, erroneous. Related with borrowings from classical geopolitics Aspects of the worldview of the Eurasians: an idea of \u200b\u200bthe difference in the sea and land as the source of interdlegental conflicts, the underestimation of the importance of maritime activities for Russia, diverges with the geopolitical trends of our time. Approaches P.N. Savitsky, aimed at reducing the negative consequences of a high continentality of most of Russia (the "principle of continental neighboring", the desire for self-sufficiency of the country), are relevant and deserved. These approaches require a new understanding that takes into account the territorial volume of modern Russia.
self-sufficiency
sea activities
continentality
self-awareness
turan Type
eurasianism
1. Bezrukov L.I. Continental and oceanic dichotomy in regional and international development. - Novosibirsk: Geo, 2008. - 369 p.
2. Belanovskaya E.V., Belanovsky O.P. Genetic traces of historical and prehistoric migrations: continents, regions, peoples // Bulletin Voznik and C (Vavilovsky Society of Genetics and Breeders). - T. 13. - C. 401-408.
3. Gaplogroup N (Y-DNA). [ Electronic resource]. URL: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/
4. Dugin A.G. Eurasian triumph // Savitsky P.N. Continent Eurasia. - M.: Agraf, 1997. - C.433-453.
5. Zadonchina // Literature of Ancient Russia. Reader. - M.: Higher School, 1990. - C.219-226.
6. Makinder H. Geographical axis of history // Classic geopolitics, 20th century. - M., 2003. -C.9-30.
7. Sea transport // Big Soviet Encyclopedia. T. 16. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia, 1974. - C.598-601.
8. Nikolsky A.F. The theory of sustainable development and issues of global and national security (the beginning of the theory of modern socialism). - Irkutsk: Siberian Book, 2012. -252 s ..
9. Novgorod epic. - M.: Science, 1978. - 456 p.
10. NASTICAL LANGUAGES. [Electronic resource]. URL: http: //ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/
11. Petrov V.L. Geopolitics of Russia. - M.: Veva, 2003.
12. Popov P.L. On the trajectories of the spread of cultural influences in the EUROPA-Russia-Asia system // Historical geography of Asian Russia. - Irkutsk, 2011. - P.70-72.
13. Savitsky P.N. Continent Eurasia. - M.: Agraf, 1997. - 464 p.
14. Word about the regiment of Igor. - M.: Fiction, 1987. - 221 p.
15. Solonevich I.L. People's monarchy. - M.: Phoenix, 1991. - 512 p.
16. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics // Big Soviet Encyclopedia. - T. 24. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia, 1977. - 575 p.
17. Trubetskaya N.S. About the Turan Element and Russian Culture // Russia between Europe and Asia: Eurasian temptation. - M., 1993. - C.59-77.
18. Trubetskaya N.S. Eugene-regional nationalism // Russia between Europe and Asia: Eurasian temptation. - M., 1993. - C. 90-100.
19. Uralsky Languages \u200b\u200b// [Electronic resource] .URL: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/
20.Florovsky G.V. Eurasian temptation // Russia between Europe and Asia: Eurasian temptation. - M. - C.292-301.
21. Tszybursky V.L. Island Russia. Geopolitical and chronopolitical work. - M.: Rossman, 2007. - 544 p.
22. Atlas of the Human Journey. GeneticMarkers. [Electronic resource]. URL: https://genographic.NationalGeographic.com.
The question of the civilization situation of Russia is important for domestic cultural and geopolitical thought. Abroad, he also pays considerable attention. Is our country part of the European, Slavic, Eurasian civilization, or a special civilization state? Depending on the answer to this question, four concepts are distinguished: Western, Slavophilism, Eurasianism, "Isolationism". (There are some transitions, combinations between extreme options; but not a new concept that is almost possible is hardly possible.)
After the events that occurred in our country in the late 1980s - early 1990s, this question became particularly sharp. Both professionals and the public could not fail to think about the historical meaning of the changes and prospects, the ways of self-determination of Russia in the modern world, in which, possibly, the geopolitical meaning of civilizational similarities and differences increases.
Appeal to existing concepts that developed the problem of Russia's place in the system of countries of the world, a comparison of these concepts, their correlation with modernity, in this historical situation it was natural - and quite natural is special attention to Eurasia.
Eurasianism emerged in the 20-30th years of the 20th century, in the Beloeamigrant environment. Eurasianism had some continuity with the traditions of late Slavic film, but reflected and reflected the understanding of the unrealistic number of his key ideas. It seems that Eurasianism was the only direction of the BeloEmigrant thought, which received a significant influence in our country in Soviet times - to some elements of Eurasianism, brought it closer with Soviet social science (and combined with elements with it incompatible).
The historical background of the formation of Eurasianism was a certain alienation of Russia from the West, which occurred after the October Revolution. At the same time, the territorial acquisitions of the Russian Empire in Central Asia, made at the end of the 19th century, were preserved at this time, and increased the process of gradual strengthening the importance of the Volga region, the Urals, Siberia in different spheres of the country's life. Differences from the current geopolitical circumstances are great, but some important coincidences are also obvious.
After the collapse of the USSR, the Western hostility towards our country has been preserved; Understanding this reality was increasingly approved in Russia, especially since the late 1990s. Most of the Slavic countries turned out to be included in the geopolitical orbit of the West. All this counteracted the influence of Westernity and Slavophilia as geopolitical concepts. Therefore, attention was naturally shifted towards Eurasianism (having a long history of development) and "insulatingism" (approved in the post-Soviet era and in some important aspects of the similar as scientific era). Since the hostility of the West remained contrary to the transition of Russia to a market economy and political pluralism, there was a need to disclose the sources of this conflict. And here was a natural appeal to the basic ideas of classical geopolitics; Namely, the Eurasianism is most closely connected (compared to other concepts under consideration) with these ideas.
It is believed that the first geopolitics "in the full sense of the word" in Russia was P.N. Savitsky, one of the founders of the Eurasianism. And the revival of geopolitics in a narrow (or "full") sense of the word in New Russia, in the 1990s, is due to the Eurasian tradition of the works of A.G. Dugin. At the junction of Slavophilic and Eurasian approaches, there is a version of geopolitics developed at the Academy of Geopolitical Problems of Russia. At the same time, Eurasianism apparently attracts the attention of theorists (geopolitics, cultural scientists) and the public, and non-ruling circles of Russia (previously USSR) is one of the paradoxical situations associated with Eurasianism.
Eurasianism caused during his formation and continues to cause interest and acute controversy. The "truth of the issues" of Eurasianism was recognized even the authors who did not recognize the "truth of the answers". We note in this regard, such a circumstance: Eurasianism, despite the declared traditionalism, diverges, in a number of important items, with Russian traditions, which led and leads to accusations of some apostasy.
The relevance and inconsistency of the Eurasianism makes this concept as a relevant subject of scientific research. In this article we will try to consider the main ideas of the founders of the Eurasianism - P.N. Savitsky and N.S. Trubetsky in correlation with some geopolitical realities of our time and with some scientific knowledge, achieved by now and sheds a new light on the origin of the peoples of Europe and Asia, their linguistic and genetic ties.
Although not all the main ideas of the classics of Eurasianism received a continuation of their modern followers, still a considerable part of this ideological heritage in modern Eurasianism remains. In early Eurasianship, some ideas are organically derived from other provisions. In such cases, the adoption of part of the Heritage of the Classics of Eurasianism increases the predisposition to adoption and regeneration in modern versions of its other parts. Some provisions and their combinations inherent in Eurasianism are specific to him, some could exist before it occurred, or later, but out of connection with it. Therefore, attention deserves attention - including in the modern context - the system of basic ideas of early Eurasianism as a whole.
Consideration of the provisions of the early Eurasianism in the modern context we understand in two aspects: as an analysis of the influence of modern scientific knowledge and geopolitical realities to assess the answers, solutions to the problems proposed by the classics of Eurasianism; And as the influence of this scientific and geopolitical context to assess the significance, the severity of the relevant issues. We consider only some aspects of this large-scale problem area. According to some issues, in the modern context, we are especially significant, we are expressing our point of view, somewhat beyond the framework of the first aspect.
We consider the provisions of classical Eurasianism to three interconnected topics denoted as "Eurasian identity", "the meaning of contacts with nomads for Russia", "the problems of the sea and land." It is in accordance with this division that we are building our consideration. The first topic refers to the cultural sphere; Second and third - to geopolitical.
2. About Eurasian civilization identity
According to the views of the founders of Eurasianism, pronounced, for example, in the "Manifest of Eurasia", Eastern Slavs closer in civilizational relations "Turanian" peoples (Turkic, Mongolian, Thro-Finnish peoples within the borders of the Russian Empire and the USSR) than to Western and South Slavs, not Already talking about other people's peoples. And the Turanian (including Turkic-speaking) peoples of the Russian Empire - the USSR, civilizationally closer to the eastern Slavs than, for example, to the Turks.
The obvious contradiction of these views with the facts of the Language sphere of the Eurasians managed, arguing the small importance of language kinship as an element of civilization identity.
Harder - with religious realities. Eurasians did not deny, on the contrary, emphasized the cultural meaning of religion; Like Slavophiles, they argued their own religiosity, opposed to Orthodoxy Catholicism and Protestantism. (For Slavophiles, such views were more organic.)
Emphasizing the civilization value of religion should lead to the emphasis of the civilization value of religious differences between Eastern Slavs, on the one hand, and by the majority of "Turanians", on the other.
This difficulty (the contradiction of the Eurasian cultural concept with religious facts when approving the high importance of religion) was not convincingly overcome.
In the second half of the 20th century, the political importance of religious differences has obviously increased. The religious views of the early Eurasians (who considered that Muslims and Buddhists on the territory of the former Russian Empire are about the transition in Orthodoxy), it was not enough to say - they were not confirmed; In modern geopolitical realities, they look weak.
Eurasians believed that the Eastern Slavs are related to "Turanians" in racial anthropolgic attitude, this is related - the result of mixing in the course of centuries-old contacts. Consider this question more.
As part of traditional anthropological studies (craniology, odontology, dermatoglification), the conclusion about the great similarity of the Eastern Slavic peoples among themselves and with West Slavic peoples (in this case an analogy of anthropological and linguistic similarity is obvious), at the same time on the substantial resemblance of Russians with threat-Finnish peoples (Several out of Russians from the rest of the Slavs). The similarity, certain levels, East Slavic and Western Slavic peoples with other people of Europe (Western European, Balkansky) are also established. Slavic peoples mostly fell into a kind of average (between the Northern and Southern Cores of Europe) a group of types. The Ugro-Finnish peoples were traditionally considered as europeoids (including northern types of types), possibly with a small mongoloid component. The mongoloid component among the Russians is also usually recognized as small. That is, from the standpoint of traditional anthropology, Russia, on the racial composition of the majority of the population is not so much Eurasian as an Eastern European country. At the same time, the existence of a racial factor that unites Western, Roman-German Europe and a separate from the Eastern, mostly the advantage of Slavic, traditional anthropology, as a rule, did not approve.
The discuscy element in determining the value of the mongoloid components in the composition of the Ugro-Finnish peoples and Russians, as well as on the origin of these components, their connection with the invasions of nomads, in traditional anthropology there was also at the time of the formation of Eurasianism, and later.
The development of studies in the field of human genetics led to the formation of a new and rapidly growing area of \u200b\u200bknowledge - DNA genealogy. Within its framework, the results obtained from new positions to take a look at this problem.
Modern human genetics operates the concept of the "haplogroup" is a genetic branch marked by a certain DNA mutation. The DNA portion undergoing mutation may be subject to new mutations, more or less strong. So from more ancient haplog groups there are later. Genetic markers of haplogroups are inherited - some of the men's, some of the female line. The facts established in the framework of DNA genealogy in our time, especially in the West, are widely popularized, capable of becoming a reality of mass consciousness. Consider the facts of the DNA genealogy related to our problem, only on the haplog groups of the male line, since the spread of the female line haplog groups gives in a general similar, but less than a certain picture.
It turned out that in Europe, among the haplogroups of the men's line, R1B1 hyplop groups (characterized by Western Europe, especially Celtic and assimiced large groups of celts of peoples) and R1A1 (characterized in Eastern Europe, especially the Baltam, Eastern, partially Western Slavs, especially Poles). The view prevails that carriers of these haplogroup were native speakers from which the modern Indo-European family, settled in Europe and Western Asia from Eurasian steppes in Eneolita era. The R1B1 haplogroup is rare outside Europe, and R1A1 is also characterized by Tajiks, Iranians, the highest caustes of India. In Europe, the Gaplogroups of I1B (characteristic of Eastern Europe, especially the Balkans) and I1A (characteristic of North-West Europe, especially German peoples) are also common in Europe. These haplogroups are relatives among themselves and are specific to Europe (more distant Haplogroup J distributed in the Middle East). Haplogroups I1B and I1A are allegedly associated with the pre-European population of Europe. In some regions of Europe (Balkans, the Pyrenean Peninsula), a haplogroup E is quite widespread, which is one of the typical also in Africa, but in Europe, outside of these regions, is relatively rare. Such is, in general, the painting in Europe is the most typical for greater part of the men's haplogroups.
Western Europe ("Romano-German", rather "postkelt") and Eastern Europe for haplog groups form two different, but related communities.
Russia, in general, is in genetically part of Eastern Europe. Researchers come to the conclusion that a haplogroup is characteristic of the Mongolian and the ancient Turkic peoples with in the Genofend of Russians is extremely rare.
True, until more Russian Central and Northern Regions of Russia is examined; Groups of Russian population, for many generations living in the Middle and Lower Volga region, in the Southern Urals, in Siberia, especially Eastern, undoubtedly received part of the gene pool from local ethnic groups, partially or completely mongoloid. Therefore, it is likely that the opinion of the practical absence of the differences between the Russian gene pool from the gene pool of other nations of Europe at the occasion of the haplogroup C will be left, but the opinion of such differences will be confirmed.
The conclusion about the absence of genetic consequences of the Mongolian IGA is unambiguous.
The value of the Thro-Finnish component in the Russian gene pool is confirmed. Inherent in the Ubro-Finnish peoples of a haplogroup N3 in the northern Russian populations is one of the typical [there]. She meets less often in Central Russia and is almost never found in South. In Belarus and Ukraine, it is significantly less frequent than in Russia as a whole. Outside of Russia, it is highly frequencies in Finland, Estonia, one of the typical is in Lithuania, Latvia, to a lesser extent in Sweden, Norway.
Thro-Finnish peoples in our time live mainly in Europe, but their genetic roots, or part of genetic roots - in Asia. Ural Linguistic Combustion (Thro-Finnish + Self-Associations), according to the presentations prevailing in modern science, was formed somewhere in the southern Urals. Various versions of the haplogroup n are encountered, except for the Urals-Finnish and other Urals, occasionally in East Asia, including in South China. It occurs, sometimes with a high frequency (Yakuta) and in some modern Turkic-speaking peoples that assimilated significant threat-Finnish or related threaters of the Group. Related haplogroup N Gaplogroup O, in various versions, characterized in many mongoloid peoples, especially typical of Eastern and Southeast Asia, including China, Vietnam, Korea, most Indonesia, to a lesser extent, Japan.
Without considering the question of how this distant kinship of threat-Finnish peoples with East Asian on haplogroups of the male line correlates with their large difference in traditional racial-anthropological division, and the question of the ways of migrating common ancestors to Europe and East Asia can be stated Some Asian bonds of threatening finns and through them are Russians. These bonds were substantially different than their classics of Eurasianism were presented: they do not bring Russians with Turkic and Mongolian nomads of Central Asia, invading Europe in 5-13 centuries AD.
There are no threatened finns with turks and religious terms. Almost all the Turkic peoples traditionally profess Islam, almost all the Ugro-Finnish - Christianity. Political ties, the traditional economy - all this does not bring the throat-finnis with Turks.
At the time of early Eurasians, there was a hypothesis about the deep relationship of Altai languages \u200b\u200b(Turkic, Mongolian, Manzhuro-Tunguski) with the Urals (Thro-Finnish and Self-Queen). It was clear that even within each of these families, the degree of similarity of weak (less than within the Indo-European Languages), and even the very existence of the Altai family is problematic (remains as in science of our time). In modern linguistics, a hypothesis is fairly influenced by a hypothesis that unites several language families of the old light into a single macro, called the Nostratic. It includes the Urals, and Altai, but also Indo-European and some other languages. In other words, the extremely distant kinship of the Ural and Altai languages \u200b\u200bin modern science is hypothetically recognized, but its selectivity is eliminated or weakened.
Turan type, as a taxon, uniting "Urals", on the one hand, and "Altaians", on the other, does not exist in any sense. And this very concept of "Turan", "Uraltai" peoples used by Eurasians have already disappeared from science for quite a long time. From the standpoint of modern science of communication with the threats, the Russians are not brought together with most of the "Altai" ethnic groups (except for some, in the addition of which a threatening-Finnish substrate, such as Kazan Tatars and Chuvashi).
The situation on the electoral cultural and historical proximity of the Oriental Slavs with the peoples of Central Asia is part of the concept of early Eurasians, the most specific to Eurasianism in general (compared to other Russian concepts-self-identifications), and at the same time, the least acceptable in the context of the data of modern science .
3. On the meaning of contacts with nomads for Russia
The central place in the cultural constructions of Eurasians is approved on the deep and positive impact of contacts with nomads on the eastern Slavs, including the very meaning of the Tatar-Mongolian domination in Russia. Here, cultural ideas closely come into contact with geopolitical. The origin of the Russian statehood of the Eurasians was associated with the Moscow Russia of 14-15 centuries, which was influenced by Mongol-Tatars.
These provisions, nor during their nomination, no later, were not adopted by most professionals. Without discussing the problems of contacts of Russia's contacts with nomads in detail, we now note that in the mass consciousness, in the historical memory of the Russians, Ukrainians do not look at these contacts at all as in the concept of Eurasians. Appeal to the facts of mass consciousness, the facts of collective self-identification, to the works of past epochs reflecting the facts of collective self-identification, the more justified in this case, because the Eurasians themselves gave this sphere of social events - they even spoke about Eurasian nationalism ... The attention of science to The phenomena of mass consciousness to our time has increased even more.
Russian epics were in 11-16 centuries; At this time, the wars of Russia with Swedes, Germans, Poles, Lithuanians took place. But in the eponymous for some reason, it was reflected by war with nomads. Even in Novgorod, by origin, there was no reflection of the struggle against German and Swedish aggression (although this aggression, according to Eurasians, and early and later, was the main civilizational threat to Russia). Novgorod epics directly do not reflect and combat nomads, talk about internal Russian conflicts. Sometimes, nevertheless, the Novgorod epics briefly mention the events of the Mongol-Tatar invasion, but they do not mention the ice racing at all.
In the epic monuments of Russia - "the word about the regiment of Igor" and "Zadonshchina" there are not the slightest signs of the Eurasian self-consciousness. In the "Word", Polovtsy - the opponents of the Russians - are repeatedly called "Pogan" (that is, with pagans, non-Christians). Not so much and large-scale, according to historical standards, the war, in "Word" is reflected as an event having, on modern terminology, the characteristics of the collision of socios belonging to different civilizations. The "Zadonshchina" speaks about the Kulikov battle, and this product is written to the contemporary, probably a member of this battle, that is, at the end of the 14th century, about 200 years after the "Word". Comparison of the "Words" with Zadonshchina is legitimately both due to the similarities of them and because of numerous quotes from the "Word" available in the "Zadonshchina".
The sharp strengthening of the civilizational opposition of Russians and their opponents in the "Zadonshchina" is striking compared to the "word". In the "Word" there is an opposition on ethnic and religious signs. In Zadonshchina, Russians are opposed to tatars in four grounds. Ethnic opposition persists, religious - sharply increases. It is constantly emphasized that the fight goes "For the land of Russian, faith of Christian." Note, the word "Orthodox" is used in the "Zadonshchina" only once, and "Christian" - repeatedly. In addition, the Tatars are opposed by Russian as descendants of Sima's descendants of the yafeta (medieval, based on the Bible analogue of modern super ethnic division of peoples). And that is not all. Tatars are repeatedly called the word "Hinov", undoubtedly, from "Hina" - China. (Means something like: "People like the Chinese".) In the "Word" "Hinov" meet much less often.
"Zadonchina" was written 150 years after the conquest of Russia Mongol-Tatars. During this time, judging by the "Zadonshchina" and in many ways, the religious and ethnic self-consciousness of the Russians has increased sharply; But not because Mongol-Tatars were civilizationally close by the Russians. Rather, on the contrary, because the religious, civilization difference between the Russian and Mongol-Tatars was pronounced and sharply realized.
It should be noted that H. Makinder wrote about the stimulating influence of the invasions of Asian nomads on the national identity of many Western European peoples. But it was associated with stimulation with alien to nomads in relation to Western Europeans, forced to be wagged in the fight against them.
Note that the Slavonic self-consciousness is also not characteristic of Russian epics. The terms "Slavs, Slavic" nor in the "Word", nor in the "Zadonshchina" there. But in them, as in the eponym, there is East Slavic self-consciousness, since the words "Rus", "Russian" belonged to all Eastern Slavs. The Russians felt themselves with Russians and Christians, and not the Slavs at all and the more not the Eurasiats.
Eurasians fairly abandoned the one-sidedness of the majority of Westerners and Slavophiles in the view of Rus and Asia. The influence of Asia on Rus was not only negative. This is not a new thought: more A.S. Pushkin (who had undoubtedly, the worldview of the Westernity type) noted that borrowing from Tatar in Russian should not be considered as rust that a foreign language is not extended to sabers and fires, but their own abundance and superiority. However, he also noted that borrowings from Tatar in Russian - only about fifty words. The vocabulary of Pushkin, published in our time, includes more than twenty thousand words. Moreover, Pushkin, of course, did not seek to use all the words of the Russian language, but probably sought to take into account (among these 50 words) all the words identified by him as borrowing from Tatar. (It turns out that the Tatar borrowing during the time of Pushkin in Russian was less than 0.25%. This is in vocabulary; about grammar and there is nothing to say.)
Eurasians, rightly noting the ambiguity of the influence of Asia on Russia, exaggerated its scale, and exaggerated the importance of the invasions of nomads as a factor caused by the penetration of Asian phenomena on Russia. In fact, many Asian phenomena (cultural, genetic) in Russia are not the result of the invasion of nomads on Russia, but on the contrary, the result of the conquest of Russia (Russia) land of the hordes, other parts of Asia, and the assimilation of the part of the local population, cultural interaction with it . Russia in 15-19 centuries is much deeper (in all respects) advanced to continental Asia than Asia ever moved to Rus. In the context of the geopolitical views of the Eurasians, this difference is important, which we will talk about.
Asian phenomena in Russia is more than in Western Europe, but is clearly less than European phenomena (borrowed and invoking Slavic) in Russia itself. As part of the gene pool of Russian elements characteristic of Asian nomads, according to modern genetic studies, about 2%. It does not reach 1% of the Türk borrowing in Russian. The scale of linguistic borrowing well reflects the scale of cultural borrowing at all. Mongolian borrowing in Russian is almost no.
Maybe Asian influences have significantly removed Russia from Europe, but did not bring them comparable to Asia. (We give an analogy of typological distances with spatial: 100 km from Moscow on the highway on Vladivostok is a practically tangible removal from Moscow, but with a practically insignificant approach to Vladivostok). That is, the Asian Communications of Russia soon can be interpreted in the Spirit of "Isolationism" than Eurasianism.
And also - Asian phenomena in Russia much less than it should have been (one would expect), given the centuries-old contacts of Russia and Asia. Asian on the origin of innovation, as a rule, penetrated Russia across the West (this fact we considered more details). This circumstance speaks at the same time against Eurasianism (it turns out that Russia is not Eurasian, but rather a European-law country), and for it - a provincial attitude to the West needs to be overcome (the understanding of this Eurasians is peculiar). Here, however, it is appropriate to remember the hidden Eurascentrism of Eurasians, noted by V.L. Tszybreskogo. According to Czymbur, Russia always (including the founders of Eurasianism) relations with Asia were considered in the context of more important relations with the West. Now we do not consider this topic in detail. In any case, Eurocentrism does not exclude the impulse to overcome europolism.
The positions of the early Eurasians on the scale of the influence of nomads on Russia and the sharp emphasis on the positive aspects of this influence are one of the most specific for Eurasianism in general, at the same time, the least reasonable parts of their concept.
4. Russia and the problems of "Sea and Sushi"
Eurasians perceived the approaches of the German political geography (first of all, K. Ratzel), English and German geopolitics (H. Makinder, K. Househofer). According to the views of K. Ratzel, the state is a kind of living organism rooted in the "Soil", "Earth". Obviously, it is not necessary for Nature, but a special (for each state) natural samples. However, the correspondence of the state "Earth" is not so unambiguous: the state can grow (as well as a living organism), expand its territory (obviously, at the expense of territories, more or less similar to originally occupied). From all this follows, by the way, the high probability of geopolitical competition between countries in similar natural conditions.
According to the ideas of the classics of geopolitics, H. Makinder, the main collisions of international politics unfold between the inhabitants of the "external crescent", the least continental part of Europe, mostly islands and peninsulas, residents of the high continental part of Eurasia ("axial region", later than the name "Hartland"), and between those and other experiencing their pressure in the inner crescent (moderate continental regions of Europe). The concept of Machineder reflected (in its own way) the realities of his time - confrontation between the UK, Germany and Russia. But Makinder, as characterized by authors of socio-political theories, spread modernity for the past (brought together, in geopolitical terms, Russia with nomads of the past) and the future. At the same time, in the past, the geopolitical realities of Europe and North-West Asia were more often different.
The centuries-old wrestling of Western Europe against the Islamic world in the Middle Ages (reflection of the invasion of the Arabs, Crusades), the centuries-old military-political confrontation between Germany and France (starting from the late Middle Ages before the Second World War) is hardly complied with the scheme of Machineder.
From the standpoint of the interests of their country, MacInder considered it necessary to prevent the Union of Germany and Russia.
Machineder is borrowed (while it is often rethought) Many key ideas of Eurasians: already mentioned rapprochement of Russia with the nomadic world of the past (Makunder was only geopolitical, the Eurasians also made it civilizational), the provisions on the "axial" geopolitical meaning of Euro-Asia ( This term used Machinender), on the formation of the economic world in this region in this region, inadequate for the ocean trade, about the positive impact of the invasion of nomads to Europe.
K. Hausheofer, having accepted the idea of \u200b\u200bopposing the "Sea" and "Sushi", built, however, the geopolitical scheme from the position of Germany as part of the "sushi", considering the expedient Union of Germany and Russia, as well as Japan (although it does not belong to "land") .
Eurasian, taking the opposition "Sea" and "Sushi", as the main geopolitical idea, after K. Haushofer, built a geopolitical concept from the "Sushi" position, but Russia was considered the main geopolitical subject of Sushi (in the territorial framework of the former Empire and the USSR ). The Opposition "Sea-Susha" was perceived by the Eurasians not as a specific realization of the 19-20 centuries, but as "eternal". This is connected with the idea of \u200b\u200bcultural unity of the peoples of the most continental part of Eurasia (in the broad sense of the word), their cultural isolation from the peoples of Western Europe.
From the point of view of Eurasians, "Eurasia in the narrow sense of the word" (approximately coinciding with the Russian Empire, the USSR) is special physico-geographicalwhat causes the existence of the Eurasian cultural generality Peoples.
It is difficult to find a country where the idea of \u200b\u200bGerman "organicism" (the state is the body rooted in "its" soil), as bad corresponds to reality, as in Russia. Consider this question more.
If you first overtake the territory on the borders of the Russian Empire - the USSR, and then averaged the physico-geographical characteristics, then the differences from Western Europe will be really big. This kind of operation, however, does not sufficient reason to consider a certain range with a special distination. But if you first hold the physico-geographical zoning of Eurasia (in the broad sense of the word), then it is not possible to obtain a distinguished, which is approximately the coincidence of "Eurasia in the narrow sense of the word". The territory of Russia-USSR is not homogeneous in a latitudinal and zonal relation, nor in orographically, nor for the remote areas from the sea. (For example, in the monograph L.I. Belakova there is a world map, where the remote zones are shown from the sea; it is seen that the territory of Russia-USSR intersects with several such zones.)
It is especially important in the context of the discussion of organicist-geopolitical approaches that the primary territory of the Great Russian ethnos and the primary territory of the Moscow states were in zones of relatively low continentality (and the primary territory of the ethnos is almost a seaside area where Novgorod is associated with ancient times). The expansion of the ethnos and the state for some reason went to others, "other people's" zones of remoteness from the sea, in high continental and ultraconetal regions. Similarly - in "Fans" landscape landscaping and orographic zones and ranges (from the forest in the steppe and forest-steppe, in Festroup and Tundra, from the plain - to the mountain areas in the lowland ...).
It is not difficult to understand why it happened. In the 8-10th centuries, the Ubro-Finnish tribes lived east of Slavs, while those who were culturally lagging in culturally, which are therefore providing the effective resistance of Slavic colonization. At a certain historical period, in the 15th and 15th centuries, non-European neighbors of Russia sharply behind her in development, especially in militarily than and was due to the rapid expansion of Russia, especially in the eastern and southern directions. The ratio of potentials of countries capable of claiming certain territories in this case was more important than the physico-geographical characteristics of these territories, their (territories) "Organic" or "inorganicity" for geopolitical competitors.
The fact that approximately this time also includes the first manifestations of the colonial expansion of Western Europeans. And Western European, and Russian expansion significantly relied on water transport - sea in the first case, river in the second. The initiative in relations in Europe and Asia in this era is moving towards Europe. It is in this era that a revolution in military technologies occurs - firearms acquires special importance. Almost these coincidences are random.
The question of which country is an extreme eastern part of Europe - Poland or Russia - decided practically. Polish Natisk to the East failed, Russian - turned out to be successful. In other words, the history of the territorial expansion of Russia brings climbs it with the West (marks the Machinender), and not with the Horde. And she, this story, says not in favor of the idea of \u200b\u200bthe organic connection of the state and the natural allotment.
Eurasian commitment to the organicism approach is interconnected with sympathies to Horde. Beyond the desire to find the Ordan roots of Russian statehood (and for a similar desire to associate Asian phenomena in Russia with the expansion of the Horde against Russia, and not with the reverse process) hides the following (implied) reasoning. "Russia (modern) is a mainly continental country. Statehood forms are organically connected with the natural environment. The main characteristic of the natural medium is its position in relation to the sea. The phenomena of continental origin for modern Russia are organic. The horde was continental education. Consequently, from theoretically possible sources of modern Russian statehood (own traditions, Byzantine influences, Scandinavian influences, Western European, except for Scandinavian, influence, Ordan influences), preferred the Horde. "
Pay attention to some methodological inconsistency of Eurasians. When it comes to the cultural identity of Russia, they refused a rigid conceptual alternative: Europe or Asia; No, both, Eurasia. When we are talking about the geographical position of Russia, on the contrary, a tough opposition was approved: the sea or continent. Eurasian, of course, also spoke about the seaside territories of Russia, but usually in a very specific context: they sought to substantiate the idea of \u200b\u200btheir small importance, almost alien to Russia. Marine activity did not inspire Eurasians. PN Savitsky: "With regard to the Russian Pacific Fleet, the fate of this fleet is still seemingly similar to the fate of the Pacific Fleet Cuba." Despite the reservation ("so far"), the focus of the thought is quite defined.
It is quite clear: Russia for culture is mainly European, but partly and Asian country. By geographical location, Russia is mainly continental, but partly and maritime. The European component prevailing in Russian culture correlates (not absolutely) with a marine component inferior to geography, inferior to the Asian component in Russian culture correlates (not absolutely) with the continental component in geography. (Of this, of course, the weakness of geographic determinism in the version of Eurasians is followed.) At the same time, Russia has always been typical of the desire to strengthen the European and marine components. Eurasian installation is opposite to this tradition.
Russia's desire to strengthen communication with the sea partly due to precisely deep, traditional cultural attitudes, and not only economic feasibility. It is appropriate here to recall the comparison of Russia with Poland, which is available in I.L. Solonevich. He noted that for Russia it is characteristic, traditionally desire for the sea, and Poland has traditionally been indifferent to the exit to the sea. It may have affected the fact that Polish statehood was developed in the Krakow region, beyond direct connections with maritime activities, and Russian - in the area of \u200b\u200bNovgorod, where such connections were; It also affected the importance that water transported (albeit river) in the expansion of Russia (but not Poland).
The grounds for refusing a tough geographic, geopolitical alternative ("sea-sushi") more than from the rigid cultural alternative to Europe-Asia - in relation to Russia and "generally". First, in Russia, European features more prevailing Over Asian than continental - over the marine. Secondly, in the cultural sphere, the interaction, synthesis, at least a simple summation-association, allowing to think different types in one concept, are more difficult to achieve than in the geographical sphere and the area of \u200b\u200bmarine and land activities related to it. The sailor and the subject of the land economy is not opposed, but complement each other. It is more difficult to deal with the relationship of cultures, including religions (religion - an important part of culture); As a rule, religion does not think each other as the complementary.
Eurasian geographical determinism aims to facilitate the "Sea-Susha" problem, partly even on relief factors; At the same time, the ratio of "North-South", latitudinal zonality. But it is well known that the Earth's biosphere is most streamlined precisely by latitudinal zones. Of course, Eurasians could not pass by the obvious fact of the latitude and zonal heterogeneity of the territory of Russia. The difference in this case was interpreted by them as complementarity, in addition, the smoothness is focused, continuity of zone transitions. But the difference in seaside and continental zones is absolutely absolutes, emphasizing their complementarity and smoothness of transitions (in Russia and at the international level).
With the fact that Russia is continental, most advantage of the country, agree, is needed. Nevertheless, hardly justified by the unilateral emphasisage of the Eurasians, following the classical geopolitics, high continentality of Russia, when ignoring, or underestimation, its significant oceanicity. "Hartland" (the concept of classical policies), as the territory, approximately coincides with Eurasia in the narrow sense of the word "(the concept of Evaziism), but not with Russia (especially in its modern borders). The considerable part of the territory of Russia is not included in the territory of Hartland, which Makinder himself has repeatedly and changed strongly (which indicates the uncertainty of the content of this concept, the weakness of its objective grounds). And the considerable part of "Hartland" is not included in the territory of modern Russia. For the essential incomplete territorial coincidence of Russia with Hartland is hiding too much. In practical contexts (and geopolitics claims for conventional practicality) quantitatively not prevailing parties of the phenomenon can be extremely important. Russian Far East is in any case far from Hartland, but an extremely important region in geopolitical terms. In addition, in classical geopolitics, and after him and in classic Eurasianity (This feature is inherited by modern Eurasianism), there is a bias to exaggerate the degree of continentality of Russia. Let us dwell on this issue.
It should be distinguished by the territorial, decent and activity aspects of the continentality of countries.
The degree of continentality in the territorial aspect is determined by the ratio of the area of \u200b\u200bdistance zones from the sea in the state of the state; In addition, the presence of direct contact of the territory of the state with the sea (exit to the sea).
The degree of continentality in the zeal aspect is determined by the ratio of the population of the population living in various zones of remoteness from the sea in the state. It is this aspect mainly analyzed in the monograph L.I. Bezruck.
The degree of continentality in an activity aspect is determined by the scale of the marine activity of a given country, characterized by the number of sea ships, their total capacity, a cargo turnover of the merchant fleet - in relation to the scale of the country's economy or with its population.
It is quite obvious that the degree of continentality in the declaration aspect depends on the territorial aspect, and the degree of continentality in the activity aspect depends on the other other aspects. But dependencies have a considerable degree of variability - the same level in one aspect can be combined with different levels in another aspect. And the dynamics of continentality in different aspects can be completely different: for example, the growth of the country's continentality in a declaration aspect can be combined with the expansion of maritime activities, with a decrease in continentality in an activity aspect.
The activity aspect is the most important thing in assessing the degree of continentality of the country. It depends on the other two aspects (in this sense characterizes them) and on such factors, which are difficult to directly evaluate them in terms of their effect on the degree of continental content (freezability and partial freezability of ports, the availability of shipping, related to the sea, their degree shipping, etc.).
But the activity aspect also depends on the overall level of the country's development (the degree of continentality in the destructive aspect depends on the overall level of the country's development to a lesser extent), on the value that the country's elites attach maritime activities. However, the geopolitical attitudes of the elite is partly the characteristic, an indicator of the country's cultural type.
PN Savitsky spoke of a high continentality of the United States, actually given the territorial aspect of continentality, due to its peculiar to the exaggeration of the "land", as a factor determining the cultural appearance of the country. But in the activities of the United States, during the time of Savitsky, they turned into a completely maritime country. In the sequencing aspect of the United States at an early stage of its existence were a purely marine country, then substantially "continentalized" (which, we note along the way, hardly influenced the characteristics of the USA as a foreign policy actor).
In the USSR in the 1930s - 1960s there was a significant shift in the population and economic potential to the East, there was continentalization of the country in the declaration aspect. But at the same time, the pace, the growth of the economy as a whole, especially the growth of the population, grew up the scale of maritime activities. The freight turnover of the USSR shopping fleet has grown from 1940 to 1971 by about 30 times (from 12.8 to 375.8 billion t / mm), and the production of electricity (an important indicator characterizing the economic potential as a whole) from 1940 to 1975 - " Only "about 21 times (from 48.6 to 1038.8 billion kWh.). The population has grown from 1940 to 1976 1.3 times (from 194077 to 255524 thousand people.) [Ibid]. The ship turnover of the USSR seal transport surpassed in 1971 sea transport turnover under the US flag (which, we note, at this time, exceeded the USSR for the production of electricity by approximately 2 times). At the same time, according to the tonnage of the USSR shopping fleet, in 1973, the 5th place in the world in 1973, that is, inferior, especially taking into account the population, countries that can be attributed to the "sea" type.
Of all these facts, in our opinion, it follows that: a) the degree of continentality, as well as the dynamics of the degree of continentality, countries in different aspects can be completely different; b) Russia (USSR) in the middle of the 20th century was not a continental, but the continental-sea (continental-oceanic) country (such, undoubtedly, is the modern RF, although the features of continentality as a result of the decline of the 1990s intensified). Once again we emphasize that the grounds for refusing a tough conceptual alternative here are more than in cultural (Europe + Central Asia as a civilizational community).
It may be, for high continental in the country's declaration aspect, the growth of marine activity gives a smaller economic effect than for the marine country in the zeal aspect. But this circumstance does not give reason to ignore the scale of maritime activities in the establishment of the country's type of totality, determining the degree of its continentality-oceanicity. Including because the possibility of strengthening the corresponding effect undoubtedly exist. They are in politics to increase the importance of the country's marine regions, based on the advantages of their position.
Here we go to the "principle of continental neighborhoods" of Savitsky. According to this idea, the negative consequences of the continental position of the country (high costs for transportation) can be weakened by the transformation of the country's economic space into the system of districts, each of which is relatively self-sufficient. Elements of such policies were carried out in the USSR, and successfully, noted in the monograph L.I. Bezruck, where this idea is developing. There is no information that Soviet scientists and politicians who conducted such an approach borrowed it from Eurasians. But the insight of P.N. Savitsky, the prospects of these ideas should be noted. However, we note the important difference between the Soviet regional policy: it was not put in such an extent that continentalneighborhoods. The desire to form relatively self-sufficient, "completed" economic areas belonged to marine areas, and was interrelated with the accelerated development of maritime activities.
Hardly our country in the Soviet era reached the highest possible (relative to the scale of the economy and population), while the expedient, scale of maritime activities. After the collapse of the USSR, the scale of marine activity in Russia has declined sharply, but the trend towards recovery exists. Currently, the development of maritime activities is becoming more relevant to Russia than ever before. There are both economic and geopolitical reasons. The value of the sea as a source of bioresources is increasing. The significance of the sea, the sea shelf, as well as the Arctic as a source of others, not biological resources - energy, including. As is known, the sea and oceans are 2/3 of the land area, and this is largely unexplored (in a resource relation too) part of our planet.
The historical tendency of the relative weakening of the transport value of the sea, if there is, then weak. The prospect of the growth of the resource value of the sea doubts does not cause any doubts (partly due to the processes of exhaustion of sushi resources - respectively, this is a very deep and long-term trend).
In the development of marine and Arctic resources, Russia is capable of being one of the key actors - it corresponds to its geographical position, potential, mentality and traditions. In this regard, they are particular importance for marine and adjacent to the sea macroregions of Russia. Eurasian ideological settings, the intentions do not contribute to the nomination of these macroregions into priority positions in Russian internal geopolitics.
The deterioration of relations with the West increases the meaning of connections with East Asia. And the Russian Far East is of particular importance. As noted by A.F. Nikolsky: "In foreign policy, the goal of Russia is the formation of an alternative economic and political development center by integrating the economies and politician of the CIS, PRC, India, developing countries of Latin America, Africa, Asia." The importance of connections with the relevant countries increases, including the BRICS countries, it means that the importance of maritime activities increases, since these ties are largely carried out across the sea. (We note that if BRICS establishes as a geopolitical union, his competition with the West can not be brought under the scheme of the "Sea" and "Sushi".)
Inherent in the early Eurasians and manifested by their followers, a bias to unilateral underlining continental features of Russia, hardly theoretically regularly and practically productive. We take on here some more circumstances.
1). Survey - almost the peninsula surrounded by two oceans; It has exits and in the inner sea of \u200b\u200bthe third ocean - this is also geopolitical facts.
2). Russia is a purely river country. There is a relationship (especially in Russia) traditions of river and maritime activities. According to K. Haushofer, river formations occupy an intermediate position (in the typological sense) between marine and continental. Of the 10 largest rivers, Eurasia (mainland) 5 completely or mostly are located in Russia, and they all fall into the sea in Russia. Russian settlements to rivers (including small rivers) in Russians are stronger than, for example, by Ukrainians, Belarusians and Poles. It is necessary to note the importance of water transport in the development of Russian Volga region, Siberia, the Far East.
If the countries of the modern world are typified in accordance with their position in relation to the sea, it is necessary to allocate, in addition to continental and oceanic types, transitional, continental-oceanic. Russia belongs to it. In classical geopolitics, and after her, both in Eurasianism (not only in early) the need for a sharp separation, even the opposition of marine and continental geopolitical types is related to the ideas about genesise. Conflict between marine and continental countries. This conflict is considered as a consequence of the various positions of the countries in relation to the sea. If these ideas are considered unreasonable (and recognize them with correct, especially in our time, difficult), then the need to include Russia into a tight continental type disappears.
In the post-Soviet time, however, there is a geopolitical tendency consistent with the Eurasian installations - integration processes (affecting, mainly an economic, but sometimes the military-political sphere), in addition to Russia, Belarus and Armenia, and the Republic of Central (average ) Asia and Kazakhstan. Many facts of the post-Soviet time, and especially the events in Ukraine and the crisis in relations with Ukraine lead to two, partly mutually additional, partly mutually alternative (as practical installations), conclusions. 1. Relations with the former republics of the USSR are extremely important for Russia; 2. These relationships in the current geopolitical situation are vulnerable, and therefore Russia is more than ever earlier, should rely on their own forces.
In the times of early Eurasians, there were no element of alternative in such alternation (or it was qualitatively different), since countries, now independent, then were parts of one state. Early Eurasians to the idea of \u200b\u200bthe country's self-sufficiency in the modern boundaries. The ideological impulse of the early Eurasianism, perceived in our time, should rather lead to the desire to recreate a single state ( Russian Empire or the USSR) than to the principle of self-sufficiency of Russia in modern boundaries. We take into account the offensive spirit of Eurasianism (both early and later), organically combined with sympathy for nomads, which are mostly conquered by history.
The idea of \u200b\u200brecreation of the empire (in one or another version) is rather unrealistic (taking into account the conflicts with Georgia, with Ukraine, and the outcome of the Russians from Central Asia is not at all visible "brother", which the early Eurasians spoke), and the principle of self-sufficiency, in Speech "Isolationism" V.L. Tszymborsky, attributed to modern Russia. The usefulness of the development of relations with the republics of the former USSR is not denied with such an understanding, but Russia must enter into these relations as a country, in a number of fundamentally important aspects of self-sufficient (for example, in the production of basic types of food).
Thus (in the modern geopolitical situation - especially), the submission of early Eurasians about the meaning of the differences between the sea and land in the formation of cultures, states and in the genesis of interstate conflicts, as well as the underestimation of the importance of maritime activities for Russia, look inconclusive. These ideas are not specific to Eurasianship, are associated with the system of ideas of classical geopolitics. Approaches P.N. Savitsky, helping to reduce the negative effects of high continentality of most of Russia ("the principle of continental neighborhoods", the desire for the country's self-sufficiency), are relevant and deserve development, with reservations that take into account other territorial volume of the country and the practical inability, in the long term, its radical increase. These approaches are also not specific to Eurasianism in the sense that allow connection to other conceptual systems.
Reviewers:
Bezrukov L.A., D.G.N., Head of the laboratory of georasourcing and the political geography of the Institute of Geography. V. B. Ochava SB RAS, Irkutsk-33;
Nikolsky A.F., D.G.n., Professor of the Department of Economics of the Enterprise and Entrepreneurial Activities of the Baikal State University of Economics and Law, Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, Irkutsk.
Bibliographic reference
Popov P.L. The main ideas of classical Eurasianism in the scientific and geopolitical context of our time // Modern problems of science and education. - 2014. - № 5;URL: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id\u003d14522 (Date of handling: 02/01/2020). We bring to your attention the magazines publishing in the publishing house "Academy of Natural Science"
Today we often hear such a term as Eurasianism. Politicians, journalists and professors of universities are talking about him. This concept was even included in the name of the political and economic block. Many are called the Eurasianism of the official ideology of the Russian Federation. But despite this, the majority do not even know that in essence it represents it. In this article, I will tell you about what it actually is, and how this ideology has been born.
There is an opinion that Eurasianism arose quite spontaneously, as a result of the events of 1917. This is the truth only in part. In fact, one of the prerequisites for the emergence of this ideology, the post-revolutionary reality was, when many Russian nobles were forced to run abroad. It was there that many of them thought about the fate of their homeland.
On the other hand, Eurasianism collected many previous ideas about the place of Russia in the historical process. The greatest influence on him was undoubtedly the views of Slavophiles. They believed that Russia had his own, different from the West, that Russia itself is already a civilization along with Western and others. But at the same time, the Eurasians separated themselves from Slavophiles, believing that the ideas of Slavophilms are too outdated. One of the main differences of Slavophiles and Eurasians is to consider the latest Mongol-Tatar yoke as a positive factor in the history of Russian-Eurasian civilization.
Another important factor in the emergence of Eurasianism was, according to founders, the betrayal of the West Russia. After the Crimean, Russian-Japanese and First World War, it became clear that Western countries pursue only their personal interests. It pushed the followers of the idea to the conclusion that Western society had long shown, which allowed to oppose Eurasian spirituality to Western materialism even more.
Thus, this ideology has absorbed many concepts of previous currents, supplemented and worked as part of a completely new ideology about Russian civilization. And the events of the first half of the 20th century became a catalyst for the emergence of Eurasia.
The time of its occurrence should be considered 1920, when N.S. Trubetskaya published the book "Europe and humanity". In it, he first opposed the Western civilization to others: "The intelligentsia of the Europeanized peoples must disrupt the bandage imposed on them by Romotokermans, free from the vague of the Romano-German ideology. It must understand quite clearly, firmly and irrevocably: European culture is not something absolute, but only the creation of a limited and certain ethnic or ethnographic group of peoples. Thus, Europeanization is unconditional evil for all non-non-German people and the true opposition is only one thing: Romanogermans - and all other peoples of the world, Europe and humanity. "
Already the next year the first Eurasian collection "Exodus to the East. Premonition and accomplishment. Approval of the Eurasians "Written by N.S. Trubetsky, p.p. Suvchinsky, G.V. Florovsky and P.N. Savitsky. Here, Eurasians not only criticized the Western world, but for the first time asked the question of the special place of Russian-Eurasian civilization.
In 1922, the second collection was called "on the paths. Approval of the Eurasians. " The idea of \u200b\u200bEurasian community was developed here, as well as the question of the positive influence of the Mongolian yoke on the formation of the Russian state. Savitsky writes: "It is the Tatar-Mongola that was given to Russia with their invasion, the property was organized by the military, to create a state-compulsory center, to achieve sustainability; They gave her the quality to become a powerful orde. "
So what was the earlier Eurasianism? It was a certain symbiosis of ideas arising from the opposition to the Russian-Eurasian civilization Western.
It included several important aspects:
1. The originality of Russia. The followers believed that Russia was neither Europe nor Asia. In their opinion, this is a mistake to geographically solve the data of the part of the world in the Urals, as the territory before and after these mountains is not neither another, but is a completely different name - Eurasia.
2. Byzantism. Eurasians believed in the fundamental beginning of Eurasia as the heir of Byzantium and considered Orthodoxy one of the main elements of its culture.
3. Eastness. Faith in the positive influence of the horde, the adoption of the eastern principles and values.
5. Eugene-regional nationalism. Eurasian civilization There is a state not only Russian, but also those peoples who have long been part of the Russian-Eurasian world, as well as those who are close to Russia ideologically. Savitsky writes: "Eurasians stand on the soil of tradition. Russia-Eurasia is perceived as unity. The case is to find the proper forms of nations cohabitation. Eurasians understand Russia as the "Cathedral of Peoples" and they are confident that the so-called national characteristics will develop in some harmony, will generate phenomena of wide and creative secreyevia nationalism. "
6. Vera in the superiority of spiritual over the material.
7. Eurasians considered that a huge influence has a geographical position. Policy and mentality primarily determines geography.
8. The idea of \u200b\u200ba secreyevia language union. This union is due to non-genetic, but historical factors. So according to Eurasians, the Tatar language phonological is much closer to the Russian rather than Polish, by virtue of the long-standing cohabitation and symbiosis of Russian and Tatar cultures.
9. The naturalness of the historical process of the association of Eurasia. History itself confirms the correctness of the Eurasianism. So every time after crushing into many small states, Eurasia is always united in a single whole. Such unigizers performed in their time and Scythians, Turks, Mongols, Russians and Bolsheviks.
10. Understanding the 1917 revolution as an inevitable and necessary event. Eurasians, unlike other emigrants, refused to criticize the Bolsheviks. They believed that the collapse of the empire is inevitable, and that the Bolsheviks are only another part of the common historical process of formation of Eurasia. At the same time, Eurasians opposed themselves to the Bolsheviks, considering Marxism Western ideology, which cannot exist within the continent. One of the main achievements of the revolution in the opinion of Eurasians was the final yield of Russia from under the European influence.
11. The presence of socialist ideas. Despite the rejection of the ideas of Marx, Eurasians still adopted some aspects of socialism so they believed that only the state was capable and should manage the economy and regulate private property. N.N. Alekseev said: "Private property is a privilege. The state should not only regulate the procedure for private property, but it is intended to also say to the private owner: if you have a privilege, hurt well, there are no rights to harm, but in general benefits. "
Despite the powerful ideological base and a good organization, the Eurasian movement very soon has declined. The main reasons were: the rejection of the Eurasians in the emigrant environment, due to the support of them of the revolution, the internal distribution and participation of many supporters in the Soviet operation on the surveillance of "Trust" emigrants.
In 1928, there was a split between the ideologists of the Eurasianism and the editors of the newspaper "Eurasia". And by 1938, this idea finally goes into a hibernation. According to the present, Eurasianism is only revived after the collapse of the USSR. With the arrival of Vladimir Putin, Nursultan Nazarbayev and new Eurasians Eurasianism evolved, a large number of new ideas appeared in it, many old ideas were recycled.
It turned out primarily that the subject of political history is not a state system, but only the people: "When we talk about the country, about the historical community, about the culture, about the form of a specific civilization, we mean that the subject of the story that we consider is" people". Types of statehood, economic mechanisms, cultural models, ideological superstructures change, replace each other and generation. But something remains constant through all these transformation. This constant value, living in long centuries and in extensive spaces, and there are people. Speaking and thinking about Russia, we think not so much about the state, how much about the inner life of the state, which the people are. The state is only a form, the people - the content. "
An important part of the updated theory of Eurasianity is geopolitics. And also this is not just a philosophy of Russia's path, but ideology. Eurasianism as a "fourth political theory" is set in one row with liberalism, fascism and communism.
Victor Ratkin
initially ideologous-ideological, then a socio-political movement, at the base of K-Pogo, was the concept of Eurasia as an independent "geographical and historical world" (Savitsky. 1927), located between Europe and Asia and differing from both in geopolitical and cultural terms. As an organized movement E. arose by 1921 among young intellectuals Rus. Emigrations that put forward a program for the transformation of the entire system of cultural and ideological plants, the result of the swarm was to become spiritual exclusion with Europe, designed to open for Russia and neighboring countries that make up Eurasia together, a new one who is peculiar to the path of spiritual and socio-political development.
History E.
For the first time, the ideas of E. As a clearly pronounced direction, thought was sounded publicly June 3, 1921 at a meeting of the religious and philosophical circle in Sofia in the reports of the KN. N. S. Trubetsky (1890-1938) and G. V. Florovsky (1893-1979). In the beginning. Aug. The same year, a collection of articles, entitled "Exodus to the East: Premonition and Proceedings" (approval of the Eurasians; BN 1) was published. According to one of the authors of the collection, P. N. Savitsky (1895-1968), the articles of the Eurasian Collection were sharply different from the overwhelming majority of the Sov. They are produced by their life-affirming tone: the authors associated with the revolution in Russia assessed as a decisive cataclysm of world history, as something that opens the "truth of religious principles".
The founders of the E. movement and the authors of the collection were 5 young Rus. emigrants: KN. A. A. Liven (1896-1949), he saw. The priest who inspired friends for the publication of the Eurasian Collection, but did not publish anything in it, Linguist and Philosopher N. S. Trubetskaya, philosopher, theologian, historian of the city of Florovsky (CRP. Priest), musicologist and publicist P. P. Suvchinsky (1892 -1985), geographer and economist Savitsky. Soon they were joined by the historian Lit-Ry and Lit. critic KN. D.P. Svyatopolk-Mirsky (1890-1939), historian and philosopher L. P. Karsavin (1882-1952), historian V. Vernadsky (1887-1973), lawyer and philosopher N. N. Alekseev (1879- 1964). The historian M. V. Chessov (1888-1943), culturologist P. M. Bicilli (1879-1953), and others were adjacent to the Eurasian movement.
In its development, E. 3 stages passed. The 1st is the shortest, but the most fruitful - continued to con. 1923 - Nach. 1924. During this period, the main subject of reflection of Eurasians was to substantiate the need for Russia of the original development path. This identity was interpreted in various ways by the leading representatives of the Eurasian movement, since at the birth of E. His founders were trying to agree on at least 3 different worldview plants: Nationalism of Savitsky, Culturocentrism N. Trubetsky and Christ-Centher Florovsky. The ideas of each of the participants in the movement feared the idea of \u200b\u200bthe rest, allowed to feel the measure of the conventionality of all the wording and encouraged to take care of the general spiritual context of thought. In the early Eurasian works, it is difficult to establish the authorship of individual ideas, while caused by external reasons the need for their tough systematization and simplification in the end led to a violation of mutual understanding, and then to the split and degradation of motion. The initial success of E. was due to the fact that at the early stage of the existence of the Eurasian movement, it was not aware of the education of a large-scale personality and the development of the country, not political scholasticism, but, on the wording of Florovsky, "Orthodoxy as a way of creativity" can be promoted.
To gray. 20 years. There is an organizational design of the Eurasian movement: to con. 1924 At the meeting in Vienna, his governing body was created - the Supreme Eurasian Council led by N. Trubetsky, the leaders of Eurasian branches in other countries were also included in the Council: P. S. Arapov (Berlin), P. N. Malevsky Malevich (London, New York), Savitsky (Prague), V. A. Storozhenko (Belgrade), Suvchinsky (Paris). At the same time, the main ideas of E. began to be questioned by the founders: in 1923 with E. Gives Florovsky, openly expressed dissatisfaction with the strengthening of the political component of the movement (Blaine E. Floor's lives of George // Georgy Florovsky: clergyman, theologian, philosopher / Per. From English. Ed. Yu. P. Senokosov. M., 1995. P. 31). Inside E. The gradual separation of 2 main directions begins - "Right" and "Left". The most famous "right-wing" Eurasians belonged to Alekseev, J. A. Bromberg, Savitsky, N. Trubetskaya, K. A. Chkheidze, and others. The "left" group "The left" group was Eurasians "second generation": Karsavin, Svyatopolk-Mirsky, Suvchinsky , S. Ya. Efron, etc. Theoretical Eurasian Seminars "Left" took place in places. Clavar under Paris, and therefore their name - "Clamar Group" appeared; The scholars that arose between the "right" and "left" Eurasians received the name "Clamar split" (see: Makarov. 2006. P. 106).
After departing to the con. 20 years. From active participation in the movement of N. Trubetskoy, the place of the ideological leader occupied Karsavin, but he later declared a break from E. The most obvious reason for the decline of the Eurasian movement was gradually formed in some representatives of E. The conviction that movement should be reoriented With philosophical and cultural on purely propaganda and navigate the mass reader who does not have a high cultural level. At the same time, the Eurasian movement became the object of attention of the GPU, which considered the widespread dissemination of Eurasian ideas favorable for the Soviet regime, since E. was an alternative to the ideas of white emigration, striving to restore the Russian Empire, and conciliatoryly related to the communist power. So., Eurasian Cheidze even expressed the hope that he gradually succeeds in transforming the Bolshevik Party in the party E. The staff of Soviet intelligence managed to gradually penetrate the Eurasian circles and convince their leaders that secret Eurasian org organizations are universally organized inside Soviet Russia, to-ry We need ideological leadership by emigrants, following. What movement has become extremely politicized. In Jan. - Feb. 1927 Savitsky with the participation of GPU was organized by the "illegal" trip to the USSR to familiarize themselves with the domestic situation and new "Eurasians" - he was convinced that he was really convinced that he had really met in the USSR with representatives of E., whereas in reality it was agents GPU (Makarov, M Athev. 2007. P. 125). In 1924, Eurasians received free of charge from Brit. Spending splitting a large amount of money that was aimed at the formation of a political organization. Eurasian activity has increased immediately. Directions: Printed publications, mugs, seminars were organized; In 1927, even the Military Organization of Eurasians was created.
The 2nd stage ended with the beginning of publication in November. 1928 in Paris Gas. "Eurasia", K-parada came out 10 months edited by the "left" Eurasians Suvchinsky, Arapova, Efron, Karsavin, Malevsky-Malevich, Svyatopolk-Misky and ranked frankly a statement position, which caused a split inside E. and the loss of influence in the emigrant circles . The release of the newspaper entailed the exit from the orgation of its ideological inspirer N. Trubetsky, as well as the discredit of E. in the eyes of the emigrant public. Savitsky, Alekseev and Chkheidze published a protest against the publication, which claimed to be a mouthpiece E., he saw. They achieved cessation of the financing of the newspaper, which in Oct. 1929 led to its closure. In 1928, with a sharp criticism of E. in w. "Modern Notes" spoke Florovsky, accused of Eurasians in the departure from the originally proclaimed tasks (Florovsky. 1928). In con. The same year, the Supreme Eurasian Council collapsed. In Jan. 1929 was formed by the Eurasian administrative committee headed by Savitsky; In 1931, the 1st Eurasian Congress took place, elected the Central Committee of the Eurasian Movement chaired by Savitsky. At this time, there was also a gradual change in the qualitative composition of E.- The emigrant youth comes to replace the "scientists". All R. 30s. It comes to no activity of the "left" Eurasians, many of them returned to the USSR, where, despite their sympathetic attitude towards Soviet power, they were subjected to repression.
In the 20-30s. For the distribution and propaganda of their ideas, the Eurasians were released in addition to the 1st collection "Exodus to the East" by another 6 with the general name of the "Approval of Eurasians": KN. 2 - "On the paths" (Berlin, 1922); Kn. 3, 4, 5 - "Eurasian Temperator" (Berlin, 1923, 1925, P., 1927); Kn. 6 - "Eurasian Collection" (Prague, 1929); Kn. 7 - "thirties" (P., 1937). From 1929 to 1937, the collections of articles called "Eurasian Chronicles" (Berlin, Prague, Paris) were published, the first 5 collections were published in a lithographic form; "Eurasian tetradi" (P., 1934-1936. Issue 1-6), "Eurasian" (Brussels, 1929-1935. Vol. 1-25). At different times, Eurasian circles operated in Paris, Prague, Berlin, Brussels, in the Balkans and in the Baltic States.
The 3rd and the last stage of E.'s existence ended in 1939 as a result of entering the GEM in Czechoslovakia. troops. During this period, the Eurasian Organization remained mainly by the efforts of Savitsky. The main result of the activities of the Eurasians at this stage is not so much from time to time renewed print editions, how many extensive correspondence, the success and failures of the movement are analyzed, and a wide intellectual and spiritual context is revealed, out of course, the movement cannot be understood Advantage is appreciated.
Of great importance in the history of Rus. Emigration had publicly political activities of some representatives of E., not related directly to Eurasian ideas. In 1932, Savitsky took an active part in the organization of the Russian defense movement (genus), whose main task was recognized by the ideological and practical assistance of the USSR due to military threat from Germany and Japan. In a statement filed in the name of I. V. Stalin 5 Jan. 1947, Savitsky wrote: "In the course of ... Speeches (in 1934 in Prague." - A. S.) ... I said that he was personally ready to take the rifle in his hands and to protect the bilge of the Soviet Union in his hands in his hands Any hostile attempts on them. In the face of the danger, which threatened to our Fatherland ... I called for a firm standing on the defensive positions of every faithful Russian, including emigrants "(Central Asian of Russia. D. R-39592. L. 125). The Eurasians A. P. Antipov, Chkhaidze and Alekseev also accepted directly participation in the defense movement. However, despite the proper activities during the Second World War, after its end of the MN. Eurasians were subjected to repression: In 1945, the Prague Operation Commander Smered was arrested 4 participants of the Prague Eurasian Group: Antipov, Savitsky, Cheidze, and I. S. Beletsky; They were deported to the USSR and spent many years in the camps. It is in the muzzle. The camp arose the first contacts between Savitsky and L. N. Gumilyov, who received a continuation in Czechoslovakia, where Savitsky returned after liberation in 1955 according to the testimony of I. P. Savitsky, the son of P. Savitsky, the last to the end remained a convinced supporter of Eurasian concepts, considered They were their most significant contribution to science and was confident that E. is a program for the future, which is destined to ever be implemented.
In the USSR, interest in E. was revived in con. 80s. XX century, first of all, thanks to publications and speeches of Gumilyov (consisting in the 60s. In correspondence with Savitsky), K-ry called himself "the last Eurasian" (see: Gumilyov L.N. Notes of the last Eurasian // Our heritage . 1991. No. 3. C. 19-34), as well as, thanks to the open access to archival materials on the history of E., collected by P. Savitsky (Garf F. R-5783. Foundation P. N. Savitsky). A new splash of interest in E., which led to the formation of a number of neo-elazian movements, occurs in the 90s. after The collapse of the USSR, becoming one of the forms of searching for new cultural, national and historical identity in Russia and in a number of CIS countries. At the same time, the greatest interest among representatives of neo-euchery causes the geopolitical ideas of the classical E., while Relig. The constituent Eurasian teaching (and above all the recognition of Orthodoxy the spiritual center of Rus. Culture and life) has not yet received due attention and further development.
A. V. Sobolev
Idea content E.
It has enough deep roots and goes back to Rus. Intellectual movements. XX century, as well as the historical and philosophical constructions of representatives of Slavophilism (especially early, in particular, the connection of E. with some ideas of A. S. Khomyakov), N. Ya. Danilevsky, K. N. Leontiev, V. F. Erna and V. O. Klyuchevsky. In 1913, Vernadsky as a result of the history of the Moscow Rus history and research of the role of Mong. conquest to rus. Stories came to the conclusions coinciding with the main provisions of the Bud. E. In 1920, N. Trubetskaya published in Sofia a small brochure "Europe and humanity", in Ki-Roy, according to his own confession, the thoughts established "for more than 10 years ago" (Trubetskaya N. S. Europe and humanity // He. 2007. P. 81). The book of Trubetsky is permeated with the general for Bud. Eurasians antipaded mood. In particular, he noted internally inherent in Europe. Culture aggressiveness, foundation in the ideology of europecentrism. The adjacent cultures that are subject to this ideology acquire a certain "incompleteness complex" and put a false task to catch up with the West. Trubetskoy pointed to disadvantage for neehnes. The peoples of the imposition of Europe alien to them. Cultures, as it deprives the autochthonous cultures of their creative potential. Claims of culture, developed by the Roman-German peoples, on versatility and "community", according to Trubetsky, are deprived of any reason: "European culture is not human culture" (ibid. P. 87). Each culture is independent value and cannot be considered as lowest or higher in relation to the other. Therefore, the correct formulation of the development objective is not in pursuit of allegedly advanced peoples, but in self-knowledge, in the most complete realization by the people of their own cultural uniqueness. Savitsky developed the primitives of Eurasian views in 1916 due to the work on the assessment of the prospects for the industrial development of Russia.
The key ideas of E. were explicitly expressed already in Sat. "Exodus to the East." In the preface to the collection, a picture of the global catastrophe is given, most of all manifested in the spiritual death of the West and the destruction of the former Russia. Exit from this catastrophe, according to the authors of the collection, is possible only on the way of appeal to the east, unlike the West, which has retained creative forces and able to give a new impetus to the development of culture. Along with this, the concept of "Eurasian" is introduced in the preface: "Russian people and people of the peoples of the" Russian world "are not the essence of either Europeans, nor Asians. Merging with the native and surrounding the elements of culture and life, we will not be ashamed to recognize ourselves - Eurasians "(Exodus to the East. 1921. S. VII). The articles that are distinguished by a large stylistic and semantic variety are the development of individual topics that are similar to this or another author. In particular, Florovsky and Suvchinsky focused on the fundamental and wide criticism of hopelessly rationalistic, devastated war and the dying West, as well as on the analysis of the catastrophes Rus. History and social development led to the unprecedented cruelty of the communist revolution. Articles of Savitsky and N. Trubetsky, on the contrary, had rather not retrospective, but a perspective nature, being devoted to the theoretical development of the concept of "Eurasia". In art. "Culture Migration" Savitsky built the theory of climatically-geographical shift of world geopolitical centers in the historical perspective and tried to prove that the cultural and political leadership in the world with necessity should move from Europe to the territory of Europe. Parts of Russia and Zap. Siberia; in art. The "continent-ocean" he proposed the original concept of the "continental economy", created taking into account the geographical position of Eurasia. N. Trubetskaya in Art. "The tops and the bottom of Russian culture" allocated a special Eurasian cultural type, formed as a result of the integration of Gloral. and the Turanian culture and sharply different in their main features from the European; in art. "On true and false nationalism", he criticized various forms of incorrect nationalist consciousness and asked the main characteristics of the "true nationalism of true nationalism" necessary for the construction and preservation of the Eurasian culture of "true nationalism", which should be fully founded on the self-knowledge of the people and the consequence of which is the restructuring of national culture in the spirit originality. Software works of Savitsky and N. Trubetskoy in essence identified 2 basic vector of the further development of Eurasian ideas: geopolitical and historical and cultural (cf. : Riasanovsky. 1967. P. 61). In subsequent essays, the problems marked in the 1st collection were developed by Eurasian authors in more detail, gradually beaten in a suggested reconstruction system of views.
Geographic research
Savitsky were the most important component of the scientific basis of the Eurasian theory. According to Savitsky, Eurasia is a closed and self-sufficient "geographical world", "Mary Mainland", the unity of course is not violated by the Ural Mountains. Actually, the territory of Eurasia is 3 plains: East European ("Belomorsko-Caucasian"), West Siberian and Turkestan (see: Vernadsky. 2000. P. 23). To prove the geographical unity, Eurasia Savitsky has developed the theory of horizontal geographical and climatic zones. It highlighted 4 such zones: the desert, the steppe, the forest and the tundra forming the stripes elongated along the line "East-West. The spherical device of the Earth does south. The strips are more extensive than the northern. In turn, large geographical zones are divided into smaller, each of the to-rye is characterized by a special combination of vegetation and soil. To explain the geographical self-sufficiency of Eurasia, Savitsky developed the theory of "Geographic Symmetry South-North". In his opinion, Tundra in the north is symmetrically correlated with the desert in the south, swamps and forests - with the steppe, etc. The core of this symmetry is the steppe: the thought of Eurasians who own the steppe, he owns Eurasia. The mutual orderliness of natural zones makes Eurasia "closed unity" and allows it to affect the cultural formation of its peoples inhabiting it. To indicate such an influence, Savitsky introduced the term "location". This expression should have indicated that the natural environment not only undergoes some changes as a result of the activities of people, but also itself affects the formation of cultural and public life inhabiting its peoples. According to Savitsky, the location is a more important factor in the formation of culture than the genetic factor in the origin of its carriers. The location forms a race, K-paradium then in accordance with this influence creates a stable cultural environment for itself, gradually folding into a special cultural type. T. about., According to Savitsky, the Eurasian cultural type (added by Savitsky to traditions. 10 cultural types of Danilevsky) has roots in Eurasia as in the habitat of peoples belonging to him, and therefore it can properly develop their creative potential, only implementing opportunities laid down In the peculiarities of its location (Savitsky. 1927. P. 30, 32-39, 47, 50-57).
Cultural and linguistic justification E.
detailed was carried out in the works of N. Trubetsky. According to Trubetsk, the concept of "individuality" is applicable not only to personality, but also to the people. The sense of nationality, uniting people in a single people, allows us to describe peoples as multiple personality. In turn, Eurasia, being populated by MN. Ethnically differ from each other with nations, which combines the feeling of belonging to the general geographical and cultural space, can be defined as a multinational personality (Trubetskaya. 1924. P. 4), the population of K-Roy has one "multiple nation" (he is. Eugene-regional nationalism // Eurasian Chronicle. P., 1927. Issue 9. P. 28), bonded by a single culture. It is rooted in the national self-consciousness of culture, according to Eurasians, determines the "face" of the people and the prospects for its development. Based on such ideas, Florovsky was ready to determine the "that the starting point from which the entire statement system is developing" Eurasians as "Primates of Culture Over Public Relations", i.e. above the political and social realities (see: Florovsky P. P. Letter to P. B. Struve about Eurasianism // RM. 1922. KN. 1/2. P. 267-274).
The overall understanding of the Eurasians of the term "culture" and their attitude to a variety of teachings on "cultural progress" expressed Savitsky: "Eurasians are adjacent to those thinkers who deny the existence of universal progress. This is determined ... The concept of "culture". If the line of evolution varies in different areas, there can be no general ascending movement, there is no gradual overall improvement: one or another cultural environment ... Improving in one and from one point of view - often falls in the other and from another point of view . This provision is applied, in particular, to the "European" cultural environment: she bought its scientific and technical excellence, from the point of view of Eurasians, ideological and most religious destruction "(Savitsky P. N. Eurasianism // Eurasian Temperator. 1925. KN. 4. P. 13-14). Based on such an understanding of "culture", supporters of E. recognized the equivalence of cultures of various peoples, pointing out that Romano-GEM. The culture of the West cannot and should not be considered a measure of the level of "civilization" other nations (Wed: Trubetskaya. 1920. P. 6, 13). Rejecting the desire to bring all cultures to the "general denominator" of universal Europe. Cultures, Eurasians believed that the features and originality of K.L. Separate culture only increase its significance.
According to N. Trubetsky, the emergence and development of a special Russian. Cultures are connected with the interpenetration of 2 cultural and ethnic communities: Slavs and the Turansk East (i.e. the peoples of the Ural Altai Group: threatening Finns, Turks, Mongols, etc.), moreover, the university's connection. Slavs with Asian. People were much more important for the formation of Rus. Cultures than their connection with the Zap. Slavs. In confirmation of this thesis, N. Trubetskaya led the elements of the original Slavic-Turan culture, preserved in rus. "Nodov": the original rhythmic structure of folk music and dance, the Turan elements in the applied folk creativity, special features of character (first of all "Udal", a reckless courage), unknown zap. Slavs and incomprehensible peoples of the West. According to Eurasians, to Rus. The culture consistently influenced South, East and West. Definishing effect on the formation of Rus. Culture was perceived by Orthodoxy from Byzantium (South): "Byzantine legacy, the Russian people needed to create a global state of ideas" (Vernadsky. 2000. P. 33). However, inherited from Byzantium, the potential of Orthodox. The state culture would remain unrealized if it were not for the influence of the East, which became the consequence of Mong. conquest Rus. Land. It was the "alloy" of these 2 influences created a special cultural type, up to the XVIII century. Successfully opposed the attempts of the West to assimilate it. The violation of the internal cultural unity of the people of Eurasians considered the main reason leading to the deplorable state of the SOCR. in Russia; Exit from this crisis is possible only one - recreation of original culture based on the vistent. Faith and Turansk statehood.
The special cultural mission of Russia-Eurasia Eurasian was seen in overcoming contradictions and disagreements between the local cultures of the East and the West, in its unifying potential: "Only to the extent that Russia-Eurasia performs its vocation, can turn and turns into an organic whole whole set of diverse The cultures of the old mainland, removed the contradiction between East and the West "(Savitsky P. N. Geographical and geopolitical foundations of Eurasianism // He. 1997. P. 297). The true unity of Eurasia is cultural, therefore, the "tasks of association of the essence of the task of cultural creativity" (ibid). According to Vernadsky's thoughts, "the power of the Russian element in the Eurasian world cannot hold on to the external coercion and the regulation of the external framework. This power in free cultural creativity "(Vernadsky. 2000. P. 262). This creativity should play a unifying and conciliation role: "In the face of Russian culture in the center of the old world, a new independent force has grown to the unifying and conciliatory role. It can only solve its task in cooperation with the cultures of the surrounding peoples. In this regard, the culture of the East is just as important for her, as well as the culture of the West. In such an influence, both evenly to the east and the West - the feature of Russian culture and geopolitics "(Savitsky P. N. Geographical and geopolitical foundations of Eurasianism // He. 1997. P. 297).
N. Trubetskaya to substantiate cultural ideas also used its own developments on phonology and compatative linguistics, arguing that under Pyranceo-Eastern. Praslav language. The diamit was closer to Prauransky (i.e. to Turansky) than to Zap. dialects. I adjusted some time to Eurasians R. O. Jacobson (1896-1982), exploring the geographical distribution of languages, concluded that there were not only "language families", but also special "linguistic communities", which is Eurasia. This is confirmed by the fact that Eurasian languages \u200b\u200bhave certain traits of similarities that are missing from other languages \u200b\u200bof Europe and Asia, even if they are related to them by other signs (see: Jacobson. On phonological language unions. 1931).
Economic doctrine E.
Developed Savitsky, based on geographical and cultural prerequisites. In accordance with its developments, the economic model for the development of large continental states is different from the model applicable to countries having free access to the seas (or oceans) or surrounded by them. For the economic development of continental countries, the most important is not the development of foreign maritime trade, but the increase in economic relationships between neighboring continental regions: "In the awareness of" continentality "and in the adaptation to it - the economic future of Russia" (Savitsky P. N. Continent-Ocean // Exodus To the east. 1921. P. 125). Considering the continental state-of-making self-sufficient in the economic sense, Savitsky believed that their economic development should not be directed internally, but inward: in particular, the most important factor in the development of Rus. He recognized the economy not trade with remote countries, but the development of its own industry and agriculture, the creation of internal closed economic cycles. For this, Savitsky considered it necessary to create a decentralized industry, concentrated not in one, but in the MN. Equalified industrial zones, which in addition to solving the main task - the development of natural wealth of the territory - could also have a positive impact on the development of remote regions of Russia (Savitsky. 1932. P. 11, 93, 168). By affecting the form of ownership, Savitsky noted that the most suitable for Eurasia would be a combination of state. and private property. Private property, according to Savitsky, is the stronghold of any farm, so "not Marxova expropriation, but" Master's value of the economy "is ... the main fact of the economic sphere" (Garf. T. 5783. OP. 1. D. 357. L. 38 ). At the same time, the state. Regulation and financing will always be necessary to coordinate between remote regions of the country, as well as various business projects requiring long time and large resources for their implementation (for example, road construction) (Savitsky P. N. on the issue of public and private starts Industry // Eurasian Temper. 1927. BN. 5. P. 285-308). Savitsky noted the positive importance of the course conducted by the Soviet government for industrialization for the economic development of Russia, as well as the importance and usefulness of the "internally-organizing traits" of the USSR, but it believed that if such processes occurred without the participation of the Bolsheviks, they would be much less painful and painful For the country.
Historical buildings
ideanly connected with E., chief was developed. arr. Vernadsky. According to him, the story is spontaneously unfolding the process: "The historical process is amerative: it is based on its own in motion deeply embedded in it by their forces, independent of the wishes and tastes of individual people" (Vernadsky. 2000. P. 21). The course of this process is determined by 2 factors: the psychological and physical impact of a certain people on the geographical habitat and the opposite of the habitat on the formation of the people: "Each nationality has mental and physical pressure on the surrounding ethnic and geographical environment. The creation of the people of the state and the assimilation of the territory depends on the strength of this pressure and on the strength of the resistance, which this pressure meets. The Russian people took their place in history due to the fact that the historical pressure provided them was able to master this place "(ibid. P. 22). Since rus. The location consists of GL. arr. Of the steppe and forest natural zones, the interaction between them and determined the special stroke rus. stories.
One of the most important elements of the Eurasian historical concept was also the idea of \u200b\u200b"rhythms of history" or "periodic rhythm of the state-forming process". According to Vernadsky, the process of education of the state-in Eurasian territories is determined by consistently replacing each other with the stages of unification and disintegration: large states. Education (Scythian Power, Gunnskaya Empire, Mongol Empire, Russian Empire and the USSR) disintegrate into small states, which are then re-combined.
Along with the cyclicity, the Eurasian's special attention was paid to the continuity of typologically common through structural components in the history of Eurasia - "exclusively strong statehood", "strong and fierce government authorities", "military empire", which has a fairly flexible social organization, authoritarianism, based on the soil and therefore escaped from their people. In cases where K.L. Of the listed principles, the unified Eurasian statehood was subjected to the threat of decay (specific gravestics, the troubled time, the eve of the revolution, etc.). From the inside, to preserve such unity, the Eurasians considered the necessary for the people of a single, holistic and organic world, which would be aware of the people of their location as historical and organic integrity.
Considering the process of forming Rus. Statehood, Eurasians emphasized 2 of the most important factor that determined the move Rus. Stories: borrowing from Byzantium Ugra. Culture and formation of state. The structures due to Mong. Igog. The latter invariably received a positive assessment in the writings of the Eurasians: according to Savitsky, "without" Tatarist "there would be no Russia" (Savitsky. 1922. P. 342). According to Eurasians, Tatars turned out to be a "neutral" cultural environment: they did not clutter the "purity of Russian national creativity", but they played a crucial positive role, since "they gave Russia a property to organize military, creating a state-forced center, to achieve sustainability" (ibid. P. 343-344). In this regard, Vernadsky pointed out the example of St. BLGV. kn. Alexander Nevsky, which, on the one hand, had a cruel resistance to the GEM. and Swede. Knights that have a zap. (Catholic.) Culture, and with others. Parties - called for a search for compromises in relations with Mongol-Tatars. conquerors, relig. The policy of the to-rye was distinguished by tolerance and indifference to the local relig. Views: "A deep and ingenious hereditary historical alarm, Alexander realized that in his historical era, the main danger to Orthodoxy and the originality of Russian culture is threatened from the West, and not from the east, from the latin, and not from the Mongolism. Mongolism carried slavery body, but not the soul. Latin threatened to distort the most soul "(see: Vernadsky G. V. Two feathers of Saint Alexander Nevsky // Eurasian Temperator. 1925. KN. 4. P. 318-337). Vernadsky believed that the state manifested in such politics. Thinking Alexander Nevsky was directed to strengthen the cultural root of Rus. People in Orthodoxy, perceiving from the Tatars that they could give in the field of state. Construction: "Alexander saw in Mongols a culturally friendly force, which could help him to preserve and approve Russian cultural identity from the Latin West" (ibid.) According to N. Trubetsky, under the guise of assimilation, the vistent. State Ideas actually digested Mong. The idea of \u200b\u200bstatehood, so essentially no overthrow of Mong. IHA was not, but took place "not the separation of Russia from the power of the Horde, but the spread of the power of Khan by the Moscow king with the transfer of the Khan bet to Moscow" (Trubetskaya N. S. Heritage Genghis Khan: a look at rus. The story is not from the West, and from the East / / He. 2007. P. 315). T. about., As of the general opinion of the Eurasians, the Moscow kingdom took over the place of the Mongols and assumed their cultural and political heritage. It is the creative perception of the experience of state. Construction of Mongols, placed on the soil Rus. Orthodoxy, made it possible to create a sustainable and cultural monolithic Moscow kingdom, where due to the generality of the Relig. Began did not exist cultural and ideological differences between the "tops" and "nizami".
The separation of the "tops" and "bottoms" of the Eurasians associated with others. The turning point of Rus. Stories - Epoch of Petrovsky Reforms, K-Ry E. gave a sharply negative assessment. Imp orientation. Peter I on the rapid reorganization of Russia in Europe. The samples led to the collapse of the national-world unity Rus. People: The church gradually turned from a living organism into one of the state bodies. The apparatus, between the "tops" and "nizami" formed cultural, and afterwards. and relig. The abyss (due to the departure of the highest part of the Society from Ultra. Relig. values), Rus. Imperial policies became anti-national and nehrist. Russia was involved in alien to its interests of Europe. Policy, consequence of the fourth, in particular, led to the final collapse of the state. The first system world War. According to Eurasians, the incorrect course of foreign policy (focus on integration into Europe) and the destructive separation of society within Russia naturally led to the deep crisis of the entire socio-political life of the country, which could be resolved only by the revolutionary way.
Social and political concepts E.
there were in close connection with their historical views and were a certain projectation of these views on the Sov. It is the situation. Evaluating the accomplished rus. The revolution, the Eurasians recognized her pattern and inevitability: the revolution was an attempt to reject alien to the culture imposed by him as a result of Peter the Great Course on Europeization of Russia. Haste Europeanization split based on a religious and national tradition and necessary for the harmonious existence and development of any state-va unity of the "tops" and "bottoms" of society - the people remained fabricated. Relig. Culture, while the highest classes were increasingly distinguished from the people and his culture, seeking to become real "Europeans." According to Suvchinsky, such processes led to the separation of educated and ruling sectors of society on grade 2, those who were influenced by the Zap. Ideas: bureaucracy and intelligentsia. Bureaucracy (ruling circles) tried to realize the Zap. The idea of \u200b\u200bthe perfect state. Machines, the intelligentsia sought to make the Zap. Ideals of liberalism and socialism; According to N. Trubetsky, "Russia's most expensive was Russia as a great European power ... For others, there were more" progressive "ideas of European civilization" (Trubetskaya N. S. We and others // He. 2007. P. 481 -482). However, artificiality and inorganic for rus. The cultures of both ideas led to an increase in the cultural break in society, an increase in social tensions and ultimately to the revolution. T. about. The intelligentsia, and the "ruling layers" were guilty of the revolution.
Trying to understand the meaning of the revolution, supporters of E. found in it both positive and negative points. According to Eurasians, in revolutionary shocks revealed deep natural forces Rus. People and there was a path of the original development of Russia, some phenomena of Soviet reality were considered as important components of the F-Eurasians: insulation from the West, active interaction with the Asian. People, strengthening the sense of world calling of Russia, the death of individualism and the triumph of collectivist ideals, coming to the power of "people from the people". The main negative feature of the Bolshevik regime. Representatives of E. saw a relig in full. Ideals, in the conscious destroy of the entire reservoir of the Relig. culture of the people. Negatively evaluated in E. Also cruel forms of Soviet political despotism, lack of tolerance for dissenters, moral and physical destruction of dissenting.
Supporters E. invariably rejected by their opponents of the reproach in the fact that they "justify" or "accept" the revolution, pointing out that they are not "accepting", but take into account the revolution, "and at the same time trying to find her historical Roots, because, according to Florovsky, "to reduce the entire revolution on the maliciousness of the party communists, first of all, to refuse to explain it ... And secondly, to save yourself from the need for creative and spiritual struggle with her" (Florovsky. 1926 . P. 132). According to Eurasians, the power of the Bolsheviks, being a heavy test for the people, nevertheless brought certain benefits: "Bolsheviks work in many ways to their opponents ... Because many of their activities ... lead to the results, right back their intent" (there same. P. 133). An indicative example of this Florovsky considered the persecution of the righqu. Church: conceived for its destruction, they actually served that, "that in the relief of martyr, the Russian soul brought over and tempered Russian faith," so "in the USSR, the Russian church flourished as a rod of Aaronov, hardly no more than in St. Petersburg Russia" (Ibid.). T about., Speaking by his own words of Eurasians, they were ready to accept "before the revolution as before the spontaneous force," to forgive "all the disasters raised her uncontrolled forces," but invariably pointed to the need to bring the curse "consciously evil her will, daring and blasphemy On God and the Church "([Trubetskaya N. S. preceded. To Sat.] // Exodus to the East. 1997. P. 50).
Despite the recognition of certain positive moments of the Bolshevik rule, Eurasians believed that, in general, his confusion of a fear for Russia as a whole, and therefore called for quite specific (both theoretical and practical) steps to change the domestic political situation: "Russia ... We must be released, conquer and beat in the spirit "(Florovsky. 1926. P. 133). In connection with this MN. For followers of E. various programs of the alleged "post-Bolshevik" device of socio-political life were developed.
Adjacent to E. Historian M. Chessov, engaged in the development of Rus. The ideas of statehood, came to the conclusion that the ideal of a political device in Rus. Culture is the "State of Truth", and not Western Europe. "State of the Law", "Legal State". Personification Rus. The ideal of the state was okay. The king, the most important point of the activities of the F-chess, not to ensure the material well-being of the people, and the concern for his spiritual salvation (Chess M. Power feat: Experience on the history of state. Ideals of Russia // Eurasian Temperter. 1923. KN. 3. p. 56 ). Based on such idealization, the Eurasians offered a number of elements of the proper state. Devices of Russia. In accordance with the 1925 program, entitled "What should I do?", New Rus. The state should be okay. The kingdom, and the king must be elected, and in the future it is to offer a successor to himself. In the Board, the king should rely on the special class of "elected rulers" implementing the "demotic" nature of power (in contrast to the democratic, such power should not be elected popularly, however, it should be focused on concern about the folk welfare). Being the head of the "chosen rulers", the king is designed to take care of the prosperity of Orthodoxy as a state-forming idea and monitor compliance with the demotic principle of government.
Karsavin played the most significant role in the development of political concepts. So, the idea of \u200b\u200bN. Trubetsky about the people as an individuality received a political refraction in the concept of "cathedral" or "symphonic" personality developed by Karsavin. Criticizing the concept of a formal law due to its destruction of creative moral strength, Karsavin in the first place put the idea of \u200b\u200bthe Council, K-parada implies a close internal (and not only external) unity of people connected by the general worldview of people, Genuine People's Unity. Any manifestation of individuality and selfish self-expression of a person contradict such an idea of \u200b\u200bthe Cattle and violate it, and therefore should be as much as possible. Personality can be considered only in multiplicity, as part of a holistic hierarchy of more complex symphony individuals - social groups, peoples, cultures. The highest form of cathedral and her ideal is the church as "a special and higher symphonic person."
The proper relationship between the "common" and "individual" in public life must be supported by a special class of elected managers, a "ruling selection" or the "ruling layer" (later the same term used L. Gumilyov), he "ideologically culturally "And" politically "leads the people (Wed: Suvchinsky P. P. on the liquidation and heritage of socialism // Eurasian Chronicle. P., 1927. Issue 7. P. 14). Alekseev to designate the same class of heads of state-wa introduced the term "state servants", indicating that Zap. The system of political parties is not applicable to Eurasia and should be replaced by the submission of a special class of people, "serving the interests of the people" (Alekseev N. N. on the ways to future Russia: Soviet system and its political opportunities. P. ,. pp. 70-75) .
Extremely important in Eurasian socio-political thought was the idea of \u200b\u200b"ideological", generalized the essence of the political theories of E. under the "ideox" Alekseev offered to understand the social and state. The system is based on a single and only state. idea. Such an idea of \u200b\u200bEurasians considered the idea of \u200b\u200borthos. Statehood: According to them, the national idea of \u200b\u200bRussia should merge with the idea of \u200b\u200bOrthodoxy. Such an "government idea" (i.e., the dominant ideology) is designed to create a society worthy of this idea, that is, the state-in ideoxchic type, in its characteristic features is very similar from the medieval. Theocracy. According to Alekseeva, the Class Organization (existing in the USSR) should come to the organization "State-ideological, extracurricular and absenteeism", the political parties of the old parliamentary type should give way to new organizational, professional or territorial org organizations.
External similarity concept of "ideological" with similar Europe. Concepts used by the ideologists of fascism, forced MN. Thunders Rus. Emigrations to warn about the danger of degeneration E. in the fascist ideology. Eurasians responded to similar accusations with an indication that Ital. and Germ. Fascism, like Rus. Communism is a perverted form of an ideological basis, since for this principle of the public device, it is determined by which the idea of \u200b\u200bthe right to society. At the same time, the real results of the "ideocratic" state. Experiments in Italy, Germany and the USSR pushed the majority of Eurasian theorists, including N. Trubetsky and Alekseeva, from the straight-line authoritarian structures, which they adhered to the 20s. N. Trubetskaya in the correspondence directly indicated that he recognizes the erroneousness of the concept of "ideoxracy", since its practical implementation leads to the strengthening of the next totalitarian regime, and as an alternative path indicated the need for the internal creative transformation of the Relig culture. values.
E. and Orthodoxy.
The religious and ideological constructions of supporters of E. have differed by a significant conceptual diversity. However, it was undoubtedly common to all participants in the movement at various stages of its development was the recognition of the Orthodoxy of the only Relig. The power capable of becoming the basis of the original culture of Russia and wider - Eurasia.
The adoption of Orthodoxy Rusy in the X century. considered by the Eurasians as "the decisive event of Russian history" (Vernadsky. 2000. P. 36). According to Vernadsky, "Since then until the XVIII century, at least, and to a large extent to the present day, the Orthodox Church remains the main manager of the spiritual life of the Russian people" (ibid.) However, starting from the XVIII century. Relig. The consciousness of the people gives a crack under the pressure of the West: "Protestantism and Protestant sects, the activities of Jesuit ... and later the direct propaganda of atheism." Higher voltage crisis spiritually relig. Russia's life reaches in the XX century, and this crisis "can end up or death, or revival" (ibid. P. 37). According to the conviction of supporters of E., however, by Russia, Russia "reveals with his revolution," there is a "rejection of socialism and the approval of the church" ([Trubetskaya N. S. prepressed. K Sat.] // Exodus to the East. 1997. pp 50 ). Eurasians believed that, despite the external deplorable position of the Russian Church, internally, it was reborn: "We see that the church comes to life in the new grace, again gains a prophetic language of wisdom and inspiration. The "Epoch of Science" replaces the "Epoch of Faith" - not in the sense of the destruction of science, but in the sense of the recognition of the powerlessness and blasphemy of attempts to resolve the main, final problems of existence "(ibid. P. 51). According to N. Trubetsky, it is Orthodoxy that it is intended to play a decisive role in the revival and formation of the National Rus. (Eurasian) culture: "Orthodoxy according to the properties of our national psyche should take a paraborn position in our culture, affecting many parties of Russian life" (Trubetskaya N. S. Raulets and the bottom of Russian culture // He. 2007. P. 196) . However, the relig. The idea turns out to be at Trubetskoy only part of a wider cultural idea: according to his statement, "it is necessary that Russian culture is not exhausted by Eastern Orthodoxy" (ibid. P. 197). Orthodoxy should be the basis of culture, but in addition to him, the spiritual elements of the "Initial Turanian East" should be included in the culture, it is due to the K-ry "heterogeneous" tribes historically ok "in one cultural whole" (ibid.). T., E., apparently, assumed a certain cultural synthesis, towering over the obvious relig. Disagreements between Orthodoxy and other religions, and therefore was fairly subjected to repayments in the elevation of ideology over the proper religion.
Focusing on the general line of sirring with the culture of the West, in the area of \u200b\u200bthe Relig. Eurasian concepts also proceeded from the hard opposition of Orthodoxy (East) and Catholicism (West). According to Eurasians, Catholicism is the spiritual basis of Romanesque culture, the central relig. The idea of \u200b\u200bK-Roy is the idea of \u200b\u200bthe "crime" and "God-Proud of": "In the East, the Savior Christ, Christ-the Redeemer, believed in the east; In the West, Christ was imagination primarily as a formidable judgment. Here were more afraid of the diploma, rather than believed in the forgiveness of sins "(Bicylli P. M. Catholicism and Roman Church // Russia and Latin. 1923. P. 65). The main lack of the Catholicity of the Eurasians was seen in its priority, in the desire to achieve the highest possible earthly power, as well as in a rationalistic understanding of spiritual phenomena, caused the crisis of all of Europe. worldview. Unlike Catholicity, Orthodoxy seeks to build a person from the ground to heaven, and therefore, according to Suvchinsky, "Orthodoxy is approved by vertical - deep into and swell, Catholicism - in the horizontal plane, which they are trying to imagine infinitely to themselves" (Suvchinsky P. P. Passion and danger // ibid. P. 28-29). Giving a general assessment of Zap. Christianity, Savitsky maximalist recognized him with a complete distortion of truth: "Arriving in Latin ... go from the truth to the perversion of truth, from the Church of Christ to the community, who betrayed the beginning of church sacrifices of human pride" (Savitsky P. N. Russia and Latin // Ibid. P. 11).
Florovsky directly tied the rationalism of Catholic. Churches with Jewish laws: "... The religious element of Judaism reveals its affinity with the same lawful spirit of Roman Catholicism, which has completed the evangelical evangelism in the theological system" (Florovsky. The trick of the mind. 2002. p. 57). Spiritual exemption from the shackles of rationalism, according to Florovsky's thought, is possible only on the ways of consistent disintegration with the "European Tradition". In this regard, Florovsky pointed to the deep national character of Rus. Orthodoxy, on the mutual influence of Ugra. spiritual values \u200b\u200band creative spirit Rus. The people, the results of the swarm became the unprecedented spiritual flourishing of Moscow Russia, as well as the emergence of special foci of ultra. The spiritual and prayer creativity (different from the centers of the secular and "household" culture), thanks to K-ry, it was indeed possible to talk about the "Holy Rus": "Through the century and space, the unity of the creative element is associated with the unability. And the points of its thickening almost never coincide with the centers of life. Not in St. Petersburg, not in the ancient Kiev, not in Novgorod, not even in Mother Mother, and in secluded Russian monastery, at St. Sergius, Varlaamia Khutnsky, Kirill Belozersky, in Sarov, in Diveyev felt the tension of Russian folk and the Orthodox Spirit "(Florovsky G. V. On the peoples of non-historical: the country of fathers and the country of children // Exodus to the East. 1997. P. 168).
Similar views regarding the fundamental difference of Vost. and zap. Christianity developed and N. Trubetskoy, who argued that Christianity, being planted in a variety of cultural media, gave different results. Romano-Germ. Civilization caused the idea of \u200b\u200bthe "fraternity of all nations" to life, K-paradium can be implemented only by a high price of loss with their cultural identity. On the contrary, Rus. Orthodoxy has always been tolerant of other cultures and following. This has a greater ability to spread, to a mission among peckers. Peoples. Perceiving the popular culture, it, as it were, inside makes it truly Christian, not depriving identity and originality.
Despite similar theoretical constructions, one of the most serious stumbling blocks for Eurasian theories was exactly the problem of Christ. Missions and Christianization of the peoples of the Eurasian East. If in Article 1922 of "Religions of India and Christianity", Trubetskaya argued that "from the point of view of the Christian, the whole history of the religious development of India is under the sign of the continuous dominion of Satan" (Trubetskaya N. S. 2007. P. 400-401), later Under the influence of ideological and tactical considerations (the need to substantiate the unity of the polyconductional Eurasia) the attitude of the Eurasians to various religions of the East has become more benevolent. In the Eurasian Manifesto of 1926, the paganism, Buddhism and Muslims of the nomadic peoples of Eurasia were already interpreted as "Potential Orthodoxy": "Paluity is a potential Orthodoxy ... If we focus on paganism, ethnographically and geographically close Russia and part of it in its composition, we are easy We will find a particularly close kinship of primary religious mistake with Russian Orthodoxy "(Eurasianism: the experience of systematic presentation // Ways of Eurasia: Russian. Intelligentsia and Russian fate: [Sat. Art.]. M., 1992. P. 363-365). In Buddhist teaching about the Bodhisattva, Eurasians were ready to see the "Premonition of the ideas of the God of God", and in the Relig. The ideal of Islam is a true understanding of the need for transforming human activity in the world (there is also). The Eurasians argued that the religious and cultural world of the East to Rus. Orthodoxy as to his center. At the same time, they tried to take into account their opponents put an indication of a relatively small success of previous Christ. Missions among the peoples of the East, on the indisputable "opposition of truth" among the pagans and stated that the appeal "from the outside" and "forced" disgusts the very spirit of Orthodoxy. Therefore, the historical mission of Russian Orthodoxy, according to Eurasians, should be to ensure the self-discharge of the Ugra. The essence of the innovative confessions of Eurasian peoples, in helping them in their natural self-development to Orthodoxy, and not in external missionary activities. The concept of "Potential Orthodoxy" received a sharply negative assessment of the Ugra. Thinkers: Florovsky called her "seductive and false theory", "pink tale about paganism" (Florovsky G. V. Eurasian temptation // Trubetskaya. 2007. P. 67). With all the desire to tie the state. And the cultural ideal E. with Orthodox. The Eurasian faith failed to find a convincing resolution of issues of how desirable and possibly the appeal of all the peoples of Eurasia in Orthodoxy and how Orthodox unity could be combined with the difference in the cultures of Eurasian peoples caused in t. h. And the difference between their relig. Reviews.
Critical assessment of E.
Eurasian ideas and concepts from the time of their appearance were subjected to incessant criticism in the Russian environment. emigration. On the one hand, the practical recognition by Eurasians of Bolshevism as a sighted fact of Rus. Stories, and with Dr. - the commitment of participants in the motion of the ideals of the Ugra. Statehood and their explicit "antispatience" led to the fact that the Eurasian movement turned out to be in the middle of the political spectrum and follow. This received polemical strikes from all sides.
Struve P. B. Past, present, future // RM. 1922. KN. 1/2. P. 229). The famous political figure V. V. Shulgin pointed out that Petrovsky turn to the West was not (as Eurasian claimed) just a whim, but was in demand by the story itself, becoming a response to Russia for a military threat from the West. Prot. Sergius Bulgakov saw in E. Return to the presision of people and a pragmatic approach to religion, a metotea called "Orthodoxism".
Some provisions of E. were subjected to serious criticism of N. A. Berdyaev. In a letter from 21 Apr. 1924, Suvchinsky Berdyaev indicated that E. Inherent certain sectarian traits, since it refuses the "universal idea" for the sake of the "reconstitution of the Orthodox Russian life", i.e., closures in national culture (see: Kolerov M. A. Brotherhood Saint Sofia: "Vekhovtsy" and "Eurasians" (1921-1925) // VF. 1994. No. 10. P. 155-156). In response, Suvchinsky wrote that the concept of "sectarianism" could not leisurely can be applied to the Russian itself. Intelligentsia, Berdyaev speaks as a representative of K-Roy. She separated from Orthodoxy, and thus from the "Russian People's National Element", and therefore is forced to "wander in different quests", illegally applying for universality. Suvorinsky also noted that the Berdyaev himself is understood as Christianity in the separation from the historical advantages of Orthodoxy as "Interconfessional, General Government Abstraction and Scheme," Critica E. is conducted by Berdyaev with cosmopolitan positions and therefore cannot be perceived as a voice true Christ. Relig. Consciousness. The Suvchinsky and admiration of Berdyaev found unacceptable in that the revolution allegedly crushes the "Orthodox life of Orthodox" and therefore it should be assessed positively, equating the reasoning of Berdyaev to blasphemia of the Bogregores (see: ibid. P. 157-158). The controversy with the ideas of E. was continued Berdyaev in Article 1925, "Eurasians", where it stops on positive, and on the negative features of the Eurasian movement. As a positive trait, E. Berdyaev mentions the rejection of the vulgar restorementism, the understanding of Rus. Question as a cultural and spiritual, feeling of the loss of Europe of cultural monopoly and hope for the return of the peoples of Asia into the global flow of history. He allocates "malicious and poisonous" aspects of E., whose root seems to be that "Eurasians want to remain nationalists closed from Europe and hostile Europe" (Berdyaev N. A. Eurasians // Trubetskaya. 2007. P. 8) . Eurasian idea, K-parade seems to him too "Asian", because supporters of E. "are more proud of their relationship with Genghis Khan than their relationship with Plato and Greek teachers of the Church" (ibid. S. 11), Berdyaev opposes the idea of \u200b\u200bthe need to create In the world, "a single spiritual cosmos, in which the Russian people should make their contribution" (ibid. P. 8-9). In the nominal approach, E. To the idea of \u200b\u200balliance Berdyaev, saw the danger of refusing to christianity in the please of the pagan particulism (there. P. 10). Later, Berdyaev called it by naturalistic monism, with a rum-rov state is understood as a function and organ of the church and acquires a comprehensive value, organizing all parties to human life. Designing such a "perfect" state. Devices, not leaving space for freedom and creativity of the human spirit, Berdyaev described as "etient utopism of Eurasians." He noticed that the emotional focus of E., which is the reaction of "creative national and religious instincts for the occurrence of a catastrophe", may result in Russian fascism (ibid. P. 5).
P. Bicilli, who participated in one of the Eurasian collections, determined his dual attitude towards Eurasians in the title of the critical Art. "Two Face Eurasianship." He considered the defendance of unity Rus. Nation and statehood, K-Rui can not be artificially dispelled in the please of the "self-determination of nation", and the associated proclamation of the principle of federalism. Dr. LIK - "seductive, but also disgusting" - Bicilli saw in E.'s desire to become the only party that inevitably should lead to dictatorship. Links to the fact that this will hinder the Eurasian Orthodox. Ideology, they seemed unconvincing. On the contrary, such a state of affairs could only lead to the preservation of the subordination of the church of the state. Bicilli also believed that the desire of Eurasians to become the only ruling, moreover, the party in the country inhabited by the peoples of different religions, leads to the domination of one people (carrier of the leading religion) over others (Bitsilli P. M. Two Lika Eurasianship // Russia between Europe and Asia. 1993. P. 279-291).
The most profound critical analysis of the foundations of E. was held Florovsky. He formulated his understanding of E.'s meaning, noting that in it - "the truth of questions, not the truth of the answers, the truth of the problems, and not decisions" (Florovsky V. Eurasian temptation // Trubetskaya. 2007. P. 36). Going away from the recognition of the fact of the revolution and the need for her spiritual overcoming, the Eurasians came to her justification. The main reason for this floor saw in the worship of Eurasians before the social elements and, as a result, in their willingness to submit historical necessity, in the conviction of "in the infallibility of history" (ibid. P. 40). With such a vision of the historical process, a certain worship of the very idea of \u200b\u200bpower was connected to the Eurasian Consciousness. Considering the rationale by Eurasians of the very difference to Rus. Cultures, Florovsky stressed his peculiar morphological approach to the problem, to-ry led them to the recognition of the subordination of the history of the peoples of the fatal process of development. The desire to save the social achievements of the revolution led the Eurasians to the idea of \u200b\u200bcreating a new direction, party. "The running pathos of creativity," wrote Florovsky, "is replaced by a pathos of distribution and" leadership ", maximalism of power, not only daring, but also dorrent. Both in Eurasianism, with all declarations of "non-parity," will be copied and the spirit of manson-nursing intolerance, the spirit of the power and enslavement will be rejected, "(ibid. P. 52). With this approach in Phenomenology, E. did not find a place for true teachings about the church, in K-Roy there are origins of spiritual creativity and freedom: "... For Eurasians, the church in the state, and not the state in the church" (ibid. With . 72), "Eurasians are too loading the church of the world and worldly" (ibid. P. 73). In the teachings of Eurasians about the "Symphonic Person", Florovsky saw the "dream of a certain socialization of man" (ibid. P. 53). He was unreasonable to find an attempt to divide Russia and Europe, since they are inside a single cultural and historical cycle. Florovsky refused to agree with a sharply negative attitude of E. to Zap. Christianity, indicating that "the name of Christ connects Russia and Europe, no matter how it is distorted or even crowded in the West" (ibid. P. 65). According to Florovsky, for the spiritual revival of Russia, not political or cultural activity is needed, the adherents of E., and a spiritual feat: "Only in Division and Askie, only in prayerful silence accumulates and gathering genuine power ... Only in this feat A resurrection and resurrection of Russia "(ibid. P. 38).
East: Exodus to the East: Premonition and Kind. Sofia, 1921. M., 1997P; Florovsky G. V. The trick of the mind // Exodus to the East. 1921. P. 28-39; The same // he. Vera and culture. St. Petersburg., 2002. P. 49-60; He is About peoples are not historical // Exodus to the East. 1921. P. 52-70; He is On the patriotism of the righteous and sinful // on the paths. M.; Berlin, 1922. P. 230-293; He is Insensitated: about controversy against Eurasians // Path. 1926. No. 2. P. 128-133; He is Eurasian temptation // SZ. 1928. No. 34. P. 312-346; He is From the past Russian thought. M., 1998; Savitsky P. N. Steppe and settlement // on the paths. P. 341-356; He is Russia is a special geographic world. Prague, 1927; He is The location of the Russian industry. Berlin, 1932; He is For the creative understanding of the nature of the Russian world. Prague; He is Continent Eurasia. M., 1997; Russia and Latin: Sat. Art. Berlin, 1923; Vernadsky G. V. Inscription Russian history. Prague, 1927. SPB., 2000P; He is The experience of the history of Eurasia. Berlin, 1934; Jacobson R. O. On phonological language unions // Eurasia in the light of linguistics. Prague, 1931. P. 7-12; He is To the characteristics of the Eurasian language union. [P.], 1931; Russia between Europe and Asia: Eurasian temptation: Anthology / Red.-Cost: L. I. Novikova, I. N. Sizemskaya. M., 1993; Karsavin L. P. Op. M., 1993; Trubetskaya N. s. Europe and humanity. Sofia, 1920; He is To the problem of self-knowledge of the personality: the columns. Art. Berlin, 1924; He is History. Culture. Language. M., 1995; He is Letters and notes / entry. Art: V. Toporov. M., 2004; He is Heritage of Genghis Khan: [Sat. Art.] M., 2007; Russian node of Eurasianism: East to Rus. Thoughts: Sat. Tr. Eurasians / Sost., Intr. Art. And notes: S. Yu. Klyuchnikov. M., 1997.
LIT.: B Ö SS O. Die Lehre Der Eurasier: Ein Beitr. z. russischen ideengeschichte d. 20. JH. Wiesbaden, 1961; He [Boss O.] The Doctrine of Eurasians / Per. With it.: N. A. Nikonova and A. A. Trojanov // Beginning. 1992. No. 4. C. 89-98; Riasanovsky N. V. THE EMERGENCE OF EURASIANISM // Califss. 1967. Vol. 4. P. 39-72; he is [Ryazanovsky N. V.] The emergence of Eurasianism / Per. From English: I. Vinovetsky // Star. 1995. No. 2. P. 29-44; Sobolev A. in. Prince N. S. Trubetskaya and Eurasianism // Lit. Study. 1991. No. 6. P. 121-130; He is About Eurasianism as a cultural centering worldview // Russia XXI. M., 2000. No. 1. P. 70-91; Eurasia: East. Views Rus. Emigrants / Ed.: L. V. Ponomareva. M., 1992; Suite L. Eurasianism / Per. With it.: N. Burikhin // VF. 1993. No. 6. P. 105-114; Ignatov A. "Eurasianism" and the search for new Russian cultural identity / lane. With it.: V. K. Kantor // VF. 1995. No. 6. P. 49-64; Polovinkin S. M. Eurasianism // Russian Philosophy: Small Encycle. vocabulary. M., 1995. P. 172-178; Chineeva E.V. Russian intellectuals in Prague: Eurasian theory // Russian emigration in Europe: 20th - 30th. XX century / Ed.: L. V. Ponomareva et al. M., 1996. P. 177-198; EADEM. Russian Intellectuals in Prague: Development of Eurasianism // EADEM. Russians Outside Russia: The émigré Community in Czechoslovakia 1918-1938. Münch., 2001. R. 185-212, 250-258; Peter Suvchinsky and his time / red. -Cot.: A. Britanitskaya. M., 1999; About Eurasia and Eurasians: Bibliogr. decree. Petrozavodsk, 2000; Paradian r. Methodological and metaphysical problems of Eurasian cultural studies / Per.: A. V. Bolds // Slavyanov. 2001. No. 5. P. 28-38; Ovchinnikov A. I., Ovchinnikova S. P. Eurasian legal thinking N. N. Alekseeva. R.-N / D., 2002; Eurasia: People and Myths: Sat. Art. / Sost and answer Ed.: A. S. Panarin. M., 2003; Paschenko V. I. Social philosophy of Eurasianism. M., 2003; Laruel m. The ideology of Russian Eurasianism, or the thought of the greatness of the empire / lane. With Franz.: T. N. Grigorieva. M., 2004; Vishenetsky I. G. "Eurasian evasion" in the music of the 1920s - 1930s. M., 2005; Makarov V. g. "PAX ROSSICA": the history of the Eurasian movement and the fate of the Eurasians // VF. 2006. No. 9. P. 102-117; Makarov V. G., M Attemva, A. m. Geosophy P. N. Savitsky: between ideology and science // VF. 2007. No. 2. P. 123-135.
D. V. Smirnov
To understand the essence of this philosophical and political movement, it should be borne in mind that Eurasianism is an ideological course within the Russian emigrant intelligentsia, surviving disappointment due to the defeat of democratic aspirations in the revolution of 1905, the Euphoria of the Hope associated with the February Revolution, the tragedy caused by the First World War The war, the "collapse" of the Bolshevik coup, the wreck of not only ideals, but also by the owners of Russia, the bitterness of the exile or the "voluntary" emigration. The emigration set up in the extreme conditions, experienced by it as the collapse of the usual lifestyle, the presence of ideas about good and evil, and most importantly, as the collapse of the national self-consciousness and loss of the national soil, the Russian intelligentsia felt not just expelled, and drunk in a dead end. The nourishing medium of its globility was the atmosphere of catastrophicity, which covered the entire emigrant environment and determining its general attitude. The specificity of the Eurasianism is related to the fact that the movement united those young scientists who have already defined for themselves the form of struggle for the preservation of Russian culture.
The name of the first book "Exodus to the East" had a certain subtext. Not only associated with traditional Christian culture with meaning, but also testifies the definiteness of the choice and the model of behavior, "return to yourself, the intention to live, without breaking away from its roots." Young emigration has ceased to live fantasies and hallucinations and began to be interested in the Soviet Russia, which occurred in it with amendment. Assess these changes from the point of view of the task of preserving Russian culture and the powerfulness of Russian statehood, to develop on this basis the strategy and tactics of their actions - this was the meaning of the movement, this purpose was determined the direction of theoretical constructions and practical actions of the Eurasians.
The release of the collection "Exodus to the East. Premonition and accomplishment. The statement of the Eurasians "(Sofia, 1921) Eurasianism immediately attracted attention to the unusualness of the concept of traditional problems, bribing the inspiration and sincerity of the authors, who bodied the inspiration and sincerity of the authors, who are bodied by the inspirational and sincerity of the authors who are alarming the bold projects for transforming the existing social structure of Russia.
The authors of the collection and the "fathers" of the new movement were the economist and geographer P.Savitsky, a brilliant linguist and ethnographer N.S. Trubetskaya, philosopher and theologian G.V. Florovsky, art historian P.P. Suvchinsky. Their undertaking attracted both numerous supporters and sympathizers (G.V. Vernadsky, L.P. Carsawin, N.N. Alexseev, S.L. Frank, P.M.Bitsilli). So the opponents (PN Milukov, N.A. Bardyaev, A.A.Kizovetter, etc.). Following the first collection, the second book followed in 1922 - "on the paths. Approval of the Eurasians, "then three more books under the general name" Eurasian Temperator ". In 1926, the Eurasians submitted to the public a systematic statement of their concept "Eurasianism. The experience of systematic presentation. " In 1931, a collection of the Thirties "thirties" was published in Paris. At the same time, twelve issues of the Eurasian Chronicles were seen from 1925 to 1937, conceived as a summary of reports, propaganda and political activities, including articles of a theoretical nature, as well as the reviews of political and economic life in the USSR, followed by the Eurasians carefully followed. Under the auspices of the Eurasian Publishing House, individual books of ideologically close authors were published.
However, despite the turbulent activities, propaganda-political activity and certain successes in this field, the Eurasian movement has already entered the crisis and split phase by the end of the 20s. P.M.Bitsilli, G.V. Florovsky, who spoke in 1928 with a self-critical article "Eurasian temptation" was moved away from him.
Exit from the movement of P.M.Bitsilli and G.V. Florovsky - those who are obliged to develop the philosophical foundations - had a tragic meaning: he meant for him a transition to a new quality in which theoretical research, in particular, "Russian studies "What was holding a classic Eurasianism, retreated to the background. The place of historiosophical concepts occupied Articles L.P. Krasavin and N.N. Alexseeva with the teachings on the ideocratic state, the selection of the ruling layer, etc. Displacement of the emphasis was immediately affected by all movement - the ideological aspect was sharply intensified.
But the most serious evidence of the split Eurasian movement was the formation of the Paris Center of Eurasianism and the publication in Paris with the active participation of L.Krasavin, "Red" Prince D.Svytopolk - Mirsky, Metsnate P.P. Suvchinsky and S.Y.Effron Weekly Newspapers "Eurasia", focused on the ideological and political convergence with the Soviet authorities and on cooperation with the Bolsheviks. The adopted epigraph was testified about the seriousness and foresightness of her intentions: "Russia is pending the fate of Europe and Asia. She is the sixth part of the world - Eurasia - a knot and the beginning of a new world culture. "
The last number "Eurasia" came out in 1929; The end of the newspaper served as the beginning of the end and the Eurasian movement as a whole. In 1931, the last Eurasian collection was published - "thirties. Approval of the Eurasians. " But the "approval" has already lost the magic of novelty. Eurasian temptations dispersed. The two releases of the Eurasian Chronicles and Eurasian Tetradi released later could no longer reanimate movements. It died. And ideas? Ideas were left, for they, like manuscripts, "do not burn" and retain the ability to give new shoots on a new well-aligned soil, although sometimes to germinate wild spleens.
As today attracts us in the teachings of Eurasians, which it contains the heuristic potential, which inspired the "last Eurasian" - L.N.Gumilyov, and what his vicious temptations are taking away, which prompted to turn away from him from the founders of G.V. Florovsky and converted to Total movement on death.
The worldview ambitions of Eurasianism are large enough - they claimed to understand many of the problems of Spirit and Being. However, in spite of the breadth of coverage, one leading aspect of the aspirations of Eurasianism ideologues is traced in these views: the idea of \u200b\u200bthe closed space, which is the name "Russia-Eurasia". This isolation exists in both geographical and cultural plan. The whole point of the statements of Eurasians is reduced to the fact that they proclaimed the existence of a special Eurasian-Russian culture. They had not enough of that cultural self-consciousness, which was in Slavophiles, although they chose them as the closest to them in spirit. But they strongly rejected the existence of Westernity. That is, for Eurasians, the anti-Paddic activities and the focus of their ideology had also directly asked supercount - the search for the functional originality of Eurasia, finding its special missionary path.
Eurasia seems to be disadvantaged due to their detachment from the ocean exchange. To compensate for this drawback, it was forced to rebuild the entire structure of material production, as a result of which the separation of the territory for industrial and agricultural areas occurred. Since everything had to rely on themselves, production was created to satisfy the vital needs in their own limits. And the fact that Eurasia, being the "continent-ocean" really had a way out to the present Ocean, did not have any importance for her: it was an exit to nowhere. In the geographical integrity of Eurasia, its cultural unity is expressed. The category of "borders" is important for understanding the being Eurasian culture. This culture was on the western side of the turn, isolateding a settling European civilization from an alien to her in the spirit of civilization of the Great Steppe (nomadic peoples), and on the Eastern - line of a confessional, who separated True Christianity (Orthodoxy) and heretical (Catholicism and Protestantism). Rus simultaneously realized itself and the center of the world, and his periphery, simultaneously focused on isolation, and integration.
Russia is primarily a continuity of the cultural traditions of Byzantium. However, Byzantism is not the only element of Eurasian culture: a noticeable trace in it also left an oriental wave, rushing on Russia from Mongolian steppes. Thus, in his spirit, Eurasian culture, according to Eurasians, is a culture and heiress, mastering other people's traditions, whereas the cultural centers of these traditions themselves have already been fed, and connecting them by the general idea of \u200b\u200bOrthodoxy.
The noted features of the "continent-ocean" are forced to look for the origins of its viability not in Kievan Rus, which has become only a cradle of the future governing people of Eurasia, and not even in northeastern Russia. Eurasians believed that for the first time the Eurasian cultural world appeared as a whole in the Empire of Genghis-Khan. Mongols formulated the historical task of Eurasia, putting the beginning of its political unity and the basics of its political system. The successor of the Mongolian state and became Moscow Rus. The Russian Empire almost graduated from the State Association of the Eurasian Mainland and, defending it from Europe's encroachments, created strong political traditions.
However, the very essence of the Russian-Eurasian idea remained unconscious inside the ruling layer, which has undergone strong Europeanization. The European element summoned significant shifts in Eurasian thinking: the national idea of \u200b\u200bMoscow as the heiress of Byzantium and the Ottoman of Christianity in the fight against Asian paganism and Western heretic culture lost its religious meaning and was replaced by the positive and political idea of \u200b\u200bthe empire and imperialism; The cultural task began to formulate depletively and purely empirically - as the growth of state territory and state power.
This process coincided with the rapid promotion of Russia to the east and the transition to its camp of his yesterday's enemy - Europe, during the struggle with the random religious pathos Islam. The last demarcation line between Russian and Asia-pagan cultures disappeared: painlessly and somehow imperceptibly the borders of the Russian state almost coincided with the boundaries of the Mongol Empire.
According to Eurasians, the surroundings of Russia with Europe and the next majority after this, which followed, caused a clear majority of the national self-consciousness, which led to the erosion of the feeling of the western border. The ruling circles began to consider Russia part of Europe, and a new culture created by the European sample of Moscow came to replace the old ideology of Moscow, the foundations of which were derived from the Slavic tradition. However, the space defined by the limits of Eurasia is still considered from the inside as a deliberate and Slavic, and from Europe. And from the outside it was defined as Asia, although different from real Asia, in particular, China and India.
The borrowing of someone else's culture ultimately turns into deformation of his own. To avoid this, it is necessary to be guided in the life of the desire for self-knowledge: only it will indicate a person or the people of his present place in the world. Only a completely distinctive national culture is genuine and meets ethical, aesthetic and utilitarian requirements, which are presented to it. The desire for unitable culture, from this point of view, it turns out to be insolvent: with the motley variety of national characters and psychological types, such an universal culture would be reduced either to the satisfaction of purely material needs with the full ignoring of spiritual, or would impose all nations of life forms developed from a national nature. -In one of the people.
As an internal barrier, the protection of culture from foreign exposure is its installation on immunity of alien and deforming influences. Self-storage mechanisms are programmed in it. As soon as she is aware of the threat, it mobilizes the entire centripetal potential for saving its integrity and unity. Its spatial location closes on the concept of "border". Drawing such a border becomes the process of deepening self-consciousness of this culture, identifying its specificity and uniqueness.
The European Concept of the West Duel and East Eurasianism contrasted the model: "Peripherals - Center in their dynamic interaction." History shows that in the cultures of the West and the East there is a lot in common. However, Eurasian culture can be revealed only on their own ways in a special world - unfolding from Central Asia in the direction of the seaside regions of the old world.
Since the beginning of the 20th century, the interaction of Eurasian and European cultures is moved from the field of technology, state construction and political life to the sphere of mineosry. And this cool changes, the West appears here in another form. During this interaction, the Eurasians conclude that the Romano-German world with his culture is their enemy. Eurasians believe that the European concepts of the "evolutionary ladder" and progress applied to the history of society are the concepts of deeply egocentric, "Eurocentric".
According to the Eurasian concept, culture can not be learned or simply borrowing it - only one who qualitatively updates it and turns it and turns into his property, in an integral spiritual element of personal being, as if she recreates it again. It in every person, as it were, is reborn again and makes a step thus jumping from the past at the present, and from him to the future. History The whole consists of jumping, where such a process is interrupted, the culture dies and one oblique, soulful life remains.
Having built a scheme of cultural and historical (linear) development, European thinking comes from a silent premise that the past is resting at the present, as in a dead end. The entire settlement here is based on the fact that only life, but not live culture, not her soul. It was about the spirit that the Eurasian thought was always baked, trying to find the expectation outside the modern European civilization. The Eurasian worldview was based on the recognition of a very real existence of socio-cultural cycles of nucleation, heyday and decline. With this approach, the culture is endowed with all signs of the person, which is achieved through its individualization and the totality of social roles performed by it. The so-called "symphonic personality" of culture is compiled from a complex of hierarchically organized personalities (class, estate, family, individual) coexisting simultaneously, but genetically related to previous generations. As such a complex organism, the culture is experiencing certain stages of its development, but not within the framework of a continuous evolutionary series, but in the circle of the completed (closed) cultural cycle.
Vera is a spiritual symbol that paints the culture of religious. Eurasians are convinced that the birth of every national culture occurs on the basis of religious: it appears, accompanied by a myth of his birth. The myth of Eurasian culture was Orthodoxy. It is characterized by the desire for alliance, which allows it to synthesize various ideological flows - both in the framework of this culture and being abiding outside. In this regard, paganism can be viewed as "potential Orthodoxy", and in the process of Christianization, the Russian and Central Asian paganism creates the forms of Orthodoxy, closer and relatives of the Eurasian Orthodox tradition than European Christianity.
Orthodoxy has the ability to easily adapt to one or another political form through faith in the possibility and need to transform being through his Christianization. It does not consider the state the only real force, believes in its own strength and therefore, it is fundamentally benevolently to all varieties of the political organization of society, regarding any of them as the transient, and more than once and for all this and unreasonable model.
The interpenetration of the church and state makes it difficult to distinguish between their cultural creativity. Eurasianism seeks to develop the principle of such distinction: the direction of the activities of the Church is the free truth, the cathedral unity, the development and disclosure of the Cathedral Tradition; The states are the unity of the non-church world, unlocuting from the church and disconnected in itself. The state draws the foundation of its ideology in the Church, dwells in an organic connection with her, but it specifies and implements these ideas in its own, worldly sphere. It is inevitably mistaken and sinful because it functions in the world of sin. Its internal disconnection is brighter than all in the division of people on the ruling and managed, in the alienation of the individual from society, in the use of force and coercion.
The ideal of Russia went not through rational consciousness, but through religious and positive experience. The main idea of \u200b\u200ba fair state, the "state of the truth", which she constantly sought to create, - subordination of statehood with values \u200b\u200bthat have an imperruptive value. It follows from this that the "State of Truth" turns out to be not a final ideal established as a result of social transformations, but only step on the way to achieve truth. In the history of Russia, under the layers of diverse views and theory, the desire to observe this initial truth was always overlooked, curb the element of human will, to achieve human self-generation of a religious-state truth.
In the Eurasian interpretation in front of the "state of the truth" there were always three tasks: Orthodoxy obstacle, "return the truth to earth" and resist the absolutization of the material principle in the life of the people. The most important was the duty to "return the truth to Earth." And that is why it is impossible to compare the "State of Truth" with the legal state of the West, since the first is based on religion, and the second on material values.
"Demotic" (under this term Eurasians understood the state where the people are not a random set of citizens, but the aggregate of all historical generations) the state avoids the forced suggestion of the total religious or philosophical minozozer. Refusing forced introduction of an ideal to life, it seeks to form a non-solid worldview, but public opinion of a certain cultural and historical era. Signs of general ideas lie in the plane less deep and less intimate than the worldview or religious faith. The "demotic" state, in contrast to the doctrinal (for example, Marxist or Islamic), was built at the "external truth", on common recognition, that is, is legal, although not in the Western sense.
"Slazen", who succumbed to the Eurasian, is that, striving or to power, whether to save Russia from the Bolsheviks, they decided to take advantage of the finished structures of this power, replacing the ruling communist party "Unified and the only" Orthodox-Eurasian Party . But the approval of the dictatorship of the Orthodox-Eurasian Party destroys the United location proclaimed by Eurasians or, as if we told today, the unified economic and cultural space of all the peoples of the Russian world, which, by virtue of their cultural and especially religious traditions, will inevitably remain beyond its borders, the people of the second grade.
The mechanisms of rationing and prohibitions operating in such a state are mainly reduced to two forms: physical coercion (which should be minimal) and the relationship relations-subordination. The second form makes you assume a well-known spiritual connection between the rules and subordinates. The undoubted advantage of the power relations is that they are based on very primary and elementary sides of the human psyche, why they are inherent in a significant socio-organizing force. Hope for the complete disappearance of the power elements (as in anarchism) - Utopia: As long as in the life of the individual, the important role is played by purely emotional factors (love, hatred, attachment, etc.), they retain their meaning.
Such an interpretation suggests that power for Eurasian thinking in itself. Power for himself is the quintessence of Eurasianism. It persists and is not used for external (social, economic, etc.) goals, but for self-consumption. The structure of the domination seems to be difficult, but the "ruling selection" is the most tangible carrier. Despite the structural instability of the ruling layer (the influx and the yield of the components of its members), it personifies the environment of the existence of the Idea-Government. After all, ultimately, it is she selected the elements necessary for the ruling system.
Eurasianism offers some Erzats for the broken empire, because it seeks to give at least some explanation and registration of a loose multinational space in which Russia, among other state entities, should be first among equal. In the end, Eurasianity can serve as a kind of cover for a conservative political target installation. But one of the distinguishing features of the Eurasianism is the recognition of changes and recognition of the historical movement. While Eurasianity can cover the fact that Eurasianism will find only limited success among the majority of the population, and its influence will be limited mainly to intellectual circles. And, nevertheless, Eurasianism remains a dangerous ideological myth.
The chief "temptation" of Eurasians, breeding poisonous fruits, Berdyaev saw in the etatism, burned according to the samples of Bolshevism and Italian fascism. Intended to replace the communist ideology of the Eurasian "idea of \u200b\u200ba government", based on dogmatized Christianity, Eurasians only strengthen the totalitarianism of the state by the authority of the church, but thereby make it serve it to serve the "Kaesar Kingdom", if not the "Mammon kingdom". The totalitarian-ideocratic state, enhanced by the authority of dogmatized Christianity, taking care of the organization of the whole life, of the whole culture and even the sphere of the Spirit, can turn into Russian fascism. This warning Berdyaev still retains its ominous relevance.
So, we can conclude that Eurasianism is the ideology of statehood. All his sociocultural, religious, geopolitical and other aspects rotate around the problem of power. The state is almost identical to culture and church, the state is the vital center, which allows you to identify Russia-Eurasia.
Nevertheless, stating the conceptual and political failure of the movement, it is impossible to silence the Eurasian truth, as G.V. Florovsky rightly noted. The historical importance of the Eurasians is that they were the first to hear "live and acute issues of the work day." But that was, according to the self-critical recognition of Floor, " true questionsBut not the truth of the answers is the truth of the problems, and not solutions. " The answers of the Eurasians went to the archives of history, and the questions set by them remained. And to answer them to us. Of course, our today's answers will be different. But where is the guarantee that these will be answers and solutions with which the story will agree? And do we have to "stand up" for them again? The critical analysis of Eurasian experience will reduce the temptation of fast responses.
Introduction
"Eurasianism" - more precisely, faith in a special, non-European, holistic civilizational essence of Russia - has always been a fashion after each breakdown of the next European-democratic project. Urearovsky - after the uprising of the Decembrists, the doctrines of Leontyev and victoryossev - after the crisis of the great reforms of Alexander Second. The first Eurasianism is after the defeat of the "White" Russian liberalism. The crisis of the second liberal reforms (1988-1998) made the vane of the ideological fashion again turn to the ideas of the features and identity. "
Today we see the Eurasian ideology as a large cultural and philosophical system, reflecting the complexity of civilization in the territory of the former Russian Empire / USSR. Now, in the light of a tough confrontation between the Islamic world and the West, "in the light of the conflict, threatening to spread and other territories, supporters of Eurasianism are increasingly talking about the need for an accelerated transition of this ideology from the cultural plane into political, both in Russia and in the CIS countries ".
Today it is often said that with all ethnic and religious differences, the cultural, civilization unity of all peoples of Russia and the CIS - the fact that East and the West, Asia and Europe are experiencing processes of close demographic and economic convergence and interlacing, thereby forming the global newevarian community , or civilization. However, there are objections against this thesis.
One of the most important arguments to the refutation of the new Eurasianism is that modern Russia has nowhere to return to the tradition, and the association on the basis of civilizational unity implies the presence of past experience creating certain prerequisites for such an association. Community - an authoritarian project makes sense if there is a living community if the power takes care of the outsider-capitalist orders.
The purpose of this work is to try to consider theoretical basis Regional studies on the example of modern ideas of Eurasians and evaluate their real prospects in the future development of Russia.
Eurasianism shows the extent to which the theme of the East is fundamental to the Russian consciousness of the XIX-XX centuries, how closely this topic is related to some classical philosophical and political postulates, meaningful for the history of ideas in Russia, such as integrity, organic, spirituality, anti-infidium.
II. Main part
1. General theoretical approaches of Eurasianism
Arising in the late 20s. The twentieth century in the environment of foreign Russian intelligentsia, the cultural and geopolitical course called "Eurasianism" pursued the main goal - the completeness of the coverage and review of world events and determining the role and place of Russia in them as a median powers between Europe and Asia. "Eurasianism originated between the two world wars, Eurasianism implies the existence between the" West "and" East "of the Third Continent - Eurasian, refers to the organic unity of cultures born in this meeting area. Eurasianism wants to legalize the Russian Empire, its continental and Asian dimension, to give Russia a persistent identity in the face of Europe, to predict her a glorious future, to develop a quasi-totalitarian political ideology and a purely "national" scientific practice ". Eurasianism reflects the paradoxes of Russian identity when it is revealed in its attitude to East Asia. Eurasians proceeded from the fact that Russia is not only Europe, but also Asia, not only the West, but also east, and therefore she is Eurasia. This has not yet manifested himself the "continent in himself" and therefore, no matter what "the thing in itself", but quite comparable to Europe, but according to some parameters, even superior to it, for example, by spirituality and polyethnics, which is subsequently L.N. Gumilev Write "super ethnicity".
Eurasians put forward the thesis that the spirit of the "fraternity of peoples" believes over Eurasia, having his roots in the age-old contacts and cultural mergers of the peoples of various races. "This" fraternity "is expressed in that there is no opposite of the" highest "and" lower "that mutual attraction here is stronger here than repulsion that the will will easily wake up to the common cause. (P. Savitsky). Not only in interethnic relations, But in all other spheres of life, people should get together. The peoples of all races and nationalities of Eurasia can come close to, reconcile, connect with each other, forming a "single symphony", and thereby seek more success than in separation and confrontation among themselves. However, there is a sufficient reason to consider such views somewhat idealized, since both interethnic conflicts and historical social and cultural differences are continuing in Russia and in the CIS, and historical social and cultural differences are not allowed to assert that it is possible to complete the convergence and connection. "
In my opinion, it should be agreed that the critical attitude towards the West and Wessengers is explained by the reaction to Western expansionism, bordering violence against Russia, to the unilateral imposition of Russia of the pro-Western course, Dictate-held by Westerns, starting with Peter I - Bolshevik on throne "(by N. Berdyaev). Negative attitude to Wessengers, however, did not mean refusal to cooperate with the West. Do not refuse, not to turn away from the West, but to cooperate and even go along the Western civilization path, but remaining Russia, keeping the Eastern, Byzantine Orthodox religion and the culture of Russia.
The ratio of Western civilization and Russian culture requires the protection of Russian culture from the expansion of Western civilization - this was the leitmotif of the Eurasians of the 20th. The twentieth century, obtained as if on the relay from the Slavophiles and the Forewoman. "If Slavophiles and the fuels defended Russian Orthodoxy from non-harmony encroachment on the part of Catholicism and Protestantism, the Eurasians could not be indifferent to the destruction of Russian culture, Orthodoxy and Russian religious philosophy," the Bolsheviks-atheists and supporters of others, Western views and ideas to the detriment of their own .
The philosophy of Eurasianism differs from Western analytics, for "expresses the opposite tendency - a tendency to synthetism, intuiviism and a holistic understanding of the world. Eurasians defended such originality and the uniqueness of the Russian culture and its philosophical grounds from the encroachment of Western atomistic individualism and rationalism. They were hot adherents of the Russian idea of \u200b\u200bthe Cattle and Philosophy of Alliance and, of course, concerned about their preservation and savings. " They saw the substantiation of the identity of the historical path of Russia's development, not only excellent, but in something opposite Western European. Like Slavophiles, the Eurasians defended the thesis on the principal difference between Russia's development from Western civilization, which is needed at the same time cooperation in the parity principle.
2. The view of the Eurasians in Russia in a new geopolitical order.
To date, it is not more relevant to the question of what will be the place of Russia in the coming alignment of forces. "This is a matter of survival and security of the country. Most Russian and foreign specialists representing the world orders of the 21st century as a multipole, proceed from the fact that Russia has to create its own regional power center within the borders of the former Soviet Union. Apparently, such a policy of Russia would not be optimal both from the perspective of its development and ensuring national security. " With all, at first glance, the attractiveness of the creation of a new center for strength and economic power consisting of Russia - the CIS countries, such a strategy would not have brought success. It would be an association of weak states that had different interests, association at the expense of Russia.
Russia, like its other CIS partners, needs Western loans and technologies, speaking here more as competitors than allies. Even Russia's trade with these countries is less than 19% of its foreign trade turnover. The absence of unity of foreign policy goals and a single source of external hazard deprives hopes for the creation of a political and military union. With such indicators it is difficult to count on the regional center of power. In addition, Russia would be difficult to withstand competition with the West for influence in the CIS countries. The Union with Muslim countries (Iran, Iraq) or China is also submitted as not the corresponding long-term interests of Russia.
Despite the seeming persuasiveness, "insufficient are the arguments and supporters of Russia's accession as a" slave "partner to the European Union or other regional centers. Such options for the development of Russia in the 21st century are not determined by its past, nor a real nor the prospects for its historical mission in the future. " Russia of the 21st century should remain independent civilization, the circumscribed status of the Great Eurasian Power, great on its economic, social and spiritual achievements.
The historic future of our country is predetermined, first of all, objective factors:
1) The unique geopolitical position of Russia, which is geographically located, occupies most of the Eurasian continent.
What would the Eurasian continent in the global order of the 21st century? What are the role and purpose of Russia on this huge continent?
Europe and Asia in the upcoming future may result in the two main world areas of economic and spiritual development. They are located on a huge one Eurasian mainland, where there is a geopolitical center of the world. Sanitary communications, terrestrial, sea, air lines between the rapidly developing countries of the Atlantic and Pacific coast lie through the space of Eastern Europe and West Asia. "Control over this space is vital, worldwide importance. The geopolitical privilege of Russia is that it as a state takes this space and is a kind of Eurasian bridge. The competent use of this geopolitical status can lead to the results of a large historical value. It is enough to notice that only the open air space of the country can bring income comparable to income from the sale of natural resources. "
2) The geopolitical position of Russia in the 21st century will largely determine the fact that there are huge natural wealth on its territory, so necessary for development and Europe, and Asia. According to some experts, in the territory of Siberia and the Far East contains 50-60% of all available natural resources of the planet. Therefore, in the foreign policy economic development of the country for the next decades of development of Siberia and the entire North-East will be the most important state project.
3) Rocket and nuclear power. Russia has a rocket and nuclear potential comparable to the US nuclear power. This deterrence factor not only ensures the military security of the state, but also largely determines the role of the country in solving international problems, strengthens the Russian position in the matter of ways to exit crisis situations in a particular region.
4) Talented people with high spiritual potential. The exceptional wealth of Russia, its property is "patient, unpretentious, hardworking people free from power ambitions. The whole history of the Russian state, including in the 20th century, shows that the inspired by the nationwide idea, this people are able to great social accomplishments. "
Thus, Russia has objective conditions to occupy a worthy place in world civilization. But in public life the possibility turns into reality through the activities of people, the activity of the human factor.
3. Transformation of Russia "By Eurasian"
Now the two main scenarios for the political development of Russia at the beginning of the XXI century are realistic. The first scenario provides for an attempt to restore Russia, as the Russian and Soviet nationalists understand it. In the way of his incarnation, such "limiters", as the lack of parity with the West on nuclear and conventional weapons, the degradation of the Russian army and the military-industrial complex, long-term food addiction, investment dependence of the producing industries, the occurring Islam, the problem of Caucasian separatism and instability in Central Asia, China's strengthening And the Chinese infiltration, an increasingly powerful effect of unifying Europe, especially in Western regions of Russia, as well as to Ukraine and Belarus.
It is clear that the anti-Western policy should rely on the strong support of one of the global external forces. This force can only be China. But it is unlikely that he wants to make confrontation with the West in the first decade of the XXI century.
What can be for nationalists internal support? "Is there an aggressive force in Russia, having an offensive ideology, conscious interests, social and economic base? Or maybe such a support-force to organize around the ideas of the Orthodox Fatherland, the President-Tsar and the "Soviet" order? Probably may. But this will not be the ideology of a rigid state centralism, which mobilizes the people to revive the Russian or "Soviet" empire. Rather, these ideas will fly into the streamlined and omnivorous Eurasianism, which will be implemented not decisive, and obscure anti-community, not Russian nationalism, and the Turkic-Russian "internationalism".
Due to the complete unpretentiousness of the Russian society, Russian nationalism, even if he accidentally comes to power, is rapidly transformed into Eurasianism. Therefore, Eurasianism is still not the second, but the main alternative to the ideological revival, political and social consolidation of Russia in the first decade of the XXI century. The liberal path is not now in Russia supports in too wide layers of society. We took the liberalization in the nineties, now the pendulum begins to move in the other direction.
Obviously, even with the most intensive anti-clock rhetoric, Russia cannot isolate from the West. "Pragmatic West, an extremely interested in Russia's stability, in its resources and hoping for new liberalization, will strengthen assistance from its own part (of course, selectively) compared to post-preferably years. This assistance will be concentrated in the TEC, the energy and transport infrastructure of Russia and in its infrastructure of communication, as well as, most likely, in chemistry and agricultural engineering. " Of course, this assistance will not be enough to revive the independent Great Russia, but it will help mitigate the most important structural problems of the country.
However, this is a matter of politicians - to decide and decide where to sail the country and drifting the regions. By the usual Russian people, the first decade of the new century will be implemented in active and full. Many will acquire simple landmarks in life, lost in the nineties of the 20th century along with work, stable social status and moral censorship. At this time, many workers and NTrov professions will reap, statuses will acquire clearer contours, and the state will explain to people again "what is good and what is bad."
4. Modern position in Eurasianism
However, despite the constant appeal to the origins that arose in the 20s. XX ideology, today, Eurasianism is a set of ideas that far from always corresponds to the program of Russian Eurasians P.N. Savitsky, N.S. Trubetskoy and L.N. Gumileva. "The developments of modern Russian fans and patriots were joined here, the ideas of National Bolsheviks, the doctrines of Western European geopolitics. Today in Russia everyone understands something under the "Eurasianism" something. Even the word "Eurasia" has different meaning, depending on who enjoys it. For Gumilev and Russian Eurasians "Eurasia" coincides with the borders of Russia: Russia-Eurasia for them is a special historical and geographical region of the Eurasian continent, along with Western Europe, China, India, Islamic Middle East, etc. " Others consume the term "Eurasia" in the traditions of Western geopolitics, i.e. exclusively in the literal sense as the name of the entire continent.
"Russian Eurasians use the concept of" Eurasia "to substantiate the organic integrity of the Russian space. In the philosophical level, this corresponds to the conviction that Russia is a special, independent civilization, which should not imitate someone, and repel in its development from its own traditions and principles. " The highest meaning of Russia's existence is the development of its own civilization project, a project that was laid in her birth.
For other "Eurasians", Eurasians-geopolitics, the only meaning of the existence of Russia - "Participation in the Great Planetary struggle" Sushi "and" Sea "," Eurasianism "and" Atlantism ", in which continental Eurasia is opposed to its maritime outskirts and overseas America." From their point of view, all the material and spiritual aspects of Russia's existence must be subordinated to this mission. The internal, organic logic of the development of Russia is ignored, and the meaning of its existence becomes "negative imitation" of the West.
Based on the initial basic ideas of Eurasians, each people of Eurasia should conscious of themselves as a part of the whole, their belonging to community. In all activities with the installation on the unity of the multi-blooded nation, Eurasia, the Russian people have to strain their forces more than anyone to the people of Eurasia.
4.1 Western and Eastern Eurasianism
Today you can also talk about some split in the Eurasian movement. On the one hand, there is a western Eurasianism focused on the cultural situation of Western Europe, to the situation of a dead declared culture, for which only the path of mechanical manipulation, naked politics and strategy remained possible. On the other hand, the Eastern, Russian Eurasianism, where the emphasis is placed on the free development of a young Russian civilization, and all political activity, Eurasian blocking, is subordinate to only one auxiliary goal - to protect this space from external on-site. We are talking about deep conceptual dressing, and each of the directions is in a sense to exaggeration.
Western Eurasianism from Eastern is distinguished by the essence itself, not political orientation. It belongs to the "West" in his spirit, the eastern Eurasians attribute to their opponents also a hostile attitude to someone else's identity and freedom, as well as a tendency to total unification. In political terms, the Western flow may well be focused on the Eastern Block, it can dream not only by the European Empire from Dublin to Vladivostok, but also the New Soviet Empire or Empire of Genghis Khan. Conversely, many Western European regionlists and the new right in spirit are more likely to East Eurasianity than to the West. Below are the main items of this principled placement.
For Western Eurasians, the struggle with the "West", with Americanism, with Atlantism is an endwort. Russia for them is only a big pawn on the "Great Chess Board". For Eastern Eurasians, the goal is the free original development of the peoples of Eurasia, and everything else is only a means. Western Eurasians are more inclined to political manipulation, they question the possibility of organic development from the bottom. The Russian Eurasians rely on the free will of Russia, to her natural movement on their own way, want to create an ideal environment for its original development. Western Eurasians believe only in the rigid leadership of the organizing center, make a bet on control from above, looped in dichotomy liberal / totalitarian. Eastern Eurasians make a bid on organic development from below, they promote freedom and the cat, which, in my opinion, currently does not exist as such. Their thesis about the living ability of the Earth itself also looks too irrational to determine their future for themselves.
Western Eurasians feed the tendency to "in-parasitic cosmopolitan", to the denial of national identity, and the real Eurasians are too superozing. If the first seek to end the political association of Eurasia by some unification, then for the second identity and freedom of all Eurasian ethnic groups, land and cultures have become an ideofix, but the implementation of this concept is obviously unrealistic, since they believe that Eurasia should be politically one, but is regionally distinctive. This thesis is supported from my point of view, too idealized by the representation of Leo Gumileev that "historical experience has shown that while the right to be the right to be themselves, the United Eurasia successfully restrained the Natisk and Western Europe, and China, and Muslims. Unfortunately, in the XX century. We abandoned this common and traditional politicians for our country and began to be guided by the European principles - they tried to make everyone identical. "
For Western Eurasianism, it is characterized by Russia's consideration at the level of pure geopolitics, it is in some kind of geopolitical conglomerate. It would be more profitable for them if all Eurasia consisted, say, from one large China or one big Germany. For Eastern Eurasians, Russia is not identical for "continental Eurasia" as "to the large space". They say that "if Russia is to reduce the geopolitical" large space ", then the specific outlines of Russia and the certainty of Russian culture lose their significance." Conversely, for the Eastern Eurasians, Russia, despite the multi-storeyness, despite the difference in crops and landscapes, is something indivisible, although, based on objective reality, it is clear that relations between individual Russian lands and cultures can not always be characterized by the combination and interpenetration .
A huge contribution to the development of geopolitics and geostrategia was made by Americans, the ideologists of Atlantism (Makinder, Mahan, Spikmen). Atlantists live in the world of geopolitics, in the real world of struggle for power, in the world of "big chess game", for them it is primary reality. For Eastern Eurasians, geopolitics at best is a secondary product as a measure of protection, as a form of confrontation with "enemy geopolitics", which, from their point of view, is carried out by the West solely to subordinate and unify. And here again, Lev Gumilev is mentioned, who said that "with a large variety of geographical conditions for the peoples of Eurasia, the association has always been much more profitable separation, disintegration deprived of power, resilience." It is difficult to argue with this, but how much such integration is possible in today's environment?
Both Western and Eastern Eurasians argue about Russian civilization, the right of every people himself determines their cultural project and lifestyle, about the special Russian path, about the unique sense that the existence of Russia is endowed, etc. But representatives of the "Russian" Eurasianism are too "worn" with the "peculiarity" and "identity" of Russia, forgetting about its political and economic development. At the same time, West Eurasianism is directed against the United States and Western expansion, but at the same time it enjoys many principles of Western philosophy and Western geopolitics.
Western Eurasians are inclined to underestimate a special self-defense world that has developed in Russia, a special education with its own logic of development, its values, etc. As a result, it turns out that "sound" Eurasianism is somewhere in the middle between these two in something polar approaches.
5. Post Economic Society and Novoevisia
The post-economic society is understood as the undesisters of economic relations and recognition, along with them, no less significance for society of other types of determinism: geographical, sociocultural, cosmoplanetic. Although it arises in the era of post-industrial society, but in addition to the industry and the economy includes other areas: moral, cultural, agricultural, national relations, etc. "Due to the fact that industrial society has developed historically earlier in Europe with severe economic determinism, and Asia was a backward economically, the ratio of the economic and non-economic (or out-economic) factor is an important part and the essence of Eurasianism. Eurasianism emerged in connection with the distinction of the East and West, Asia and Europe in civilization criteria for development or backwardness. " Civilized West and Standard, Agricultural East, where the backward or lagging side is given a catchy role in relation to the West, this was the position of supporters of the westernization of the entire world civilization as the only possible.
Eurasians also defended the possibility and the legitimacy of the existence of civilization not only on Western standards, but also on the eastern criteria and achievements. Here, civilizational criteria and achievements are inferior to the cultural environment. It took into account the difference between civilization as a phenomenon more material and culture as a process more spiritual. If, "the Eurasians previously expressed a stricken and protest feeling, the newly examination, as the geopolitics and the ideology of the post-industrial society, acts as an equal dialogue between the civilizations and cultures of the East and the West, for their rapprochement, cooperation and mutual enrichment from the position of their convergent philosophy."
In modern conditions, the former issues of Eurasianism is largely removed, because today East and West, Asia and Europe are experiencing processes of close demographic and economic rapprochement and interlacing, thereby forming the global newevarian community, or civilization. Actually, this trend was noted at one time the Eurasian themselves who defended the interests of the disadvantaged East before the enlightened and expansive West. Eurasians acted for enlightenment, the civilization of the East, but at the same time defended the inevitability of spiritual enlightenment to the eastern and most west.
6. Is the Eurasian path of development of Russia predetermined?
Supporters of the Eurasianism argue that today their ideology is saving. Surrounded by fragments of previous ideologies including the last, radically - liberal - democratic, people are particularly in dire need of introducing their future, and reopen the Eurasianism. However, some forces are too actively used by the last argument, trying to explain to all that radical - liberal democracy, Americanism, Atlantism, Globalism is successfully pressing Russia, and urge everyone to stand under the banner of the countercondition of the Atlantic civilization movement, which would take people (this applies to any country, The population of which is not included in the "Golden Billion"), without the existence of which the state is allegedly unbelievable.
However, it is interesting that the gross imposition of the peoples of Russia of Western values \u200b\u200balso meets significant resistance and strengthens the mood of deposition from the center and among those who reject them, and those who are inclined to master this Western culture. Taking the values \u200b\u200bof Western Moskness - reasonable egoism and competition, and the struggle of all against everyone - as basic motivation of behavior, people to a lesser extent perceive the problems of the state.
The results of many sociological studies are sufficiently unexpected. "A 24% of people speak for integration with the EU, while thesis:" Russia is a special country, and the Western lifestyle to her alien "in general, more than 70% of respondents are supported. Even more unequivocally rejection of Western values, the Western lifestyle is manifested in responses to questions that are ideological problems. Thus, a calm conscience and mental harmony was considered by the priority values \u200b\u200bof 75% of Russian citizens - in 1994; 93.4% - in 1995; 92% - in 1997 and 90% - in 1999. Priority to family and friendly relations to material success - a fetish of mass consciousness in developed countries - gave 70.8% in 1994; 93.4% - in 1997; 89.4% - in 1999. " Consequently, the population of Russia does not adopt the liberal project to "copy and catch up" the West, although the transfer of many principles and values \u200b\u200bto the Russian soil, in my opinion, could have a very positive impact on development in all directions.
It is worth noting that the excessive imposition of the people inadmissible for most other people's fundamentals of minigising leads to political instability in the country and to exacerbation, in particular, interethnic problems. If the government does not want conflicts within the country, the draft civilization, which it will support should be determined by a simple postulate - not to lay as the basis of the ideology that it does not know the culture of the peoples living in the state. It should be emphasized: most people in Russia do not want to make the most copy of Western civilization.
The State Essence of Eurasianism, aimed "to achieve the unity of Russia as a common destiny, the general history and the common house of all its peoples in many respects meets the requirements of time. Elements of Eurasian ideology are obvious in the approaches of almost all the country's political forces, except for the extreme liberal. "
7. Basic principles of Eurasian politics
Three models (Soviet, Western, Eurasian)
In modern Russia, there are three main, competing models of the state strategy both in the field of foreign policy and in the field of internal policies. These three models make up a modern system of political coordinates, which is expanded by any political decision of the Russian leadership, any international demarche, any serious social, economic or legal problem.
The first model is the inertial stamps of the Soviet (mainly late) period. This is very rooted in the psychology of some Russian leaders system, often subconscious, pushing them to accept this or that decision on the basis of a precedent. The Soviet reference model is much wider and deeper by the structures of the Communist Party, which are now on the periphery of the executive authority, away from the decision-making center. All the politicians and officials are guided next to her, formally in no way identifying themselves with communism. The upbringing, life experience, education is affected. In order to understand the essence of processes occurring in the Russian policy, it is necessary to take into account this "unconscious sentency".
Second model: Liberal-Western, pro-American. She began to develop at the beginning of the "perestroika" and became a kind of dominant ideology of the first half of the 90s. It, as a rule, is identified with the so-called, liberal - reformers and political forces close to them. This model is based on the selection as a reference system of the Western socio-political device, its copying on Russian soil, following international issues of national interests in Europe and the United States. This model has the advantage that allows relying on a very real "foreign real", unlike the virtual "domestic past", to which the first model is. It is important here to emphasize that it is not just about "overseas experience", but it is about the orientation to the West, as a sample of successful capitalist world. These two models (plus their numerous variations) are presented in Russian politics very fully. Since the late 80s, the main ideological conflicts, discussions, political battles take place between these carriers of these two worldviews.
The third model is much less known. It can be defined as "Eurasian". It takes about a more complex operation than a simple copying of Soviet or American experience. This model also applies to the domestic past and foreign really differentiated: absorbs some of the political history, something from the reality of modern societies. The Eurasian model comes from the fact that Russia (as a state, as a people, like culture) is an independent civilization value that it must preserve its uniqueness, independence and power in order to maintain all the exercises, systems, mechanisms for the ministry and political technologies that can promote this. Eurasianism, therefore, is a kind of "patriotic pragmatism", free from any dogmatics - both Soviet and liberal. But at the same time, the latitude and flexibility of the Eurasian approach do not exclude the conceptual harness of this theory, which has all the signs of organic, consistent, internally consistent worldview.
As the two first orthodox models prove their unsuitability, Eurasianism is becoming more and more popular. The Soviet model operates with outdated political economic and social realities, exploits nostalgia and inertia, refuses to sober analysis of a new international situation and the real development of global economic trends. The pro-American liberal model, in turn, cannot be fully implemented in Russia by definition, as the organic part of another, alien Russia of civilization.
Eurasianism and foreign policy of Russia
We formulate the main political principles of modern Russian Eurasianism. Let's start with foreign policy. Russia's foreign policy should not directly recreate the diplomatic profile of the Soviet period (a strict confrontation with the West, restoring a strategic partnership with "routine countries" - North Korea, Iraq, Cuba, etc.), at the same time, it should not blindly follow the American recommendations. Eurasianism offers its own foreign policy doctrine. Its essence comes down to the next. Modern Russia will be able to preserve as an independent and independent political reality, as a complete subject of international policy only in the conditions of the multipolar world. It is impossible to recognize a unipolar American center-polar world for Russia, since in such a world it can only be one of the objects of globalization, which means that independence and originality will inevitably lose. Counteraction of unipolar globalization, upholding a multipolar model is the main imperative of modern Russian foreign policy.
The third category is the third world countries that do not have sufficient geopolitical potential in order to qualify even to limited subjectivity. In relation to these countries, Russia should carry out differentiated policies, contributing to their geopolitical integration into the "general prosperity zone", under the control of powerful strategic partners of Russia in the Eurasian block. This means that in the Pacific zone of Russia, the preferential strengthening of the Japanese presence is beneficial. In Asia, geopolitical ambitions of India and Iran should be encouraged. It should also contribute to the expansion of the influence of the European Union to the Arab World and Africa as a whole. The same states that are in orbit traditionally Russian influence should naturally remain in it or be returned there. This aims to integrate the CIS countries in the Eurasian Union.
Eurasianism and domestic policy
In internal politics Eurasianism has several critical areas. The integration of the CIS countries into a single Eurasian Union is the most important strategic imperative of the Eurasianism. The minimum strategic amount necessary to start serious international activities to create a multipolar world is not the Russian Federation, but it is the CIS, taken as a single strategic reality, bonded by a single will and a general civilizational goal. The political structure of the Eurasian Union is the logical of everything to be based on the "Democracy", with a focus not on quantitative, but on a qualitative aspect of representation. Representative power should reflect the qualitative structure of the Eurasian society, and not the average quantitative indicators based on the effectiveness of the election show. Special attention should be paid to the representation of ethnic groups and religious denominations. In the person of the Supreme Ruler, the Eurasian Union should concentrate the general will to achieve the power and prosperity of the state. The principle of the public imperative should be combined with the principle of personal freedom in proportion, significantly different from both liberal-democratic recipes and from the depleting collectivism of Marxists. Eurasianism suggests compliance with a certain balance, with a significant role of public factor. In general, the active development of the public start - the constant of the Eurasian history. It manifests itself in our psychology, ethics, religion. But unlike the Marxist models, the public start should be approved as a qualitative, differentiated associated specificity of national, psychological, cultural and religious installations. The public principle should not suppress, but to strengthen the personal beginning, give him a high-quality background. It is a qualitative understanding of the public that allows you to accurately determine the golden middleness between the hyper-endalism of the bourgeois west and the hypercollectivism of the Socialist East.
The administrative structure of Eurasianism insists on the model of "Eurasian federalism". This implies a choice as the main category when building a federation of non-territory, but ethnos. Returning the principle of ethno-cultural autonomy from the territorial principle, Eurasian federalism forever eliminates the background of separatism itself. At the same time, as compensation, the peoples of the Eurasian Union are able to maximize ethnic, religious and even in certain matters of legal independence. The unconditional strategic unity in the Eurasian federalism is accompanied by ethnic pluralism, an emphasis on the legal factor "the rights of peoples". Strategic control over the space of the Eurasian Union is ensured by the unity of management, federal strategic districts, which can include various formations - from ethno-cultural to territorial. Differentiation of territories immediately at several levels will give the administrative control system flexibility, adaptability and pluralism in combination with rigid centralism in the strategic sphere.
Eurasian society should be based on the principle of revived morality, which has both general traits and specific forms related to the specifics of an ethno-a confessional context. The principles of natural, purity, restraint, orderliness, responsibility, healthy life, directness and truthfulness are common to all traditional confessions of Eurasia. These unconditional moral values \u200b\u200bshould be given the status of the state norm. The Armed Forces of Eurasia, the security ministries and departments should be considered as a strategic civilization. The social role of the military should increase, they need to return prestige and public respect. In the demographic plan, the "proliferation of the Eurasian population" is needed, moral, material and psychological promotion of large families, transformation of large-scale in the Eurasian social norm.
In the field of education, it is necessary to strengthen the moral and scientific education of young people in the spirit of loyalty to historical roots, loyalty to the Eurasian idea, responsibility, masculinity, creative activity. The activities of the information sector of the Eurasian society should be based on the unconditional compliance with civilization priorities in the coverage of internal and external events. The principle of education, intellectual and moral education should be put on the principle of entertainment or commercial benefits. The principle of freedom of speech must be combined with the imperative of responsibility for freely said words. Eurasianism implies the creation of a mobilization type society, where the principles of creation and social optimism should be the norm of human existence. The worldview should disclose the potential human capabilities, to give everyone to everyone, overcoming (internal and external) ore and limitations, express their unique person in public service. At the heart of the Eurasian approach to social problem The principle of the balance between state and private. This balance is determined by the following logic: everything is large-scale related to the strategic sphere (military-industrial complex, education, security, peace, moral and physical health of the nation, demographic, economic growth, etc.) is controlled by the state. Small and medium production, services, personal life, entertainment industry, leisure area, etc. The state is not controlled, on the contrary, the personal and private initiative is welcomed (in addition to cases when it enters into a contradiction with the strategic imperatives of Eurasianism in the global sphere).
Eurasianism and economics
Eurasianism, unlike liberalism and Marxism, considers the economic sphere not independent and non-defining for socio-political and state processes. According to Eurasians, economic activity is only a function from other cultural, social, political, psychological and historical reality. You can express the Eurasian attitude towards the economy, paraphrasing the Gospel Truths: "Not a person for the economy, but the economy for man." This attitude to the economy can be called high-quality: the emphasis is not made on formal digital indicators of economic growth, a significantly wider range of indicators in which a purely economic factor is considered in a complex with other, predominantly having a social character. Some economists have already tried to introduce a qualitative parameter to the economy, sharing the criteria for economic growth and economic development. Eurasianism puts the question even more: it is important not only economic development, but economic development in combination with the development of social. In the form of an elementary scheme, the Eurasian approach to the economy can be expressed as follows: state regulation of strategic industries (MIC, natural monopolies, etc.) and maximum economic freedom for medium and small businesses. The most important element of the Eurasian approach to the economy is the idea of \u200b\u200bsolving a significant number of Russian national economic problems in the framework of the foreign policy Eurasian project. This refers to the following: Some geopolitical subjects, vital in multipolarity of the world - first of all, the European Union and Japan - have a huge financial and technological potential, which can drastically change the Russian economic climate. For us, investment and other cooperation with developed economic regions is vital. This interaction initially should be based on logic more voluminous than narrow economic relations - investments, loans, import-exports, energy supplies, etc. All this should fit into a wider context of common strategic programs - such as the joint development of deposits or the creation of uniform Eurasian transport and information systems. In a sense, Russia should entrust the burden of the revival of its economic potential on partners in the "Club of Supporters of Multipolarity", actively using this opportunity to offer extremely beneficial joint transport projects ("Trans-Eurasian Magistral") or vital for Europe and Japan energy resources.
An important task is to return to Russia capital. For this, Eurasianship creates very serious prerequisites. A confused, fully converted to the West, squeezingly belonging to itself, submersible in privatization and corruption Russia of the period of liberal reforms (beginning of the 90s) and Russia of the beginning of the XXI century - mirror opposite political reality. Eurasian logic implies the creation of the most comfortable conditions for the return of these capital to Russia, which in itself will ensure a serious impulse for the development of the economy. Contrary to some purely liberal abstract dogma - capital rather return to the state with a strong, responsible authority and a clear strategic guideline, rather than in an unregulated, chaotic and unstable country.
III Conclusion
Eurasianism is the most developed ideology of various conservative currents arising in Russia in the 90s. "Already in the first years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, it attracted the attention of some intellectuals and politicians - as a way to comprehend the catastrophe and substantially substantially substantial continuity of the state (which was a difficult task). However, it did not manage or could not declare himself as an organized political movement, with its own project: social, economic, political. " And although the Eurasian ideology occupies an important place on the political and intellectual arena of modern Russia, it is still a greater extent of the worldview of several strong personalities on the Russian public arena than the ideology of any political party.
However, the explicit advantage of the new Eurasianity is the actual statement of the multiculturality of the modern Russian Federation, as well as the combination of openness and orientation on dialogue and loyalty to historical roots and consistent upholding of national interests. Eurasianism offers a consistent balance between Russian national ideas and the rights of numerous peoples inhabiting Russia, wider - Eurasia. Specific aspects of Eurasianism are already used by the new Russian authority (integration processes in the CIS, the creation of the Eurasian Economic Commonwealth, the first steps of the new foreign policy of the Russian Federation in relation to Europe, Japan, Iran, the Middle East, the creation of a system of federal districts, strengthening the vertical of power, the weakening of the oligarchic clans, The course on patriotism, statehood, increasing the responsibility in the work of the media - all these are important and essential elements of Eurasianism). These elements are intermitted by the trends of two other models - the liberal-Western and Soviet. The increase in the role of Eurasianism in Russian politics is definitely evolutionary and gradual process.
Eurasianism undoubtedly deserves it to know better. "Whatever his real popularity among the wide segments of the population, it constitutes one of the main post-Soviet ideologies, is truly developed, theoretically substantiated and aims to register Russia." It returns to heritage - to the searches of the beginning of the century, to the scriptures of emigrants. However, the transformation characteristic of Eurasianism in our day often "leads" him away from the sources.
Bibliography
Vidman V.V. Materials International Conference "Eurasianism is the future of Russia: a dialogue of cultures and civilizations", 2001
NOT. Bekmakhanova, N.B.Narbaev Materials XV Interdisciplinary Discussions: Future of Russia, CIS and Eurasian Cylizization
G. Yugai Materials XV Interdisciplinary Discussions: Future of Russia, CIS and Eurasian Cylizization
Ilov E.V. Two sides of the new Eurasianity Independent Newspaper №167 2001
http://www.president-press.ru; http://eurasia.com.ru/leaders/dugin.html.
Dugin A. "Principles of Eurasian Policy"
V. Chkasheli is the inevitability of Eurasianism. Most people in Russia do not want to copy Western civilization, "independent newspaper" 15.03.00
V. Feller "Eurasian Transformation of Russia"
Lavrov S.B. "Lion's lessons Gumileva" (Eurasian Gazette number 6, 1999)
M. Laruel "Rethinking the empire in the post-Soviet space: New Eurasian ideology" (Eurasia Bulletin No. 1, 2000)
there
Dugin A. "Principles of Eurasian Policy"
Laruel " Rethinking the empire in the post-Soviet space: new Eurasian ideology "(Journal of Eurasia №1, 2000)
