Ethnososliving in Soviet society

The theory of the resource state and ethnososyre in Russia

The Constitution of Russia, fixing the existence of the “national republics in the Russian Federation”, creates an opportunity to consider the processes taking place in a number of constituent entities of the Russian Federation through the prism of political nationalism. From this point of view, there are political nations in the Russian Federation with the rudiments of statehood and the provisions of a federal agreement related to the central authority of the Russian Federation. Representatives of the elites from among these nations are conducting a double -destroyed policy, the purpose of which is to receive from the center of budget subsidies, and at the same time, the maximum distance from this center in other matters. The most radical-decorated representatives of the elite call for the separation of these republics from the Russian Federation and the creation of full-fledged national states.

Nevertheless, the “republics in the Russian Federation” cannot be considered national priesthood. Having secondary signs of statehood (constitution, flag, coat of arms, anthem), they are deprived of its main signs that make social education the state - their own police and the army. But the paramount function of the state is to maintain internal security and protection against external enemies.

Finally, the nationalism of regional radical politicians is not the political liberal-nationalism of the Western type. For example, they require privileges for the title ethnic group, while proclaiming themselves democrats, while one of the main theses of liberal democracy is the equality of all citizens before the law.

The regional structures of the Russian state and society productively allows us to study the theory developed by modern sociologist Simon Cordon [1] . The author proceeds from the fact that in Russia at all stages of its history - both the pre -revolutionary and Soviet and the post -Soviet - to a large extent, the state had the features of the resource, and society - the estate. A resource state is a state that, in fact, and sometimes legally, has property for everything that is available on it (including land, natural fossils, people, their work and the results of this work).

There is no private property as such in the resource state, there is no commercial and market distribution or does not dominate. The state distributes all the necessary means (from food, clothing and housing to money and privileges) between social groups, instead of imposing certain duties on them. The right to receive this or that resource makes a social group (hereditary or non -investigative), and the quantity and quality of the resource puts this estate in a certain place in the hierarchy of society and determines the nature of its relationship with other, higher and lower classes.

The state in an estate society not only distributes resources, but also monitors their use, and also punishes their misuse (not only individuals, but also entire estates). Correct, or target, here is the use of the resource by purpose according to the needs of the state. If the estate is incorrectly used by its intended purpose (assigns it to itself or seeks to turn it into goods), then it can be deprived of it and even disbanded as an estate.

According to Cordon, the estates existed not only in the past of Russia, but also preserved in modern Russian society. For example, the estate is special services, whose special rights are even stipulated by law (“Law on the FSB” [2] ). Soviet estates continue to exist (pensioners, state employees, etc.). At the same time, the embryo of the class type coexists with the estate, which operates and interacts with the state according to completely different laws.

The concept described above gives the key to understanding the relations of peoples in the Union and Autonomous Republics of the USSR and in the national autonomies of modern Russia, allowing us to consider the peoples living in them (and above all the so -called title ethnic groups) as ethnic groups.

So we will call ethnic groups that receive a certain resource from the state (usually in the form of a set of privileges) and in return are obliged to fulfill certain state duties (sometimes symbolic, sometimes real). Ethnososlovia should be distinguished from ethnic groups. So, the Russians in the USSR were an ethnic group, but were not ethnic group, because they did not have privileges given by the state.

Ethnososylms have their own corporate self -awareness, built on the idea that they have earned a state resource (past or real merits or as compensation for past grievances), and special ideas about the ideal behavior of a member of ethnososylming (until he should dress and speak). They are characterized by the desire for mutual assistance and the creation of the organs of estate self -government that could be accepted into ethnic groups or exclude from it (respectively, to endow with the resource laid to him, or to deprive it).

The existence of ethnososlias is a tradition for Russia, in the Russian Empire their rights and obligations were stipulated by law. Then all the peoples were divided into natural subjects of the empire and foreigners, and the latter, in turn, into sedentary, nomadic, vagabonds, Siberian foreigners, foreigners of the Turkestan region, etc. Their life was regulated by the Charter about the management of foreigners, published in 1822.

Different categories of foreigners had various privileges related primarily to the order of management and military service [3] , at the same time, certain responsibilities were imposed on them, in particular in the field of taxation and movement in the country [4] . Simply put, the foreigners of Turkestan received a resource from the state (for example, the right to self -government based on their own customs), but they were obliged to use it correctly (in order to strengthen, and not weaken imperial power).

In the Soviet Union, ethnic groups existed secretly (although some privileges of small peoples found a legal expression - so, the Chukchi by law were exempted from draft to the Soviet army). The rights and obligations of ethnic groups (ethnic groups) were either stipulated in by -laws (non -public orders of party committees on the share of representatives of certain peoples upon receipt of universities, etc.), or were silently recognized by all as an established state of affairs, tradition (so, the position of the first secretary of the regional committee of the CPSU of the National Republic, as part of the RSFSR, went to the representative of the title ethnic group, the second position of the second Secretary - Russian).

There were ethnososlias of privileged (titular ethnic groups of national republics and districts) and punished (Chechens, Ingush, Crimean Tatars), doomed to legitimate infringement of rights. An example is also known when the infringed ethnososylia - Soviet Jews - managed to obtain from the state the right to travel abroad for a permanent place of residence, which were deprived of the members of the privileged Soviet classes.

It is interesting to consider the mechanism of the activity of ethnososylming on the example of a typical title ethnos of the National Autonomous Republic of the RSFSR - Bashkir in the BASSR and its heiress - the Republic of Bashkortostan [5] .

Ethnososyposion of Bashkirs in the BASSR

The victory of the Bolsheviks over the whites during the civil war became largely possible due to the compromise between the Soviet government and the moderate nationalists (“National Communists”) from the environment of non-Russian peoples. A striking example of such a compromise was the contract between the Bashkir Republic, headed by Zaki Validov and Soviet Russia. Initially, relations with Russian power were thought of Bashkir nationalists as federal. In fact, in Soviet Bashkiria, by the 1930s, the ethnososyp vibration of the Bashkir, which existed throughout the Soviet period and continues to exist now [6] , is finally formed.

What resources did the Bashkirs receive from the state, which allows us to talk about them as a Soviet ethnososrian?

First of all, the right to use the native Bashkir land .

In the 1860-1870s, the state allowed the purchase and sale of Bashkir estate lands, which resulted in a “land fever”-the buying up of the Bashkir lands at low prices, reflected in Russian literature (L.N. Tolstoy). For nine years, from 1869 to 1878, it was sold - with a huge number of violations of the law - about a million acres of Bashkir land on average ruble for ten [7] . Thus, representatives of the titular nation lost a significant part of their land.

The nationalization of the land by the Soviet regime meant the seizure of it from those Russian merchants and wealthy peasants who bought it from the Bashkirs. But this resource was not returned to Bashkir birth, but was transferred to the Bashkirs-Selts (later collective farmers) for use. Moreover, it was assumed that the land would be used for its intended purpose - for agricultural activities (the Soviet government managed to turn the Bashkirs into farmers) and the traditional folk crafts of the Bashkirs - breeding horses, bees, etc.

Official propaganda in every possible way extolled the image of a Bashkir-agriculture or horse-haired, to whom the Soviet government returned that he was illegally selected from him under the royal regime. Gradually, the idea began to take shape that one of the main devices of the Bashkirs in Soviet society was agricultural work, which was broadcast through literature, theatrical productions, cinema, television, setting a model of behavior for representatives of this nation. This representation was divided by the Bashkirs themselves: the first Soviet generations of which perceived nationalization, that is, the expropriation of land among former private owners as historical retribution, and their work on nationalized land for the benefit of Soviet power - as a triumph of social justice.

As a result, the Bashkirs in the BASSR, unlike Russians and Tatars, were mainly busy in agriculture and forestry. According to the 1989 census, the Bashkirs made up the majority in the following sectors of the national economy: agriculture - 34.6% Bashkirs, 33.3% of Tatars, 16.6% of Russians); Forestry (37.1% of the Bashkirs, 29.5% of Russians, 29.5% of the Tatars [8] . It is significant that perestroika sociologists and joint figures of the Bashkir national movement see this already social injustice - the ideas of people of this nationality about social justice and a worthy place in society have changed over time.

The next resource, which in Soviet times, received the ethnososylia of the Bashkirs from the state is the right to develop native culture .

It was ensured by a number of state measures - the creation of the National Theater, the National Schools Network, National Departments in Creative Unions, Departments at the philological facilities of pedagogical institutions and universities, newspapers and magazines in the Bashkir language, a state publishing house that publishes books in the Bashkir language. Finally, there was a guide to faculties and graduate schools of universities of the Republic and Moscow and Leningrad (we note that it was extended to the humanitarian faculties, as it was necessary to reproduce the humanitarian intelligentsia).

The obligation of the targeted use of the resource indicated in this case that members of the ethnic group Bashkirs are required to receive education, become either creators or consumers of the Bashkir Soviet culture. Official propaganda inspired that the Bashkir-intelgent should engage in the development of national culture, the study of their own history, the creation of Bashkir literature, their popularization, and the Bashkirs-the peasant, the worker, the employee should become a book, an active reader of products in the Bashkir language, an expert on his history and culture (in its Soviet version).

In this regard, by the 1960s, the humanitarian scientific community of the BASSR had an interesting and little-exposed phenomenon: the creation of dissertations, monographs, scientific works on the history of Bashkiria (especially on its nodal topics, such as joining Russia, uprising of the XVII-XVIII centuries, Bashkiria during the Civil War of 1918-1921) become becoming The prerogative of scientists is Bashkirs by nationality. They consciously or unconsciously consider this as a kind of specific ministry of members of their ethnic group and the attempts of scientists - Russians or Tatars - are regarded the same regarding violations of the established rules and respond to them by a moral boycott.

At the same time, the historian - Bashkir by nationality, who suddenly decided to engage in another topic - say, the history of Europe, is also considered by them as a candidate for exclusion from ethnic groups. In the eyes of his members, he was guilty of inappropriate use of the resource: he received his education as Bashkirs, using benefits for representatives of this nationality, but refuses to fulfill ethnic service.

Another resource that the Bashkirs relied in Soviet times as an ethnososyre can be called conditionally “friendship of peoples” .

This resource suggested the state ideological support of the Bashkirs, the creation of a positive image of this people and the heroes personifying it, the condemnation of the insults of the Bashkirs and their culture, the proclamation of the right to enter the “family of Soviet peoples” “on equal terms”. In other words, it was assumed that any Bashkirs by nationality, in whatever the Soviet Union, he could count on a welcoming meeting by representatives of other peoples of the USSR, on respect for its culture, its heroes and, above all, to Salavat Yulaev, the official cult of which had a common -euminic character.

The obligation of a member of the Enososliving Bashkir to use this resource consisted in the same attitude to representatives of other peoples of the Soviet Union (including Russian). In the 1930s and 1950s, even the unspoken rules of the speech etiquette of the Bashkirs, aimed at expressing respect for the Russians and the prevention of conflicts on national grounds, were formed in the republic. For example, in order to avoid unpleasant situations associated with the fact that it is difficult for a Russian person to pronounce Bashkir names and patronymics, the Bashkirs themselves suggested calling them in the Russian way (so, Ametdin became Alexei, and Ilgam - Ivan). If not only the Bashkirs, but also the Russians participated in the general conversation, it was considered impolite to speak Bashkir. Entering the room where there are both Russians and the Bashkirs, it was necessary to pronounce a greeting in both languages.

In general, the unspoken ethics of Soviet society instructed to remain silent about national grievances, extol to the dignity of other peoples (of course, there was other behavior among fellow tribesmen in informal communication).

Another resource that the Soviet state gave the Bashkirs on the basis of tradition, that is, an unwritten law is the right to create national mono -ethnic armed groups .

However, this right could be used only in the case of a large defensive war (in peacetime, the Bashkirs served on a common basis in multinational military units). An example is the creation of the famous Bashkir Cavalry Division during the Great Patriotic War. The targeted use of this resource, of course, was considered the fight against the enemy and the protection of the entire (and not just small) homeland and the state.

A similar resource was provided not only by the Bashkirs. As you know, during the Great Patriotic War, the Kalmyk and Chechen-Ingush cavalry divisions were also formed, and the latter is known for the fact that most of its personnel deserted or passed to the side of the enemy: “Of the 2986 people, called up in 1942, the Chechen-Ingush national cavalry division was deserted by 1772 people. " [9] The punishment for this was the deprivation of Chechens and the Ingush of state privileges, including the right to live in his small homeland (from the standpoint of the worldview of the resource state, everything, including the Earth, belongs to the state, and he decide which people where will live).

Finally, one of the main resources granted by the Soviet state of the Bashkirs was an administrative resource .

Propaganda represented the use of it as the exercise of the right of the Bashkir people to self -determination, which the Bashkirs were deprived of in the pre -revolutionary period. However, the BASSR was not the “state of the Bashkirs” (just as it was not the province of the unitary “Russian” state of the USSR, endowed only with the appearance of nationalists, according to modern Bashkir nationalists). It was about the right of the Bashkirs to occupy certain positions in the party and Soviet apparatus (as a rule, according to the tradition of the Bashkirs, the first secretary of the committee, and the Russian or Tatar was the second. It was a very important incentive for any Bashkir, because he knew that he could count on a certain career growth, only because there were cases when representatives of other nationalities, first of all, are primarily, first of all, first татары, выдавали себя за башкир, чтоб воспользоваться этой привилегией. Однако это накладывало и обязанность повышенной лояльности по отношению к советскому государству и публичное, подчеркнутое осуждение «башкирского национализма» (в эпоху сталинских партийных чисток предполагалось даже личное участие в таких чистках и разоблачение искомых «националистов»).

Советскому ресурсному государству, со своей стороны, существование этносословия башкир было выгодно по ряду причин:

• развитие культуры неславянских народов, подвергавшихся дискриминации при царском режиме, соответствовало пропагандистской саморекомендации советского государства как освободителя народов империи;
• за счет ресурса «дружбы народов» обеспечивался межнациональный мир и согласие в стране;
• поддерживалась лояльность СССР нерусских народов, и прежде всего их политических и культурных элит.

Дальнейшее развитие этносословия башкир, равно как и других титульных этнических и неэтнических советских сословий, было связано с кризисом сословного общества, поразившим СССР в «период застоя». Этот кризис был связан с распространением среди сословий убеждения, что выделяемая доля ресурса не соответствует значению того или иного сословия в обществе, а также с развитием механизмов теневого рынка и криминальной рыночной экономики, подтачивающих начала сословности [10] . Это предопределило судьбу советских сословий (в том числе и этносословий) в постсоветскую эпоху.

[1] Кордонский С.Г. Сословная структура постсоветской России. М., 2008; Он же. Ресурсное государство. М., 2007; Он же. Russia. Поместная федерация. М., 2010.

[2] Федеральный закон от 3 апреля 1995 г. № 40-ФЗ?"Об органах федеральной службы безопасности в Российской Федерации"

[3] Так, инородцы Туркестана подчинялись местному судопроизводству и освобождались от воинской повинности.

[4] См.: Правовое положение инородцев Российской империи. URL: http://badnews.org.ru/news/pravovoe _polozhenie_inorodcev_v_rossijskij_imperii_chast_1/2011-01-07-5880 ; Андреянова Н.Н. Понятие инородцев и их классификация в дореволюционной юридической литературе и законодательстве Российской империи XIX века. URL: http://emelinaludmila.ru/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t128.html .

[5] Подобная попытка уже предпринималась в работе: Романов Р. Существует ли башкирский национализм? URL: http://www.rb21vek.com/280-sushhestvuet-li-bashkirskij-nacionalizm.html/

[6] Тот факт, что башкиры были и остаются этносословием, не отменяет того, что каждый отдельный башкир входил и входит различные сословия и подсословия советского и российского общества (крестьян, рабочих, интеллигенции, горожан, селян, членов КПСС, комсомольцев, членов профсоюза, пенсионеров и т.д.)/

[7] Развитие капитализма. Расхищение башкирских земель // История Башкирии. URL: http://www.oktb-tower.narod.ru/histor/bash6.htm /

[8] Ирназаров Р. Равенство этносов в республике Башкортостан. Уфа, 1997. С. 49.

[10] См.: Кордонский С.Г. Сословная структура постсоветской России. М., 2008.