January 21 "Literaturnaya gazeta" published an interview with a historian, author of the program "Who are we?" (TV channel "Culture") Felix Razumovsky, who talks about the "crisis of self-identification" of modern Russia.
Without engaging in polemics with F. Razumovsky, we will only note that, in our opinion, in some cases, his theses are disputable, and examples are doubtful (in particular, the example of Nizhny Novgorod democracy, which, in F. Razumovsky's view, actually appears as a theocracy, and reasoning about national idea (!) in Veliky Novgorod).
The historian states that today Russia finds itself in an ideological vacuum, which, in turn, is due to the interruption of historical tradition. However, the tragedy is not only and not so much in it, but in the fact that in society there is no need to fill this vacuum: "The uniqueness of today's transitional time is that vital questions are not even raised. Apparently, because society does not have needs. No one needs ideas! Enough economic and political incantations " .
The interview points out that the concepts that "pseudo-ideologists" use today are nothing more than clichés that are not able to inspire Russians to creative activity.
For example, the “pseudo-task” of “building capitalism”: “Our economic luminary, Mr. Yasin, who was involved in reforms, admits at this forum that in Russia money cannot make a person work - they do not act as an incentive. I am embarrassed to read this. If if a respected scientist had asked any Russian folklorist what money is in folklore, he would have learned a lot of useful things. He would have been explained that money is a robber and a high road ... And more treasures. And that's it!" .
Razumovsky is also critical of the idea of democracy. "Democracy itself is an abstract principle, a certain political procedure. If you want democracy to take root in Russia, you need to create a national version of it ... Democracy is a certain principle that every time must be applied to a real cultural and historical tradition " . As a "national version" of democracy, he just puts forward the practice of Veliky Novgorod, which we have already mentioned: "In the Novgorod veche republic, this task was solved. Russian democracy flourished in Veliky Novgorod for five hundred years. Honorable age! And what was it all based on? Spiritual authority Novgorod rulers! The most amazing thing is that almost all of them are canonized, canonized. Holy people as the backbone of democracy... This is, if you like, democracy in Russian. The Novgorod bishop was not only the head of state: foreign policy and finances too were his direct concern. The state treasury was kept on the floors of the Cathedral of St. Sophia. And everything was in order with the national idea in Novgorod " .
Further, the interview is reduced to traditional discussions about the great fate of the Russian people, that all statesmen before perestroika (including Brezhnev) were rooted in the Russian Orthodox tradition and culture, which you need to know in order not to expose the country to needless destructive cataclysms. Doubts are expressed about the possibility of the existence of liberal democracy in Russia ( "Russian liberalism is a greenhouse flower, exotic ") and it is concluded that it is time for us to come to the Russian version of capitalism, because in Russia there can be either Russian capitalism or destructive. What the first option consists of is not clear, only the traditional examples of Morozov and Tretyakov are given (by the way, for some reason, all discussions about "Orthodox capitalism", as a rule, end with an appeal specifically to Russian merchant patrons, without mentioning that, in fact, they belonged to the Old Believers - ed. ).
However, according to F. Razumovsky, " "There is only one way out of this historical impasse - self-knowledge. ... We need to urgently and clearly understand ourselves, our history, the features of Russian civilization .
Sources