Nikolai Baranov. Russia: a state without ideology, a society without a national idea

The last decade of the 20th century. turned out to be one of the most difficult for Russia in its history. Because of its utopianism and excessive idealism, the communist ideology was doomed to defeat, and the ruling Communist Party did not find the strength to decisively reject the bankrupt ideological doctrine and transform into an organization of the social democratic type. Other powerful political movements There were no people in the country at that moment who were ready to offer society new ideologies and development goals. As a result, the state fell into an ideological vacuum. In the early 1990s, fearing revenge of communist ideology and practice, the Russian political leadership initiated a ban on any state ideology, including in Article 13 of the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation (clause 1) the provision that: “Ideological diversity is recognized in the Russian Federation” and “no ideology can be established as state or mandatory” (clause 2). It should be noted here that this ban should not be regarded as a ban on state ideology in general, since the state as a way of social existence in conditions of the dominance of political alienation cannot exist without ideology. It's about that the ideology of the state cannot and should not be reduced to the ideology of a certain class. The foundations of a new non-class ideology should be formed under the influence of the ideas of freedom and equality, which includes:

Assessment of Russia as a civil society: awareness of the unity of the peoples of Russia, united common destiny, respect for the tradition of love for the Fatherland and responsibility for the Motherland;

New basic values of social relations: freedom of human development, equality and self-determination;

Intrastate pluralism, separation of powers and federalism.

In this regard, liberals proclaim that the primary goals are the solution to a set of problems inherited from the 19th century, including the creation of a rule of law state; problems of the 20th century - eradication of the remnants of social and industrial feudalism; demonopolization of the economy, the fight against fascism and other extreme forms of nationalism. Along with this, it is necessary to solve problems that are unique to Russia: to promote the formation of the middle class, awareness by society and the state of the idea of the legitimacy of private property, etc.

The state, in their opinion, must overcome the traditions of statism: ensure the inviolability of private property; make a separation of property and power and cease to be the dominant owner, subject economic relations in the country; pursue an active policy in the field of combating inflation and stimulating private (including foreign) investment; vigorously pursue anti-monopoly policy; take care of the environment, education, healthcare, the development of science, culture, the poor and disabled; fight crime; pursue a sound military policy; carry out the conversion of the main stronghold of statehood - the military-industrial complex and the reduction of the army to the size of the real needs of the country. If we manage to “expand” the socio-economic space and complete the liberal-democratic evolution of the state, then Russia has every chance to take its rightful place in the civilization of the 21st century. These are the goals, objectives and values of modern Russian liberalism.

Modern domestic conservatives rely on values such as freedom, development and traditions. The interpretation of each of them has its own important features.

In contrast to the Marxist interpretation of freedom, conservatives view it not as freedom of conscience, but as freedom limited by “the imperatives of Christian ethics that were formulated at the dawn of our era.” At the same time, the traditional Russian understanding of freedom “must be combined with such universally recognized values as freedom of speech, tolerance towards other religions and other nations, openness of the country, democratic republican structure of government, freedom of information, civil liberties, human rights,” which is especially relevant in conditions unprecedented in national history expansion of non-traditional cults.

Conservatives consider private property, new business ethics and initiative within the framework of their business to be the basis of the second named value - development. By “their own business”, conservatives mean not only entrepreneurship, but also the work of a doctor, teacher, journalist - any qualified and honest specialist.

By tradition, as a value, they understand, first of all, following the natural course of things. Russian tradition is patriotism, state, religion, family, language, culture and, of course, history.

These three values are not only self-sufficient, but also designed to overcome the “fatal contradiction between democrats and communists for the 20th century.” Conservatives agree with Democrats “in recognizing the value of freedom as the greatest value of humanity.” However, conservatives are modernizing this value: “freedom is not that liberal fetish, by worshiping which you can be a destroyer of morality, you can deny everything, we do not accept such freedom. We are for freedom based on moral law. We by no means deny formal freedom, but we believe that formal freedom must stand on a very serious moral foundation.” Conservatives have only one point of agreement with the communists - the state must be strong. Placing private property at the forefront of the entire economy, conservatives believe that the state must collect taxes with an iron fist and fight the shadow economy.

Representatives new wave Conservatives are united by three generic principles of Russian conservatism: anti-Westernism, Orthodoxy, and a powerful centralized state. However, understanding external and internal tasks Russian statehood causes disagreements that can lead to the formation of different movements within the framework of modern Russian conservatism. Like other new ideologies, modern conservatism is in the initial stages of its formation. Hence all of its weaknesses: amorphousness, inconsistency of fundamental values.

Questions for self-control

1. What is the essence and main types of political consciousness?

2. Determine the place and role of political ideology in the life of the individual and society.

3. Name the functions of political ideology.

4. Highlight the general and special in liberalism and neoliberalism.

5. How does the ideology of conservatism differ from neoconservatism?

6. Describe the advantages and disadvantages of communist ideology.

7. What is the role of emotional factors in politics?

8. Name the main ideologies in modern Russia.

Literature

Bulygina T.A. Soviet ideology and social sciences. – M., 1999.
Gadzhiev K. S. Political philosophy. - M., 1999.
Gutorov V. A. Modern Russian ideology as a system and political reality (Methodological aspects) // Polis. - 2002. - No. 3.
Dynamics of political consciousness and behavior. Political Science. – M., 2002.
Kovalenko V.I. Integrative ideology in Russia: foundations, problems, prospects // Vesti. Moscow State University. Ser. 12. Social political studies. 1994. № 3.
Kosov G.V. Political science. Lecture course. – Stavropol, 2002.
Makarenko V.P. The main ideologies of our time. – Rostov n/d., 2001.
Panarin A.S. Russia in search of an idea: options for civilizational choice // Vesti. Moscow State University. Ser. 12. Social and political research. 1993. No. 5.
Pastukhov V. B. The End of Russian Ideology (New Course or new way?) // Polis. - 2002. - No. 1.
Political ideology in the modern world. Political Science. – M., 2003.
Political Science / Ed. Komarovsky V.S. - M.: RAGS, 2002.
Plyais Ya. A. Political ideologies and their formation in Russia // Polis. - 2000.- No. 2.
Solovyov A.I. Political ideology: the logic of historical evolution // Polis. - 2002. - No. 2.
Russia: Experience of national-state ideology / V.V. Ilyin, A.S. Panarin, A.V. Ryabov - M., 1994.
Sirota I.M. Modern political ideologies - St. Petersburg, 1995.

Ideology today

From Chapter 2 “The Crisis of National Ideology” of Part I “IDEOLOGY AND SOCIETY” of the book by A.E. Molotkov. "Mission of Russia. Orthodoxy and socialism in the 21st century"

The current state of Russian statehood in all its manifestations - political, socio-social, economic, historical, etc. – can be confidently defined as a crisis. It seems that everyone already understands that this is not “perestroika”, not “reforms”, not “liberation from totalitarianism”, not “entering the world community” and not even “the machinations of the CIA”, but something much more serious, internally determined and historically inevitable.

And the further this process drags on, the more political illusions about the “rebirth of Russia” fade into oblivion, the deeper this awareness becomes. The patriotic hopes of the last decade are one after another giving way to a sense of their own inadequacy to the demands of history. And this is in a sense natural: the period of new patriotic enthusiasm is replaced by a period of patriotic realism - an awareness of the entire systemic depth of the current Russian crisis. It turned out that the crisis is not only external, economic or political in nature, but extends to the deepest internal spheres of Russian reality, including traditional forms of national ideology, self-awareness, and national identity. It turned out that none of these principles in itself could become the basis of national unity and the beginning of a new state upsurge. The realism of history clearly exposed the totality of our national-state and cultural-ideological collapse.

Many are inclined to see in this the consequences of the destructive seventy-year communist rule, allegedly responsible for the destruction of national existence and the very archetype of the Russian people. However, such an explanation is too superficial and typical of those who continue to indulge themselves in illusions. Real analysis requires recognizing this phenomenon as a deep civilizational crisis throughout historical Russia, which came at the end of the 20th century to the need for a new state-historical self-identification. Only with such an understanding will the ineffectiveness of everyone without exception find its explanation. traditional recipes national revival. A different scale of approach is needed: not revival, but transformation as a transition to a qualitatively new uniform historical existence. In terms of its significance, this is not just a local national-historical task - to be or not to be a great Russia, but a deeper, civilizational one: is another civilization possible at all, or is there only one path for humanity after the failed communist experiment - a global, post-industrial capitalist world? Russia is staying here last question: "To be or not to be"?! Therefore, the protracted national-historical pause is quite understandable - the answers to such questions do not lie on the surface. Moreover, if in the ideal sphere of national self-awareness in the form of a national idea, such an answer, in general, exists (Holy Rus'), then in real story the answer must be formulated at a much more substantive level - in the form of ideology. This task is the most fundamental national issue of our time.

In this context, the current ideological crisis can be viewed not as a struggle between certain traditional ideologies, but as a time for summing up general ideological results. This is a new and much more productive perspective, taking ideological issues into a constructive direction. Not a choice between this or that, but a complete rethinking of national history over its entire thousand-year period. It is no coincidence that literally all historical and metaphysical subjects of the national idea appeared on the surface of the ideological field - from ancient paganism, to Christianity and communism (as well as: Orthodoxy, Eurasianism, monarchism, Westernism, Slavophilism, socialism, etc.). This is an exceptional phenomenon and means a civilizational break: all national-historical meanings are open - it is necessary to re-realize their unity at the level of the national spirit.

The collapse of communism as a kind of peak of national history caused not only the economic and geopolitical collapse of Russian statehood, but also the collapse of the very ideological infrastructure of the nation in its entire historical continuity. That is why public consciousness is frantically searching for a national idea as the only ontologically reliable support that must survive under the rubble of collapsed ideological structures. However, the national idea is metaphysical in nature and the search for it is a spiritual process, therefore the current ideological crisis is a worldview crisis associated with the task of a new spiritual self-determination of national self-awareness. And this is the most difficult and unpredictable factor in the current national-historical choice.

Attempts to speed up this process by putting forward certain already worked out traditional ideological forms as the basis for new state construction cannot change anything in the state public consciousness, mechanical approaches are inappropriate here. Thus, monarchy is inapplicable to democracy, and the Soviet habit of social equality is incompatible with a return to the class division of society. And so on in all directions... The situation itself adds additional urgency historical time, which does not stand still and cannot wait for us to gather our thoughts. A new stream of problems poured into the fragile, confused national self-awareness - Western worldview values and corresponding ideological formulas. This is an objective process that also requires national ideological adaptation. But are new values compatible with the national archetype, with traditional moral priorities, Christian in its sound, both in Orthodox Russia and under socialism? Is it possible to rebuild national consciousness overnight according to the Western version, according to the type of possessive individualism of J. Locke or the “war of all against all” of T. Hobbes? Same moral question: wealth and poverty - what to do? How can these things be reconciled if the Christian axiom about the difficulty “for the rich to enter the Kingdom of God” is repeatedly reinforced in the national consciousness by the postulates of socialism?

Thus, the current state crisis is not just a crisis of ideology, but deeper - of national identity, its self-determination in new historical conditions. And here one circumstance can be highlighted: between the national idea as a metaphysical area of ontological meanings and ideology as an empirical projection of these meanings on the plane of real history there is a vast area of relatively free meanings that represent an active field of national consciousness. This is a living area of national culture, in which the meanings of the national spirit and national faith (national idea) are organically transformed into words - into the formulas of national ideology. Therefore, as long as the national-cultural self-awareness of a society is devoid of internal unity, as long as it is torn by internal contradictions, the formation of an integral state ideology is impossible. In other words, an unstable worldview as a general one simply cannot take the form of an ideology as a specific one.

Here, in the area of the transition of national metaphysics to the plane of real history, two functions of national existence—national faith and national reason—enter into a complex and often very contradictory interaction. If the national idea is formed by the national spirit (i.e. national faith), then ideology is formed by the national mind, i.e. intelligentsia, aware of spiritual realities in the categories of thought. And this is a very important circumstance for understanding national history in the context of its ideological turns. All the most serious national-historical crises (the turmoil of the 16th century, Peter's reforms, the revolutions of the early 20th century, the crisis of 1991) were directly related to the intelligentsia, which was trying to find new ideological forms for a historically adequate expression of the national idea. At the same time, the repeatedly emphasized gap between the national (folk) faith and the intelligentsia (often pro-Western, i.e., to some extent “foreign”) consciousness almost always turned out to be such that ideological formulas acquired a mixed and destructive meaning for national history. It became commonplace blame the Russian intelligentsia for all such sins. However, some objective historical justifications can be found for it...

The first of them is determined by the very geopolitical position of Russia as a Eurasian and multinational state. Russia is a “synthesis of civilizations,” and this imposes a special transnational inconsistency on the Russian worldview as a need for a supranational ideological form. Therefore, non-national ideological displacement (often understood as universalism) is a constant factor in the self-awareness of the Russian intelligentsia.

The second is the objective need to correspond to historical time, the pulse of which Europe has confidently set for the last two millennia. Compliance with the rhythm of the time, Christian in its content and purpose, for Orthodox Russia was a fundamental condition for historical actualization, therefore the Western orientation of Russian thought was a necessary factor in national-historical development. Russia could not remain with Asia outside of historical time: as a Christian state, it was originally inscribed in the Christian context of history and is its inseparable component. Here the Russian intelligentsia made a direct connection between national self-awareness and the universal Christian destiny of mankind.

All these factors as a whole make the ideological crisis a permanent phenomenon of Russian national identity: the dissonance between national reason and faith becomes the subjective engine of Russian history. If the national idea is defined as a derivative of the national faith, and ideology as a derivative of the national mind, then the sought-for harmony of faith and reason in the national-cultural and state sense means the appeal of the national mind (i.e., the intelligentsia) to the sources of the national faith, and the affirmation of the national ideas as the main meaning of national ideology. This is that necessary act of national self-knowledge, without which the forward movement of national history is impossible; and the deeper the given spiritual-ideological self-knowledge, the clearer and stronger the historical self-determination.

Russian society is often defined as ideocratic. This really reflects the fact that driving force Russian history is an idea. It is the idea as a deep metaphysical ideal (clothed in the religious form of Orthodoxy), revealing itself in the actual national self-consciousness, that forms the national ideology and the corresponding forms of government. But the fundamental distance between idea and ideology, growing in society in the form of empirical contradictions, each time requires the modernization of ideology and the search for its new forms. The change of ideological forms is an ideological crisis. Essentially, this mechanism is the internal algorithm of Russian civilization, which predetermines the well-known catastrophic nature of Russian history.

However, the current change of ideological forms has obviously been delayed. National faith and reason cannot find each other in any way, cannot find a common platform, a common current time, common points of a new civilizational crystallization. National existence seemed to have broken up into many fragments from different periods of national history, different forms national statehood and national-historical self-awareness. The national mind, being in complete ideological confusion, seems to have ceased to understand anything at all and is ready to abdicate all historical responsibility for the ideological self-determination of the nation, submitting to ideological chaos as an objectively inevitable and natural state of postmodern society. At the same time, the policy of de-ideologization, purposefully carried out through the media, greatly increases the ideological apathy of society, completely destroying any positive tendencies towards its civil self-organization. As a result, national identity turned into a motley ideological eclecticism, devoid of holistic meaning and a unified historical logic.

There are many reasons for this state of affairs, but the main factor in the ideological instability of society, of course, was the abrupt reset of the system of communist ideology, and the reckless denial of the Soviet period of Russian history as a shameful mistake that must be quickly forgotten. Such a negative approach to one’s own history (given again through the media) largely determines the hopelessness of new attempts at national-ideological self-determination. It is impossible to restore one’s national-historical identity if the previous stage of national history is missing in national self-awareness! History is continuous and continuous, tearing out entire chapters from its chronicle, we cannot understand its meaning, its logic, its purpose. Then we seem to be stuck in a state of historical uncertainty, where the broken chain of times appears in the form of fragments that do not fit together in any way: Orthodoxy and capitalism, paganism and communism, monarchy and postmodern society, socialism and globalization... How to realize all this in the unity of meaning, historical logic and national destiny, if we do not recognize the unity of national history?!

However, it is here, in the question of the succession of national history, that the most painful contradictions of national self-consciousness are exposed. IN general view we can distinguish three conditional ideological subjects that actively lay claim to the continuation of national history: this is the pre-revolutionary statehood of the early 20th century, which is based on the Orthodox system of values; This government system socialism of the second half of the 20th century, with a communist ideological basis; and this is a new capitalist statehood, with a neoliberal, openly pro-Western ideological appearance. The successful, coordinated pushing out of the middle (socialist) link from the bridgehead of current historical reality makes the current situation fundamentally insoluble, if not absurd: between the Orthodox statehood of the early 20th century and post-industrial society the beginning of the 21st century, no ideological correlation is found. Attempts to directly combine both in the form of some kind of historical continuity are absurd! …As a result, national history finds itself at the point of collapse, in a state of loss of its own identity, under the threat of losing the relevance of national existence. And the fact that this state of historical uncertainty and harsh ideological confrontation is tragically prolonged, and national self-consciousness cannot self-determine in its own identity, suggests that the current crisis is of the “highest category of complexity” - i.e. is ideological turmoil.

Here it is important to immediately emphasize one fundamental point that helps to understand the essence of the current, largely artificially maintained systemic instability. IN modern theory nonlinear systems have the concept of a strange attractor - a certain point of crystallization, which, while itself remaining stable, contains a program for building a paradoxical system of instability (“non-equilibrium order”), that is, chaos that is formed and grows in accordance with a certain pattern. Essentially this is exactly what The attractor in modern Russia is the constantly growing negative attitude towards the Soviet past in the public consciousness. This position of negativity in itself has certain prerequisites for stability due to the fact that, indeed, many things did not satisfy many people in Soviet system; and it is enough only to periodically (through the media) remind us of the “dark sides” of Soviet reality for this point of view to maintain a dominant position in society. This point of view is the attractor that forms the “systemic instability” of national identity! In addition to the media, new ideological forces are naturally working to artificially preserve it as the starting point of public opinion: the neoliberalism of the new Russian elite and, most importantly, the position of the Orthodox Church, which has its own serious account of the communist past. The essence of the paradox is that two historically legitimate subjects of national ideology (Orthodoxy and communism) are enclosed in a closed spiritual and psychological paradox of mutual rejection, which, as a kind of conditional matrix of ideological instability, again and again returns Russia to the boundaries of real historical instability of 1917 ! While dubious subjects of Western liberal ideology, alien to the Russian spirit, are sovereignly leading the controlled chaos of the current Russian reality...

State ideology of the Russian Federation.

1. Introduction.

Throughout the history of the Russian state, the issue of ideology and the development of a national idea has been very important for our society. It just so happened due to the nature of the character that a Russian person cannot live without a goal. Even now, the need to choose a certain course is very important, especially since the 21st century is a century of new challenges and dangers that threaten the sovereignty of our country and the lives of Russian citizens. Of course, the choice of ideological direction of development is of great importance and cannot be decided overnight, therefore both political scientists and politically active citizens must take an active part in determining the vector of development of society and the country as a whole.

The issue of the formation of ideology in our country cannot be divorced from historical events. As a result of political transformations that have occurred in recent decades, Russian citizens have found themselves in a vacuum of political ideology. Of course, there were ideologies, they always exist, but there was no key direction of development. Instead of working out the direction for the development of the entire state, uniting in this difficult time, all people were subjected to the pressure of individualism, which was instilled by Western propagandists and domestic liberals.

2.1. The ideological component of modern Russian society.

It so happened that the entire nineties passed under the slogan of de-ideologization, and people were brought to their senses, Firstly, the fact that ideology is something negative, a kind of barrier and obstacle on the way to a bright future, a democratic society and freedom. Second The main target of liberal reformers was the state, therefore, during the drafting of the main law of the country, the constitution stated that no ideology could be considered state, that is, the liberal ideology of the West was taken as the basis. As a result, such de-ideologization led to the degradation of all spheres of society, in which chaos arose due to the lack of a common goal. And the introduction of an alien ideology, formed on Protestant materialistic morality in a collision with Orthodox spiritual values, is certainly the cause of social conflicts.

However, from a political science point of view, it is obvious that not a single civilization, not a single society can manage and develop harmoniously without a national ideology. The development of society and its vitality depend on the ideological subsystem. As a result of the absence of such a system, fertile soil is formed in society for the polarization of the views of various social groups of society and even the radicalization of left and right forces, which leads to the destabilization of society, which could be observed at the end of the last century. If one ideology ceases to exist, all layers of society direct their aspirations to the development of a new ideological doctrine. When this process ends, then the crisis comes to an end. Of course, it is absolutely permissible for several ideologies to exist in society at once, but to prevent social cataclysms, a state ideology is necessary, an ideology that is shared by the authorities and supported by society.

This new ideology must respond to the challenges of our time and form a new matrix of life in a new society. Just like every person has a unique DNA chain, every civilization also has its own civilizational code, in which a set of value guidelines of a particular society is hidden. At the present time, they are present in our society in an unclear form. Therefore, political scientists and all representatives of social sciences must comprehend and interpret the basic values of the Russian nation, which will form the basis of a new ideological model.

2.2 The importance of introducing state ideology.

At the beginning, it is important to understand what ideology is and what its forms are. Currently, many people use the concepts of ideology, state ideology and national ideology, but do not always know that there is a difference between them. Ideology is a system of views and ideas in which people’s attitudes to reality and to each other are recognized and assessed. social problems and conflicts, and also contains goals (programs) of social activities aimed at consolidating or changing (development) of these social relations. . Thus, ideology appears as something necessary and inherent in every society. Another thing is that this may or may not be formalized and secured or not legally secured. According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation: “Ideological diversity is recognized in the Russian Federation. No ideology can be established as state or mandatory.” State ideology is a kind of national idea formalized and supported by the authorities, which all citizens of a given country must adhere to. IN this moment

The importance of taking measures to develop a new ideology is now understood by representatives of various parties and political movements. Including the current President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin. Even during his first presidential term, he developed the basic principles of the so-called “Russian idea”. Modern political scientists share the same opinion. For example, in his reflections, the famous analyst, S.S. Sulakshin, commenting on the ideological vacuum in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, writes that “this part of the Russian Constitution contains the formula for the destruction of Russian statehood.” Such a measure will be able to smooth out the situation between various ethnic, religious and economic groups, which worsened in the 90s. last century in connection with the de-ideologization of Soviet society, and to bind together a single people. Many researchers in this area recognize that “such an “integrative” ideology should not only unite people and smooth out conflicts, but also form public morality and generally accepted norms of behavior.”

However, it is worth noting here that the importance of developing an integrative national idea does not imply the introduction of unanimity, which in our time is already difficult to imagine in principle, since there are not one or two ideological centers in the world, but much more. Be it the USA with its tenets of democracy and liberalism or the PRC, which lives according to the principles of communist ideology. In view of such pluralism of opinions, it is worth emphasizing that a national ideology must be accepted by the people of their own free will, and not out of fear of terror. Society is always, to one degree or another, diverse, in relation to their religious, social or ethnic affiliation, therefore the desire for reunification with their historical and cultural heritage must be voluntary. Marxism-Leninism and liberalism, which they tried to instill in Russian society twice in the 20th century, are living proof that it is impossible to force certain views on people. Violent interference in the spiritual and social life of people inevitably leads to counter-reaction and resistance from society. An example of this is the sharp reorientation of values from communist to capitalist ones. But at the same time, these stages in the history of our people will become building blocks in the construction of a unified national ideology that will combine the experience of past generations. After all, it is difficult stages in history that determine the fate and strengthen the character of various peoples, and the dialogue between different currents will lead to a synthesis of the various currents of modernity and past eras.

In addition, it is worth emphasizing that the process of developing a new state ideology is complicated by the fact that the Russian people currently lack socio-cultural and national self-identification.

2.3. The role of the state in creating a new national ideology.

The role of the state is very important in the process of this synthesis. Taking into account the paternalistic traditions of Russian society, one cannot deny the fact that power will always be of great importance in the fate of our people. Just as a moderator is often required to resolve international conflicts, an arbitrator is also needed to stabilize social tension within society. From this we can conclude that the future of our people will be inseparably linked with the state and its institutions. This is common to all continental powers. Unlike maritime states, in which the individual comes first, in our country the state takes the leading position. Even in the very first years Soviet power the role of the state did not fade into the background, only the names changed, but the essence of the state apparatus was not canceled. Only the content has changed, which was previously monarchical, but has become socialist.

In the 90s The state's reputation fell due to shock therapy and other adversities, but already at the beginning of the 21st century, trust in state power began to return again. The experience of the 90s showed the alienation and unpleasantness of liberal values and left an imprint on our civilizational DNA. Of course, now people do not see something divine in the state, as they did before, but the authority of the state has not been completely exhausted. And he is quite capable of acting as a corrective force in the development of a national ideology, establishing the rules of the game, preserving the diversity of the Russian people.

As a result of the changes that have taken place in the history of the Russian people, it becomes clear to most Russian citizens that survival in a globalizing world is achievable only with strong Russia. And despite the calls of liberal forces for a life of prosperity, the majority of citizens want to preserve their identity and homeland, rather than follow a dead-end road. What is attractive is not even the image of wealth, but the image strong Russia. Even in the USA, one of the sources of liberal movements, there is its own state ideology, the so-called “American Dream”. And American citizens are ready to defend this image, just as they did in the 18th century. The components of the American national ideology are patriotism, belief in the greatness of the United States, freedom and a life of abundance. It was these slogans that American democrats used in the middle of the century in order to make the United States one of the key centers of power instead of a fading Europe. “The proclamation of the highest national values is of particular importance in a crisis, becoming one of the mechanisms for overcoming it.”

3.1. The appearance of the new state ideology of the Russian Federation.

Considering the current identity crisis of modern Russia, it is very important to use the spiritual component of the potential ideology of our country. Faith in the strength and greatness of our country is a key link on the path to building a new state ideology. At the same time, many modern researchers are confident that Russia should be a great and strong country; a number of factors oblige us to do this. Firstly, this is a geopolitical component. Our country stretches from the Baltic and Black Seas all the way to the Pacific Ocean, on its territory there is a large number of natural resources. At the same time, approximately 143 million people live in Russia, which is not much for such a territory. Secondly Over the centuries, Russia has been formed as a country with a cohesive economy that has worked for the greatness of our country. Our economy can be called an integral mechanism, nothing else. Thus, such rich country will not be able to maintain its territory and wealth without being great. “Either Russia is a great power or the collapse of Russia into a number of Russian-speaking countries,” is the opinion of modern analysts. It turns out that the basis of the new national ideology should be the idea of a great Russia, capable of withstanding the threats of our time. Third, Another important component of the all-Russian ideology should be the rule of law in social and political life. The meaning of this proposal is to counterbalance all branches of government and the inadmissibility of revolutionary violence. In modern Russia, we can observe that all power, by and large, is in the hands of the president and his apparatus. In reality, harmony in society can be achieved by maintaining balance between the three branches of government. If such parity is achieved, all conflicts will be resolved within the legal framework, plus they will not spill out onto the streets. The development of the political system in such a case will take place through evolution. An example of how this mechanism works is the United States, where the constitution adopted in 1787 was never changed, only supplemented. The constitution itself, of course, plays a big role in this. The constitutions of Western states contain words that characterize them as countries where the moral and political matrix of the entire society is defined. For example, in the German Constitution there are the concepts of “common good”, “ general tasks", "state community".

Such concepts lead to the idea that the introduction of a truly new ideology into modern Russia seems possible only with amendments to the constitution of our country. The Constitution should not be a dogma, but should reflect the needs of the state and its citizens.

3.2. The national question within the framework of the new state ideology. Another very important issue in the analysis of the introduction of state ideology in Russian society is national question . After the disintegration of the USSR, the national question became one of the key ones, given modern. After the formation of the Russian Federation, the administrative-territorial division of the country began to be formed according to the principle of federalism, but federalism based on nationality. In view of the fact that the Russian population, according to the 2010 census, is approximately 78%, it will not be possible to build a strong state where Russians will not be a state-forming nation. But at the same time, this statement should not sound like a threat to representatives of other nationalities. Unlike, for example, the USA, a country of emigrants, in Russia all peoples have rich history and have lived on their lands for many centuries. The US goal is to assimilate everything emigrant waves and create an artificial nation, but in Russia the history of every people is part of Russian history. Federalism on a national basis for indigenous peoples only leads to aggravation of relations between the federal center and the regions of the Russian Federation. The ideas propagated by Western agents of influence in such areas are based on demands for freedom for each ethnic unit. But the concept of freedom should not be harmful to the future of Russian ethnic groups. Such ideas pose a threat to Russian sovereignty, since only a strong and one nation, no matter what peoples make it up. Plus, Russians, by their nature and historical experience of cohabitation with many peoples, are tolerant and friendly towards all ethnic groups. Thus, the state ideology in Russia must contain two key rules. Firstly, Russians must be the basis and core of Russian statehood. Secondly, all peoples living on the territory of the Russian Federation are equal in their rights and responsibilities in relation to their homeland. Moreover, many peoples managed not to disappear in the pages of history and preserve their culture only because they “adjoined larger nations, state-owned and tolerant.”

In addition, in the modern world there is no such rule that would say that there are as many states in the world as there are peoples.

Another key issue in the formation of a new ideology should be spirituality. The spiritual factor seems to be very important not only for Russia, but also for all states that want to continue their existence in the 21st and subsequent centuries. It can already be observed that many countries in the world are consolidating along civilizational lines. For example, China positions itself as a guide to all Asian countries, countries Latin America strive to act as a single whole, as representatives of Ibero-American culture. According to the French scientist, Alain Touraine, industrial society main conflict developed between representatives of different classes, the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, and the discussion was about the rights of people, their freedom and the fair distribution of goods produced. In a post-industrial society, the central issue will be the organization of society, its integrity and level of happiness. We should not forget about the three pillars of the Russian Empire: monarchy, Orthodoxy, nationality. Already in the 20th century ruling circles

understood how important the spiritual factor is in the unification and integrity of the state. In the 21st century, we are not talking about the fact that Orthodoxy should be a pillar of our statehood, but spirituality, which consists of history, traditions and the experience of intercultural communication, should serve as a cementing part of the state ideology of Russia. In addition, a certain paternalism should be an important component of the Russian state ideology. Of course, the state should not look after its citizens in a manner similar to paternalism. Tsarist Russia , when the people were presented as helpless objects of history. The new Russian ideology should be based on a synthesis of pre-revolutionary paternalism and Soviet trusteeship. Russia, as stated in this constitution, is a social state, but simple words

not enough to create a strong state. Reading the crisis of development of Soviet collectivism, which is also characteristic of Eastern civilizations, and the problematic adaptation of Western individualism, the new ideology should focus on the institution of the family. The family serves as a point of contact between West and East and well reflects the Eurasian essence of Russia. Family is the best source of spirituality in society in a globalizing world. It is the family that gives strength to every citizen of the state and serves building material in the construction of a legal and social society.

4. Conclusion.

To summarize, it is worth highlighting the main provisions regarding the new ideology of modern Russia.

Firstly, ideology is directly related to state well-being and the state of development of social relations and, therefore, is a systemically formative foundation for ensuring the sovereignty of the Russian Federation. From this we can conclude that Russia in the 21st century can defend its sovereignty and maintain its position in the world only by having a strong ideological foundation. But at the same time, state ideology should not impose one point of view on a person and control his behavior and interfere in his personal life. Regardless of whether a new constitution is adopted or the current one is amended, Article 13 is a time bomb and must either be amended, allowing for the creation of a state ideology based on the cohesion and unity of all citizens of the Russian Federation, or completely removed. But in this case, one of the normative documents should stipulate the inadmissibility of creating a society similar to a totalitarian one.

Secondly, It is not acceptable to transfer ideological models that dominate in other countries to the Russian civilizational community, since each state has its own national ideology, which will come into conflict with the state ideology. This could lead to a repetition of the events of the early 90s, except that Russia at the moment may not be able to endure new political upheavals and may lose its integrity and sovereignty. Therefore, a new state ideology must be developed through scientific, analytical and expert activities, taking into account the rich cultural and historical heritage of the Russian Federation and with the assistance of government authorities.

Third, the new state ideology should be based on spirituality, taking into account cultural historical experience and regardless of religious affiliation, patriotism, which should be cultivated, starting from the family and ending with educational institutions, and which V.V. has repeatedly spoken about. Putin , and social justice.

In addition, state ideology should be based on three principles:

1. use of an evolutionary approach in the development of society and the formation of state ideology, preservation of cultural and historical values;

2. strengthening statehood and maintaining order in society, which includes the restoration of moral values and mutual respect in the spiritual sphere;

3. priority of the common interests of the state, nation and society over individual interests, which is one of the principles of “sovereign democracy”, which finds support in scientific and political circles.

It is worth noting that in addition to these principles, one should also take into account the experience that Russia gained in the 20th century and which is reflected in the following provisions. Firstly, in order to avoid repeating the revolutionary path of development, Russian society should not lose touch with the past and take into account all the pros and cons of past political systems and regimes. Secondly, the new state ideology must contain provisions on the inadmissibility of fragmentation of the state and the development of certain boundaries in the field of disintegration of the state in order to avoid the cessation of the existence of the Russian nation. It must be laid down in the Russian DNA once and for all that our prosperity and well-being depends on spiritual strength, moral affinity and sound patriotism.

In conclusion, it is worth noting that in every society a correction of public opinion and the political psychology of the population must be carried out. Regardless of society and form of government, a country can survive and protect its sovereignty only if it has a state ideology based on the social-state ideal of the necessary state. Of course, this does not reduce the role of other ideologies that exist in the world, and which, moreover, are an incentive for the development and improvement of state ideology. IN ancient Rome soldiers went into battle, led by the idea of Great Rome, Russian soldiers went on the attack, believing that they were fulfilling their sacred duty to their family and land, in the USA people are ready to stand up as a wall for freedom and their rights, as well as for the “American Dream”. We can say that all these ideas rule and control people more than specific actors and organizations, which is why they constitute a psychological portrait of various nations and are included in the civilizational matrix. Russian citizens We need a state ideology that could lead Russia to a great future, an ideology that can lead Russia out of its current chaotic state. The state of the 21st century is not just a territory surrounded by border posts, it is a super-idea and the meaning of life. Without such an officially formalized idea, not a single organization can exist, let alone the state.

5. List of used literature:

1. Alekseeva T.A., Kapustin B.G., Pantin I.K. “National ideology”: an illusion or a misunderstood need? // October. – 1997. – No. 1. – pp. 137-153.

2. Zaorskaya I.Yu. Statehood in the historical fate of the peoples of Russia // Power and society: vector of change. Sat. scientific tr. Vol. 1. M. 1998. P. 7.).

3. Sokolova R.I., Spiridonova V.I. The state in the modern world. – M., 2003. – 253 p.

4. Surkov V.Yu. Texts 97–07. – M.: Publishing House “Europe”, 2008. – 192 p.

5. Constitution of the Russian Federation. // " Russian newspaper"from January 21, 2008 [Electronic resource] URL:

6. Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany. [Electronic resource] URL:

7. Plenary meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club

8. Popov G. Why Russia needs to be great // Nezavisimaya Gazeta dated 03/29/2000. [Electronic resource] URL:

9. “Russia at the turn of the millennium” // Rossiyskaya Gazeta dated December 30, 1999. [Electronic resource] URL:

10. Sulakshin S.S. What is ideology. [Electronic resource] URL:

11. Federal State Statistics Service. Number and composition of the population.

12. Federal State Statistics Service. Census results for 2010. [Electronic resource] URL:

13. Center problem analysis and public-administrative design // Cycle "National Idea": National Idea of the USA: [Electronic resource] URL:

14. Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary // Ch. editor: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. [Electronic resource] - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. 1983. [Electronic resource] URL:

The answer to this question is perhaps one of the most important today. What ideology does Russia need? In general, does it need ideology? The creators of the Yeltsin Constitution believed that, no, it was not needed. And therefore, even a separate article prohibited the emergence of state ideology in the country.

But ideology is nothing more than... a route on a bus. There is no route, no one will reach the final station. They will quarrel and fight. They will force the driver to drive in several directions at once. As a result, they will mark time or move along some course, but very slowly. In jerks. Uncertain.

Once bus passengers have an approved route, disputes will immediately cease. There is nothing to argue about - if you don’t want to go this way, you can get off.

In China there are no disputes precisely because the route is approved and the bus travels along it. And as they move forward, passengers are assured that they are “on the right course.”

Does China have a state ideology?

Of course I have. And it is enshrined in the Constitution of the People's Republic of China. China is building socialism with national Chinese characteristics. At the same time, the main slogan of modern Chinese society has become not the building of communism, but the “great revival of the Chinese nation.” No “universal human values”, no globalism. Clear and understandable - the rebirth of the Chinese nation. That is, the revival, development, strengthening of the PEOPLE of the Chinese state.

What kind of ideology do we need? It’s easier to say – what an idea. After all, ideology is an idea, simply polished from all sides, wrapped in beautiful clothes, but this does not stop it from being an IDEA.

Need it? We really need an idea today. Only the most inveterate liberal would disagree with this idea. Any other citizen of Russia will agree that it is the absence of this clearly formulated idea that is hindering the development of the country today.

Patriotism in its pure form cannot be a national idea in Russia. Why? Because love for the Motherland, which is truly historically highly developed in Russia, does not answer the question of what the country should become, where it is going and what it offers to the world. We love Russia, we love it for what it is. But the feeling of patriotism alone will not help us understand what it should become.

Therefore, we need an ideology, we need an idea in which patriotism will only become an ever-increasing consequence, but not the cause!

When developing a national idea, ideology (call it what you want), we must take into account several aspects, keep in mind several levels of its future perception:

The ideology (idea) of Russia must be harmoniously combined with the historically established mentality of the multinational people of the country, which is much more similar than different among different parts of the Russian people.
The proposed Ideology (idea) must necessarily make Russia stronger and more united. More if you want. In the sense of influence in the world and the desire to “become like us, become us.”
Russia's new ideology should be attractive for export. It must bring us new allies without discarding old ones. It must compete with dignity with other ideas and ideologies, which are the essence of world civilizational projects.

In the new ideology of Russia, everything should be beautiful - both the internal content and the external form.

Is there such an idea today?

Eat. We are ready to offer it to our people.

This is the Idea of Harmony. The idea of Harmony of three unions.

What kind of alliances are we talking about?

Let's start from within the country. Today, social stratification in our society has reached unprecedented proportions. The difference in income literally tears society apart, making it amorphous and extremely vulnerable to external influences.

Therefore, the first of three Unions that we propose.

1. Social union.

A unified society in which the state limits the ability and aspirations of one social group to benefit at the expense of other social strata. First of all, you are a citizen of Russia and only secondly, an employee, entrepreneur or official. Solidarity instead of competition and rampant exploitation.

Changing legislation so that any citizen of Russia feels socially protected. He was a member of social society in reality, and not like today - only on paper.

Justice is the main word in our new Idea of Harmony of Three Unions (IGTS). Everything that does not meet the principle of fairness, from the income tax scale to the punishment for brazenly driving without a license on playgrounds, must be changed. Towards justice, which will immediately add Harmony to our society and reduce tension in it.

Union of Nationalities.

Russia is a union of Eurasian peoples freely united around the state-forming Russian people. In this free union of all nationalities, every part of the mosaic is valuable, every people and nationality are priceless, and all of multinational Russia is ready to fight for their uniqueness.

In this unique union of equal and respectful nationalities, there is a place for other peoples. Whose historical uniqueness and even safety are being questioned modern globalization. We don't want to make anyone like us. And this is our fundamental difference from the United States and “European values.” Be yourself, remain as your history, culture and traditions have bequeathed to you. If you want, together we will protect traditions, faith and culture from attempts to “globalize” everything in the same way.

Russia is offering the world a new civilizational project. To be more precise, it is quite old – a Russian project. Only in new design. There are two Unions within it: a social union and a union of nationalities.

It's still the same Russia. It was called differently in different periods. It was the Russian Empire, it was the Soviet Union. But justice has always been written more or less clearly on our banners. So let’s not be ashamed of this and clearly write the word “justice” on them again!

But for outside world we need another third alliance.

Union of Civilizations.

Russia has already given the world a unique experience of successful peaceful development of completely different peoples, religions and cultures within one country. Russia itself is a union of civilizations in miniature, where completely different (seemingly!) communities have united and have been developing peacefully for centuries. This is an example for the rest of the world. Where we, our civilization, were, no one disappeared; everyone acquired writing, a national intelligentsia, and even statehood. Where we were not, peoples of entire continents disappeared, culture and history were destroyed. The works of art of the Incas and Aztecs melted into faceless coins are a clear illustration of what happened wherever NOT OUR CIVILIZATION came.

Russia offers the world a union of civilizations. We protect our identity and are ready to help protect yours. We extend the hand of friendship and do not demand the soul of the people for this.

Russia is for a planetary civilization consisting of free peoples, and not faceless “consumers” who have no nationality and do not know their ancestors and roots.

This means that we are for peace, against war, against the forced transformation of some people into others.

Today, when no one on the planet can feel confident, when any country and any ruler that does not have nuclear weapons can simply be destroyed because of “evidence” on Facebook or Twitter, such a position may be extremely in demand.

Let's hone the idea. Let's have a brainstorming session the size of the entire country.

We need a new national idea - ideology.

The idea of Harmony of Three Alliances is a new ideology that Russia can offer to the world.

Article 13 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation states that in the Russian Federation no ideology can be established as state or mandatory. This situation arose in connection with the historical experience of the USSR, where there was a totalitarian ideology, and then authoritarian society

. She claimed to be scientific, correct, true, and assessed all other views as false, harmful, which must be fought, eradicated, prohibited. This ideology affirmed a certain social, state idea, a goal, for the sake of which everything else was turned into a means. Man ultimately had to become imbued with this idea and consciously transform himself into a means of its implementation. The general goal is differentiated into specific goals

The data of a sociological study conducted in the USSR during the “era of L.I. Brezhnev” in preschool educational institutions are indicative. The question was asked: who do you love most? It turned out that Lenin dominated in the first place and only then the parents and others. The repressed ideological communists rationalized the situation: I personally suffered, but this strengthened the power that implements the idea I shared. I am ready to continue to suffer for this. It is clear that such an ideology hostile to man had to be discarded, which was done in the 1990s. The state abandoned ideology, its ideological function, and moved on to setting specific goals: to create a multi-party system, a market economy, a pluralistic culture, etc.

IDEOLOGY

A state can live without ideology, but society cannot
Russia must have its own ideology
Patriotism as an ideology for the revival of Russia
Modern society needs a new ideology

The question of why to do this somehow hung in the air. And at the same time, a person, as a species being, still has an existential need for a system of values and meanings for which it is worth living. Each individual independently creates a set of values under the influence of education, upbringing, traditions, the flow of various information, etc. The most important factor in this process is the real practical life of the individual, his social status, socio-economic position.

The main criterion for selecting certain values in the event of abandoning ideology becomes the principle of utility, the utilitarian approach. How differentiated are the different social groups, their values, life-meaning guidelines, motivations for activity are so different, and each citizen focuses on specific personal goals that reflect his interests, the interests of his family, on what is useful for him and his family. He realizes his interests as opposed to public ones. Many thinkers have emphasized the eternal hostility of the individual and society, since the individual has individual interests, goals, and society - general, public.

State, protecting common interests, inevitably subjugates individuals, using various institutions, methods and techniques, direct and hidden mechanisms. Along with the system of coercion, society has developed mechanisms for transforming public interest into personal interest through the formation of a certain system of values among individuals, primarily moral. The individual considers morality to be his purely personal education and is proud of the fact that he determines himself to act, guided by internal law, which, ultimately, is nothing more than the requirement of society, which has become the internal conviction of the individual. A utilitarian approaches moral standards with the criterion of personal benefit. If they do not bring benefit, and even more so if they interfere with the acquisition of benefit, then they should be discarded. In modern Russian society, this approach flourishes, especially in economic relations: “business is business, nothing personal.”

The most important condition for the transformation of the public into the personal is the individual’s awareness of his unity with society, with the society in which he lives, with the people who are part of it. The unity of citizens, the high level of their support for the state at present in connection with the events in Ukraine, the entry of Crimea into the Russian Federation, and the confrontation with developed Western countries is due to external factors and indicates that the feeling of patriotism and self-preservation of the sovereign Russian society has not yet been lost among the overwhelming majority of citizens. External reasons are temporary, but the prospects for the internal foundations of the unity of the people are questionable, since centrifugal forces operate with enormous property differentiation. Russia's movement along the path of creating oligarchic capitalism and a consumer society gives rise to the following logic of reasoning for the utilitarian-oriented population. I “live here and now” and I would like to live well here and now, and not wait for a wonderful tomorrow, enduring hardships now.

Why should I work hard, fight for the public interest, defend existing social conditions that give rise to huge property differentiation and enable oligarchs to exploit me? Why does the comprad Orsk bourgeoisie export national wealth abroad, why do officials get rich through corruption, why are there such large expenditures on law enforcement agencies (army, police, etc.), and not on the development of production and the growth of the well-being of every Russian? Why do we need an imperial policy that leads to confrontation with the West, sanctions that prevent us from enjoying the fruits of civilization, causing a decline in the living standards of the vast majority of the people? Utilitarians can implement the following courses of action. Firstly, guided by the principle “fish look where it’s deeper, and people look where it’s better,” emigrate, because “it’s bad here, but it’s good abroad.”

This option is used primarily by young people with professions in demand abroad and wealthy people with financial resource for a comfortable life there, etc. Secondly, limit yourself to your private interests, adapt to existing circumstances and, to the best of your ability, realize personal utilitarian goals. Use power for this purpose by subscribing to or entering into it. Thirdly, insist that one must join the world of modern Western civilization through complete submission to it. It is necessary to lease the country to world capital with an advanced level of development of the economy, science, and technology. Invite foreign managers and owners who know how to manage the economy, public relations based on modern civilized norms, since our elite cannot govern effectively. And the government itself cannot defeat government corruption; this can only be done from the outside. In this sense, the current government in Kyiv is doing the right thing by inviting foreigners into the government and involving the world community to solve internal problems.

The so-called liberal modern Russian non-systemic opposition adheres to approximately this position. Fourthly, rebel against the negative phenomena in our society, fight for a fair, prosperous society of general well-being, since the general good, from the point of view of a consistent utilitarian, is the sum of utilities, the benefits of all citizens. This applies to philosophizing utilitarians (there are very few of them), an ordinary utilitarian does not talk about the common good, he is limited to personal gain and believes that everyone cannot be a winner, but there is always a winner and a loser. The Constitution of the Russian Federation denies state ideology, but at the same time it is itself the Basic Law of the Russian Federation and contains ideas, values, and goals that are attractive to citizens: democracy, legal and welfare state, human rights, etc. The main ideas of the Constitution of the Russian Federation must be theoretically substantiated and placed as the basis of the state ideological doctrine.

On the basis of this doctrine, the state is obliged to carry out its ideological function in full, taking into account the historical experience of Russia and using modern information, organizational and other capabilities. State power must carry out its daily activities on the basis of a newly created ideology. Then it will be clear to citizens what kind of future society we are moving towards, what goals we are pursuing, what values we are guided by. The main condition for the people's trust in the authorities would be met - the unity of words and deeds of the state. On this basis, it would be possible to formulate an idea, a common goal that unites citizens and motivates them to implement it.

Rogulev A.I.
Ural Institute of Management - branch of RANEPA Associate Professor of the Department of Theory and Sociology of Management, Ph.D., Associate Professor
Gulina N.A. Ural State Law University Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy and Sociology, Ph.D., Associate Professor