Independently of each other, a number of newspapers published articles that, in our opinion, are capable of initiating a discussion about the existence of an ideological justification for the "new conservatism." In addition to Felix Razumovsky's article on the "crisis of groundlessness" and "the need for self-knowledge", this group includes several remarks that are not even independent articles.
First, this is Andrey Kolesnikov's (Izvestiya) commentary on the regular report of the National Strategy Council "National Strategy and the Agenda for the Second Term of President Vladimir Putin." In the article "Workday Agenda", the author states the complete lack of content of the presented report and notes the stylistic unity of the formulations of the creation of the SNS with the formulations of Stalin's times, while noting that after the stylistic one, if you try very hard, you can also see the semantic unity. A. Kolesnikov develops the same theme in his next article "The Year of Big PR".
The absence of any ideologemes among those who today embody Russian conservatism is also noted in Novye Izvestia by Viktor Erofeev: “An education has come to power that has nothing to do with a real party. This is the power of the void, which, like a vacuum cleaner, will suck everything including himself . "
The absence of a coherent ideological program seems to be confirmed by Alexander Tsipko in his review of Elena Tregubova's book Tales from a Kremlin Digger (LG, January 21). From the review, you can understand that liberalism is very bad. This is both "smerdyakovism" and the impossibility "to be a member of the liberal community today and remain a free, thinking being . " This is the impossibility of "observing the canons of liberal political correctness and remaining an honest person," and so on. Meanwhile, except for the denial of liberal values, any positive (except for F. Razumovsky and A. Privalov ) positions of the Russian "new conservatism" in recent months. it has been almost impossible to find
Sources