Lyubov Borusyak: Young Muscovites are no longer ashamed of the slogan “Russia for Russians!”

On April 6, 2005, the Polit.Ru portal published Lyubov Borusyak's study Patriotism as Xenophobia. In it, based on the results of a survey of young Muscovites, the author examines the problem of xenophobia, which has recently become increasingly acute in Russia.

The analysis of the situation carried out in the article is based on a "pilot" survey of young Muscovites (primarily students).

First of all, the author draws attention to the features that must be taken into account: this is the privileged position of Moscow in relation to other Russian cities, hostility towards Muscovites, etc. features of the capital and metropolis. The author especially emphasizes "local patriotism": "The idea that there is hell everywhere except Moscow-paradise makes one want to preserve this paradise, and to preserve it for the most worthy of it - Muscovites. This is one of the important reasons for xenophobia towards all visitors, regardless from their nationality . However, the positive concept of a "better life", "paradise" is not in itself a unifying principle, or rather, a rather strong unifying principle. Much stronger in this regard is the negative justification - xenophobia, the desire to "defend" one's "specialness" from certain encroachments. And this desire has a rather powerful foundation in the traditional stereotype of a "besieged fortress" that has taken root since Soviet times.

In recent years, Moscow has become an object of active expansion of two groups of migrants: Russian migrants and migrants of other nationalities. At the same time, the first group is perceived not with hostility, but with a clear awareness of the danger of competition. "At this level, xenophobia can be characterized as a negative catalyst for local, urban consolidation" [highlighted by us - *ed. ]. But hostility towards migrants of other ethnicities "inscribes the city into a community of a higher level - state, Russian, Russian. It must be said that "ethnic" xenophobia, hatred of "foreigners" is successfully fueled both by their own actions (terrorist attacks) and by state policy - xenophobia during a war is a necessary condition for its successful (or even unsuccessful) continuation. In order for a war to be perceived as legitimate, it must have the support of a significant part of the population, and for this, xenophobia must also be legitimized "*.

The author emphasizes that "in the mass consciousness, xenophobia seems to be the embodiment of patriotism" , and argues that "there is a situation in the country now when it is possible to quite officially formulate the national idea as a patriotic idea, and there is already a universal integrator - a demarcation line between "our" and "strangers" laid " .

The pilot survey, on the basis of which the study was written, included 200 Muscovites aged 15-22 years, in which they accepted (students of Moscow universities (65%), schoolchildren (25%), students of vocational schools or technical schools, others).

Despite the fact that the sample does not claim to be representative, the author believes that the main trends characteristic of the youth "Moscow" moods, nevertheless managed to be caught. We note only some aspects of this study.

The survey revealed that young Muscovites perceive themselves as twice the elite (Russians + those born in Moscow), and feel they belong to a group that is sharply opposed to the rest.

Contrasting "us" and "them" is one of the basic points in the minds of the respondents. “Thus, there is an awareness of their belonging to communities of a different order. As “Russians” as opposed to “non-Russians”, and as “Muscovites” as opposed to “newcomers”, young people begin to realize themselves as patriots and, at the same time, members of an elite community that they would like to see (and even make) closed and even more elitist. In other words, xenophobia has an important unifying and status-forming property" .

It is interesting to note that for Muscovites, the main criterion for a “Muscovite” is birth in the city, and for visitors, nationality (in the latter case, the leading answer was that a “ Russian person living in Moscow” can be considered a Muscovite ).

A significant part of the survey participants (42%) believes that a non-Russian person cannot be considered a Muscovite at all. And this point of view is not supported only by ethnically non-Russian participants in the survey.

At the same time, only 15% of respondents said that only Russians should live in Moscow (20% of Muscovites and 5.4% of visitors), while 21% of survey participants believe that "Moscow is an international city, representatives of different nationalities" .

At the same time, Moscow youth is absolutely tolerant towards their Russian peers from other regions as long as they do not encroach on their rights (the most illustrative example is competition for the right to enter universities, the Unified State Examination).

The survey showed that Russian students who came to Moscow are in no way inclined to identify themselves with migrants of other ethnicities. “They believe that, as Russian people, they have the right to be in Moscow on an equal footing with native Muscovites, but they deny this right to non-Russians. It is interesting how some non-Russian students “justify” their stay in the capital. One of them, an Udmurt by nationality, adds in the questionnaire, that "representatives of those nationalities who have lived in Russia for more than 100 years can come to Moscow . "

The author notes a wide variety of responses that characterize the xenophobic attitudes of young people towards immigrants of other ethnicities. Of the 136 statements on this topic, 48 (the largest number) can be conditionally designated as "problems of communication". Then the groups "crime", "urban problems" and "they are not like us" follow. There are also unexpected, emotional formulations: they say, due to the fault of visitors, Russian people, Muscovites are getting worse, losing their "natural" virtues, in particular, kindness and tolerance: "we don't like them", because of them "we become irritable " , because of them, "universal hostility, malevolence", "stratification of society" , "because of them, skinheads appeared" , etc.

Thus, the author emphasizes, "there are "we" and there are fundamentally different "they" - a classic situation of xenophobia. In terms of their qualities, "we" and "they" are directly opposite, do not intersect. When there are too many "them", and they, According to young Muscovites, there are too many in Moscow, “we” can’t stand it, we are changing, losing our identity, adopting those qualities that are immanently inherent in “them.” But the blame for the fact that we are getting worse lies solely with “them”: if if they leave, stop annoying "us", then we will return to our natural ideal existence and restore our "natural" qualities. Judging by the answers of young Muscovites, the fear of losing identity due to constant contact with "them" is experienced very acutely " .

The antithesis "hosts - guests" is often found in the respondents' answers. At the same time, it bears a special burden. The respondents consider themselves masters of Moscow not in the sense of hospitality ("hospitable hosts"), but in the status, imperious meaning of the word: "masters of life", "usurpers of all rights" to Moscow. And "guests", respectively, are understood not as those who need to be met and received better, but as temporary residents with a sharply reduced status. And in this sense , "an uninvited guest from the Caucasus turns out to be really "worse than a Tatar", Muscovites treat Tatars much more tolerantly than Caucasians" (compare with the statements of German Sterligov).

The complete absence of reflection on xenophobic and "international" attitudes is also shown by the positive self-characterization of the respondents. For example, the characteristics of the "Russian" and "Russian-Moscow soul" are considered by the respondents to be: kindness, responsiveness, hospitality, friendliness, generosity, sincerity, and so on. "It is clear," the author emphasizes, " " that both friendliness and hospitality apply only to 'their own' and in this sense are not refuted by the demonstrated xenophobia, but are quite consistent with it .

"Russian Muscovites not only consider themselves the masters of their city, but also people of a different nature than visiting foreigners - they endow themselves with all the positive qualities, they - with all the negative ones . " Thus, it is quite logical that young Muscovites consider themselves entitled to some actions to discriminate against visitors. Only for them this is not discrimination, but "the struggle for their own rights and the well-being of their native city . "

For example, they are quite in agreement that "it would be right to regulate the ethnic composition of the city, not to let representatives of other nationalities into the capital or expel from the city" .

Many respondents more or less agree with the slogan "Russia for the Russians." This, in the author's opinion, "testifies that in the public mind such a point of view is not marginal and one should not always be ashamed of it" .

For all survey participants (Russians), Russia is a value that should not be available to everyone, and for Muscovites their city has an even higher level of significance, the rights to which are, firstly, Russians, and secondly, those born in this city. In many ways, it is precisely this approach that signifies the idea of ​​patriotism in the minds of many young Muscovites . Interestingly, most of the statements about patriotism were not openly xenophobic.

In addition, with all the xenophobic attitudes that respondents demonstrate, most of them do not support the actions of skinheads (only 18% of respondents have a positive or rather positive attitude towards the behavior of such people), but many are ready to find an excuse for them.

Sources

• Borusyak Love. Patriotism as xenophobia // Polit.Ru. 2005. April 6. [Publication of the Bulletin of Public Opinion, Levada Center].