Philosophy of the Russian idea. Russian national idea - opinions of famous people

The concept of “Russian idea” was formed in the 16th century and was embodied in the form state structure. The Orthodox monarchy became the embodiment of what was understood by the “Russian idea” in those days. The Christian philosopher Pyotr Chaadaev for the first time asked himself the question of the purpose of the Russian people, its special meaning and vocation. Chaadaev was not convinced of the exclusivity of Russia, but it was Chaadaev's Philosophical Letter, which was published in the Telescope magazine in 1836, that initiated the conversation about the destiny of the people.

“We do not belong to either the West or the East,” writes Chaadaev in the Philosophical Letter, “we are an exceptional people”

The isolation of the Russian people from the historical processes in the world was initially assessed by the philosopher in a negative way, but over time was replaced by a conviction in an exceptional path for Russia. Chaadaev considered religion to be the source of happiness and well-being for Russians.

“... It amazes me not that the minds of Europe, under the pressure of innumerable needs and unbridled instincts, do not comprehend this so simple thing, but that we, the confident owners of the holy idea handed to us, cannot understand it. And, meanwhile, after all, we have had this idea for quite some time. So why have we still not realized our purpose in the world? Isn't the reason for this the same spirit of self-denial that you rightly point out as a distinctive feature of our national character? I tend to this opinion, and this is what, in my opinion, it is especially important to truly comprehend. ... By the grace of heaven, we brought with us only some appearance of this worthless civilization, only the insignificant works of this pernicious science, civilization itself, science as a whole, remained alien to us. Nevertheless, we have become sufficiently familiar with the countries of Europe to be able to judge the profound difference between the nature of their society and the nature of the one in which we live. Thinking about this difference, we should naturally have a high idea of ​​​​our own institutions, become attached to them even more deeply, be convinced of their superiority ... ".

The term "Russian idea"

Is the Russian idea a philosophy or a set of concepts? The term itself was first used by F.M. Dostoevsky in 1860. The world learned about him after the report of V.S. Solovyov "Russian idea", which was read in Paris in 1888. Philosopher A.V. Gulyga gave him a very clear definition:

"The Russian idea of ​​Dostoevsky is the concept of universal morality embodied in a patriotic form."

Russian philosophers Trubetskoy, Frank, Karsavin and Fedotov used this term in this sense. They considered the Russian idea to be the connecting and unifying link of the nation. The unification was achieved mainly in the footsteps of Chaadaev - on the basis of religious thought. Holy Russia is Russia united by the veneration of the saints of the Russian Orthodox Church.

V.S. Solovyov wrote in his article "The Russian Idea" that the idea "is not what the nation itself thinks of itself in time, but what God thinks of it in eternity."

I. Ilyin noted the importance of patriotism in the philosophy of the Russian idea:

“This idea formulates what is already inherent in the Russian people, what constitutes its good strength, in what it is right in the face of God and original among all other peoples. And at the same time this idea shows us our historical task and our spiritual path; this is what we must cherish and grow in ourselves, educate in our children and future generations and bring to real purity and fullness of being - in everything, in our culture and in our way of life, in our souls and in our faith, in our institutions and laws. The Russian idea is something living, simple and creative. Russia lived by it in all her inspired hours, in all her good days, in all her great people. In other words, under the Russian idea, I. Ilyin understands only everything great, good and only positive that is in the history, fate, culture and spirit of the Russian people. N. Berdyaev, on the contrary, includes in the totality of problems and lines of research of the Russian idea not only the good, the best, the “right” - he believes that it is possible to approach the mystery of the “Russian soul”, the originality of the path of Russia, only if one immediately recognizes “the antinomy of Russia, its terrible inconsistency. Then Russian self-consciousness gets rid of false and false idealizations, repulsive boasting, as well as spineless cosmopolitan denial and foreign slavery.

Is the Russian idea a geopolitical issue?

A number of researchers believed that the Russian idea began to be considered in a geopolitical sense and the consideration of the Russian people as a God-bearing people is chauvinism. Similar views were held by the researcher A. L. Yanov. The philosopher Gulyga saw this as a desire to "compromise the spiritual history of Russia."

In addition, he considered the term “Russian idea” to be broader than the definition of the relationship between society and the state. The Russian idea did not consist, in his opinion, only in the idea of ​​an Orthodox monarchy.

Russian idea and modernity

After the collapse of the USSR and the spiritual crisis that followed the collapse, the Russian idea became especially relevant.

“Today, the Russian idea primarily sounds like a call for national revival and the preservation of the material and spiritual revival of Russia. The Russian idea is relevant today more than ever, because humanity (and not just Russia) has come to the edge of the abyss...

... The Russian idea is a component of the universal Christian idea, set forth in terms of modern dialectics,” Gulyga wrote.

The Russian idea has played and continues to play a leading role in the revival of the Russian Orthodox Church.

In direct connection with the question of statehood, the question of the form of state structure, state power, government controlled. But before answering this question, it is necessary to return to the essence of the very problem of the ideology of the Russian state and the ideology of national security, to find out what lies and continues to be the basis of Russian civilization and its value orientations.

The core element of Russian civilization is the Russian Idea. Its essence is the national and religious tolerance of the Russian people, the readiness to come to the aid of the weak, to protect the humiliated, to sympathize with the wretched, to ensure not only their own safety, but also the safety of every people who shared their fate with them. In the Russian Idea, such a quality of a Russian person as tolerance for the mores and customs of other peoples was extraordinarily fully manifested. It is these features of the Russian Idea that led to the fact that Russia as a country developed on a multi-ethnic basis. That is why the formation of the Russian state, starting from the time of the Muscovite kingdom, was carried out not by the extermination of the peoples who joined, and the process itself looked more like a gathering of lands, like a voluntary entry of peoples into the hands of the Muscovite, and then the Russian sovereign. This feature was very subtly noticed by L. Gumilyov, emphasizing that "therefore, the ethnic diversity of Russia continued to increase" (L. Gumilyov. "From Rus to Russia", St. Petersburg, YuNA, 1992, p. 221), and the process this was carried out "not by the extermination of the annexed peoples, by driving them into reservations or by violence against the traditions and faith of the natives, but by complimentary contact between Russians and aborigines or by the voluntary entry of peoples under the arm of the Muscovite tsar." Thus, the colonization of lands "by the Russians is not like the extermination of North American Indians by the Anglo-Saxons; the slave trade conducted by French and Portuguese adventurers; the exploitation of Javanese by Dutch merchants. But these were peoples who were proud of their "civilization" and had already survived the Age of Enlightenment" (ibid., p. .227).

Therefore, the Russian state was built in a special way, it did not repeat or copy the ways of state building in the West or in the East.

The national expression of such a state as was the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union and the current the Russian Federation there can only be the totality of peoples inhabiting this state (regardless of its name), the totality of peoples, which is considered as a special multinational nation and as such possessing its own nationalism. The concept of "superethnos", given by L. Gumilyov to designate an ethnic system consisting of several ethnic groups that arose at approximately the same time, in one region, in similar natural and economic conditions, is quite relevant to this community.

Thus, the Russian state was originally built as a multinational state, embodying those qualitative, value orientations that, through traditions, experience, trials and the struggle of peoples for self-preservation in a single community, led in essence to a real brotherhood of peoples, which, especially in the days of trials became stronger and brighter for each people of this brotherhood than the consciousness of its belonging to any other group of peoples. Great Patriotic War 1941-1945 highlighted this quality with the greatest completeness, and that is why today anyone who would like to completely destroy the greatness of a single people is trying to belittle the significance of this brotherhood for victory over the enemy, to distort the true meaning of the Victory, to belittle the role of the Russian people in this process.

It is necessary, however, to see that the Russian Idea had and continues to have another embodiment - Russian nationalism, which has always been the reaction of the Russian people to the humiliation of their national dignity, to the infringement of their interests or their neglect. And it is no coincidence that Russian nationalism, as one of the forms of expression of the Russian Idea, receives an unusually wide development at the turning points of Russian history, in " Time of Troubles". Carrying a number of positive aspects, Russian nationalism at the same time carries a significant destructive charge, since it is with it that the idea of ​​\u200b\u200brecreating the Russian national state on the territory of the Russian Federation is directly connected. That is, Russian nationalism initially carries a political content, becomes an element political struggle, comes to the fore in "time of troubles", drowning out very often what is positive, promising, "eternal" in Russian

Idea. And it is this side of the Russian Idea that is endlessly and rudely exploited by various forces fighting for power, which objectively leads to a distortion of the Russian Idea itself.

Its deformation and discrediting over a long historical period, and especially after 1991, when the Russian Idea could really become a consolidating idea, occurred primarily due to the desire of various political and social forces to use it primarily in party, class, narrowly national, clan or religious purposes.

The study of various views and positions on the Russian Idea allows us to identify and summarize the most important of them, which, to one degree or another, are supported by various groups of the population of Russian society.

Firstly, spirituality is recognized as the main component of the Russian Idea in almost all positions, the source of which is patriotism, Orthodoxy and the life path itself with its constant struggle for survival in difficult natural conditions and in constant wars for one's existence.

The main source of both spirituality itself and its components, according to this point of view, is the divine principle.

Quite dully are mentioned as a source of spirituality, social phenomena, reduced to the concept of "life path".

Secondly, another component of the Russian Idea is just as unanimously recognized as catholicity (sometimes on a par with the concept of community), in which the divine principle is the main starting point.

It is also recognized that catholicity is an expression of a certain stable type of social relations, but these social relations themselves are just the result of the spiritual evolution of Russian society. It turns out that social relations also have a divine source, since spirituality, as we noted, has the same divine principle as its main source.

Thirdly, the next component of the Russian Idea is recognized by all as statehood. However, the form of its embodiment is interpreted differently. Some see her as the most best option, developed during the thousand-year history of Russia, in the form of a monarchy.

Others, denying any form of democracy, advocate the establishment of a national dictatorship based on loyal military units and a cadre of smart, honest and sober patriots quickly rising to the top.

For a genuine democratic structure in Russia, from the point of view of supporters of this position, the main thing is missing - a mature sense of justice. And in the conditions of a vast territory, weakly connected by its individual parts into a single whole, the multinational composition of the population, the religious and cultural predominance of the Russian population, when it will take many years to restore legal consciousness and national self-consciousness, primarily of the Russian people, the country should be headed only by a national, not totalitarian, but an authoritarian, educational and reviving dictatorship.

And representatives of the radical-democratic direction stand up for a powerful (strong) state, which acts as an instrument for preserving identity. At the same time, the same spirituality acts as a positive part of this identity, acting as the history of the struggle for the preservation, reproduction and development of the superethnos (already Russian, not Russian) as the bearer of a unique spiritual and cultural tradition. As the main task of this struggle, the radical democrats define the solution of the national super-task - the creation of an interculture, which ultimately coincides with the ultimate goals of mankind (apparently, interculture is the ultimate goal of mankind), and with the Providence of God. And just as in the previous cases, it is recognized that this struggle is essentially religious, imbued with the consciousness of its high historical responsibility. And although all this is given at the level of a hypothesis, the conclusion about the forms of statehood is far from being hypothetical.

From the point of view of this part of Russian society, after 1991 a new ideology was being formed in Russia - the ideology of enlightened democratic patriotism. And it is precisely this ideology that stimulates today, in its very first approximation, the Russian type of democracy. This type is:

the constitutional combination of the advanced social technologies of the West (we have already noted the social limitations of capitalism, so it is not very clear what advanced social technologies of the West we are talking about) and the thousand-year Russian historical tradition (sobornost, statehood, cosmism), as well as the Russian type of market economy, which has a social orientation.

Hence it follows that the essence of Russia in choosing its form of statehood is not a formal pseudo-democracy (what is it in its essence? Is it then necessary to admit that Western democracy is a pseudo-democracy, and what does this mean?) and not totalitarian dictatorship (apparently, the USSR is meant), but a democratic and at the same time national type of statehood, which is closest to corporate democracy and corporate statehood. And as a conclusion - this type is the path to modern Russian statehood, strong state power. Having essentially reduced the path to the future between the choice of the form of state power, the choice that is determined by a compromise between freedom, which in its absolute expression leads to anarchy and the collapse of the state, rebellion, and justice, which gives rise to despotism and totalitarianism, the authors of this approach limited the entire search, all the hopes of the Russian people by the need to find this balance, which, in their opinion, is the core of the entire political struggle (this is very convenient, since it completely takes us away from the need to resolve social issues, issues of property).

What is revealed quite frankly, openly when these views are compared?

First of all, an appeal to religious origins and the religious justification of all the traditional features of Russian history. Even social processes have a spiritual, religious nature of origin and development. Then, indeed, it will be enough to instill moral religious values ​​- honesty, decency, patriotism, intolerance to evil and support for good, to find an honest, patriotic person who, on a purely national, Russian basis, will surround himself with equally honest patriots, and that’s it, maybe not it will change very quickly, but radically: having seized power, mafia structures will not rob their people, those who have stolen property from the people and the state will return it to their owners, the robbed person will be imbued with the belief that the robber will return the stolen goods to him, and the state, or rather, the honest patriotic elite, personifying the state , will consistently express and protect the interests of the people, in this case Russian.

Apparently, it is necessary, nevertheless, to figure out, first of all, from where these ideas and ideas opposite to them (radical-democratic) grow, although there is an outward coincidence in many positions, even in an indistinct, unreasoned recognition of the social side, the social orientation of all the events and processes taking place in Russia.

The origins of coincidences and discrepancies lie in the ideas of Russian nationalism, which for some is the core of the Russian Idea, while for others it is an idea that is unacceptable from all points of view. Therefore, it is no coincidence that radical democrats, denying the existence of Russian nationalism, or recognizing its limited, narrow existence, are trying to oppose it in some form to Russian nationalism.

What is the Russian Idea? From the standpoint of the first point of view, the Russian idea is "this is a Russian national formula statehood, "including such components as spirituality, the sources of which are patriotism, Orthodoxy and traditions of the life path, catholicity and statehood. This determines the need for the existence of Russia only as a national state of Russians, i.e. such a state should be built on the instinct of national self-preservation Russian population. Otherwise, according to supporters of this point of view, it is no longer Russia. The multinational composition of the population in Russia constantly carries the threat of disintegration and disastrous civil wars. And only the religious and cultural predominance of the Russian people, which is distinguished by accommodating and kindness, can help to avoid this danger.

At present, only a dictatorship designed to solve this problem can solve the problem of creating a Russian state, stop decay, overcome the political, economic and spiritual crisis. And the dictator must be single-faced, but he must rely on spiritual strength and on the qualities of the people being saved. Another variant of the form of statehood, arising from such an interpretation of the Russian Idea, is a monarchy.

Representatives of the radical-democratic trend believe that the Russian Idea of ​​the new Russia lies on a different plane - the Russian national idea, which has nothing in common with Russian nationalism and has always been above it. This is explained, from their point of view, by the fact that the Russian people, as the creator and guardian of the great empire, was more "Russian" than "Russian".

This logic of reasoning is very convenient. It allows us to neglect the Russian experience, to present the matter in such a way that the formation of the Russian state proceeded without the participation of the Russian Idea, that initially the idea of ​​Russian nationalism was in the formation of the Russian state, which contradicts historical reality.

Therefore, the statements of representatives of the radical-democratic direction that Russian nationalism and the Russian Idea have nothing in common with each other are unfounded.

In addition, if we follow the logic of the supporters of this position, according to which the Russian people, as the bearer of imperial ideas, as a supernation, cannot have their own national-state identification, since it is expressed in the concept of Russia. Hence the need arises for that form of statehood, which they say: radical democrats - corporate democracy.

Historically, the Russian national idea and Russian nationalism are interconnected. This is the whole paradox that the Russian Idea has always had and continues to have two directions of influence: it is the core of the Russian (Eurasian) civilization and it is also the core of Russian nationalism. The second - has always been and remains a reaction to the infringement of the interests and positions of the Russian population, to unjustified hardships and deprivations, etc. And it is no coincidence that the revival of the ideas of Russian nationalism, the appeal to it, becomes very active precisely in the "time of troubles", at turning points in history as one of the last means of overcoming trials for significant groups of the Russian population. The national interpretation of the Russian Idea as the basis of Russian statehood is also the position of certain circles directly connected with the Russian

the Orthodox Church or within it. Let us dwell on some of these positions, which are of undoubted interest from the point of view of the content of our subject of analysis.

First of all, the ROC stands for the broadest and deepest mutually beneficial and equal cooperation between the state and the Church, and this, from its point of view, can be a very important step towards slowing down the process of deepening the political radicalization of Russian society, establishing peace and harmony in it. But a completely logical question arises: how do the supporters of the confessional direction see this state itself?

The multinational state in Russia is, from their point of view, just an ideological stamp and a completely obvious lie. In their opinion, Russia is the state of the Russian people. And reliance on his traditional values ​​(both cultural and religious), on his best spiritual qualities is the only guarantee of the viability of the Russian State. And it was the ROC that has always been the source and custodian of these values. From this, quite obvious conclusions arise - the restoration of the political role of

Church, which she played now in the distant past, overcoming the atheistic nature of the state.

Therefore, while Russians make up 85% of the population, a controlled transition to a policy of "enlightened nationalism" inspired by the moral ideals of Russian Orthodoxy is still possible in the country.

Undoubtedly, the role of the Russian Orthodox Church in the formation and development of the Russian state is great. It is difficult to overestimate her. Rather, she was constantly underestimated. But there are some points in the position of the ROC that raise doubts and even fears.

Firstly, cultural and spiritual, even more - civilizational values ​​- this is far from only and not even so much the values ​​​​of religious origin (Divine Spirit), but the way of life of the Slavic tribes, and then the Russian people, and above all, the communal nature of life, work , traditions that have been preserved from generation to generation for centuries, life in the rules of democracy, which Herodotus noted in relation to the barbarian Slavs (at the time of Herodotus, the word barbarian did not carry a negative negative meaning, but only meant belonging to another, non-Hellenic population).

And after the adoption of Orthodoxy in the 10th century, the Russian and related tribes that adopted Christianity continued to live in ideological, religious dualism, along with Christian teaching, pagan beliefs and pagan deities were recognized.

The finest hour of the Russian Orthodox Church came after the establishment of the Tatar-Mongol yoke in Russia.

The strength and greatness of the Russian Orthodox Church lies in the fact that it was able, in the absence of any other social force, to express with the greatest completeness, clarity and accessibility for the broad masses of the people those spiritual values ​​and positive traditions that have taken on a canonical character.

The strength and greatness of the Russian Orthodox Church lay in the fact that, having expressed in its teaching these spiritual values ​​common to various Russian communities, it itself rose to the level of the recognized only organized force of a nationwide character.

The strength and greatness of the Russian Orthodox Church, finally, lies in the fact that it was she who, for the reasons indicated, had to become the inspirer and organizer of popular resistance to the invaders. The activities of Sergius of Radonezh, the presence of Oslyaby and Peresvet on the Kulikovo Field, monastic asceticism in the name of the Russian People and the Fatherland are not symbols, but an expression of the essential, qualitative, folk content of the Russian Orthodox Church at this particular stage in the history of the Russian State.

And it is quite natural that after the liberation from the Tatar-Mongol yoke, the Orthodox religion becomes the state ideology, and Russian Orthodox Church continues to play the first and most important role in the transformation of the Russian state into a multinational Russian state. At this stage, the ROC as an organization continues to be the leading link in the emerging political system of Russian society. But by the end of the XYII century, the situation began to change not in favor of the Russian Orthodox Church, primarily because by this time - the time of Peter the Great, the state began to firmly occupy a leading place in the political system and could not share its role with anyone, in including the Church. The liquidation of the Patriarchate and its replacement by the Synod is a fairly convincing reflection of the emerging new political and social situation.

Add to this the transformation of the Russian state into the Russian one, the appearance of Muslims and Buddhists in its composition, which significantly changed the confessional situation and forced the state to reckon with it, take it into account in its future plans, and it becomes clear that in the conditions of multinationality and the existence of various religions, recognizing only Orthodoxy as a national religion could cause serious damage to the plans for the development of the Russian state, the Russian Empire.

Undoubtedly, the main part of the Orthodox is the Russian population. The recognition of the Russian national state is a complete change in the role of the ROC in today's complex ideological and spiritual conditions and an expression of the desire

The ROC should fill the formed ideological vacuum with its philosophy, its ideology. And no matter how much various clerical circles deny the desire to turn religion into a state ideology, objectively this is exactly what is behind a number of proposals in the political, spiritual, social, cultural and educational sphere of Russian society.

Quite accurately K. Dushenov defined this situation in the article “Unbreakable Union of the Kremlin and... the Cross?”, published in the city of Sovetskaya Rossiya on July 6, 1996: human heart."

At the same time, the RPU’s firm adherence to spiritual, civilized values, which it represents, first of all, as Russian, and not Russian (which from an essential point of view should not be of fundamental importance) makes

The Russian Orthodox Church is a firm, consistent supporter of the establishment in Russian society of the national foundations of being, and an equally firm opponent of the penetration into Russia of Western ideological values, commercialized to the ground, threatening the spiritual disintegration of society and the rejection of its national identity.

This is what makes the Russian Orthodox Church an ally of all those forces that are striving to preserve and develop Russia's original and exceptional path of development into the future. It would be an irreparable mistake to consider such an alliance as temporary, opportunistic, since

The Russian Orthodox Church will live and will have a high authority in society as long as traditional spiritual and cultural-historical values ​​live in society, which have taken on a religious character in the Church's interpretation, but have not lost either their significance or their unifying power.

It is important to take this into account both in state ideology and in National Security policy.

Consideration from different points of view of the problem of nationalism in general and Russian in particular allows us to say that its most frequent, repeated element, in any interpretation, is patriotism, as a rule, local, limited by narrow national (more often nationalist) framework. At the same time, apparently, it is necessary to take into account that neither primitive nationalism, limited by the framework of national exclusiveness, nor national patriotism can act as a unifying idea, just as the populist-populist idea cannot act as such. The first idea is always already real patriotism, it is limited by the interests of certain social groups trying to present their interests as national ones, it is for these groups, as a rule, a means of either self-affirmation or achieving a specific political goal. The second idea is popular-populist, always carries a temporary, opportunistic character and dies along with the conditions that gave rise to it.

Although it must be admitted that the populist-populist idea also has stable elements, primarily of a social nature, which makes it attractive, "recognizable."

The Russian Idea, cleansed of false, opportunistic interpretations and its gross exploitation for purely narrow political purposes, can act as a state unifying idea.

Its discredit and deformation after 1991, when it really could have become a consolidating idea, occurred for a number of reasons:

firstly, the essence of the Russian Idea was the efforts of various forces - from the left to the right, replaced and Russian nationalism became it;

secondly, Russian nationalism very quickly became politically radicalized, becoming one of the most important means of struggle for opposition forces of various orientations (leftists, sovereigns, monarchists, jingoists, etc.);

thirdly, in their turn, the radical democrats, striving to gain a foothold in power after 1991, ignored this idea, it did not fit into the ideology of unbridled liberalism ("capital has no boundaries"). Moreover, they opposed it because, from their point of view, the Russian idea is a "Soviet value" ("elder brother"); they allowed and even encouraged in opposition to

Imposing the ideas of Western civilization on the Russian Idea, considering them as effective remedy destruction of communist ideology. The Russian Idea, being a "Soviet value", became the object of destructive actions. The methods of these actions were television, the media, the distortion and deformation of the entire education system and the rejection of the Russian classical pedagogical school, the encouragement of the penetration into Russia of confessions alien to its people (Protestant, Catholic, sectarian) hostile to the religions of the autonomous peoples of Russia - Orthodoxy, Islam, Buddhism ;

fourthly, the political regime, relying on the momentary populist-populist moods of the population, itself contributed to the destruction of the integrity of the idea. Having exceptionally favorable conditions in 1991 for the revival of the Russian Idea and its transformation into a state unifying ideology, the regime, reflecting the interests of the emerging financial and political oligarchy, which grew on the yeast of liberal democratic politics, began to contribute to its devaluation (to no small extent by its amorphous position in relation to Russian-speaking population in neighboring countries) and allowed the opposition, which transformed the Russian Idea into the idea of ​​Russian nationalism, to use it as a leading ideological position;

fifthly, the Russian Idea did not become the idea of ​​the emerging new social stratum - the national (but not comprador) bourgeoisie. The adherence to this idea on the part of certain individual representatives of the same stratum does not change the essence of the picture;

and, finally, sixthly, the transformation of the Russian Idea into the idea of ​​Russian nationalism somehow contributed to the emergence of extremely extremist political groups, up to the emergence of neo-fascist ones, which turned it into one of the central elements of their ideology.

After the collapse of the USSR in connection with the formation of the Russian diaspora in the near abroad, in the CIS and Baltic countries, the Russian Idea acquires a new qualitative content, ignoring which contradicts both the very idea of ​​patriotism and the political interests of Russia.

The Russian government and, especially, the Russian foreign policy and foreign economic departments, with their short-sighted policy in 1991-1995. in this matter, based on the priorities of party (liberal-democratic) interests over the "eternal" interests of Russia, created significant difficulties in the implementation of both domestic and foreign policy. Does the Russian Idea contradict the interests of the non-Russian peoples inhabiting Russia? And what place does it occupy, or rather, should it occupy in the state ideology of the Russian State? And is it possible in principle?

We have noted the most important, historically established main components of the Russian, Eurasian civilization. But these same components, most of them, are inherent in the Russian Idea, they are the essence of its content. And this essence formed the basis for the formation of Russian civilization, became its core, ensured the continuity of the entire historical development of Russia, i.e. ensured the continuous, unified, consistent development of the country, the development of the community different peoples Russia, uniting them into a single whole.

That is why we continue to assert that the parties and social movements existing in the current political system of Russia carry in their programs not so much an ideology as a pre-ideology, since each of them reflects not the interests of the entire people as a whole, but those social, national, professional, confessional the populations they represent and protect. Therefore, the consolidating, conciliatory character in them is less pronounced than the confrontational, sometimes reaching extremism.

Some parties and movements in their ideological positions turn to the past, trying to revive or reform the position of obsolete or compromised ideological values, which causes distrust, resistance, and fear of a significant part of the population.

Others continue to rely on the rejection of the Russian, Eurasian civilization, which is untenable from their point of view, and advocate entry into Western civilization and thereby advocate the cessation of Russian history, the rejection of Russian spirituality, Russian statehood in the traditional sense for Russia. Why their stake on the values ​​of Western ideology has led to a rather high degree of discrediting the democratic principle as such.

Evidence of this is, above all, the growing negative attitude of ordinary citizens to such concepts as "human rights" and "democracy." Moreover, in the minds of the same ordinary citizen, Western values ​​are increasingly associated with the cult of violence, money-grubbing, rampant crime, and primitive consumerism. It is no coincidence that socially useful labor in the scale of values ​​with such an ideology begins to occupy an extremely low place.

Still others based their ideology on the ideas of Russian nationalism, which in a number of cases has taken on a completely outright aggressive character.

For the fourth, the core element of ideology is patriotism, which is more and more clearly acquiring the features of great-power chauvinism.

In other words, each of the ideologies (pre-ideologies) proposed to society, having a number of positive positions in its assets, nevertheless, carries a confrontational character, not rising above group, party, class, confessional and narrow national interests.

The new ideology should, first of all, interrupt the tradition of political radicalization in society, which inevitably leads to conflicts that can easily develop into an armed form. The current political regime “worthily” continues this tradition, as evidenced by the shooting of the Parliament in October 1993, the war in Chechnya, the escalation of anti-communist psychosis on the eve of the parliamentary elections in December 1995, and presidential elections in June-July 1996

The new ideology should offer society the basis of civil peace and harmony, establish in the minds of society a new approach to understanding the problem of property based on its diversity: state, public, private, collective and the equality of their forms, enshrined in law; instilling in society a sense of citizenship, patriotism and statehood.

The most real path to civil peace and harmony is not opened by any agreements between various political and public organizations or between a group of the latter, on the one hand, and the authorities, on the other. Such agreements do not affect deep, causal phenomena, but are, as a rule, of a compromise, opportunistic, temporary nature. They operate in a relative balance of opposing or rival parties. It is enough for one of the conciliatory parties to receive a tangible advantage or to consider themselves infringed, as only a paper signed by the parties remains from the consent.

The real path is elsewhere. And in relation to Russia, it consists in the need to recognize the legitimacy and regularity of all stages of the development of the Russian state, that is, the entire historical path, no matter how difficult and even tragic the individual segments of this path may be. Such an approach allows preserving the dignity of people, their self-respect, their social status, since no one and no political expediency has the right to demand that they give up their interests, views, chosen way of life, if all this does not contradict the Constitution and current legislation.

In order to reach such an agreement, it is necessary:

firstly, the recognition of the continuity of the modern Russian state in relation to the Muscovy, which means today the assumption of rights and obligations in relation to the spiritual and cultural heritage Kievan Rus, Russian principalities, the Golden Horde, the Bulgarian kingdom, the Kazan and Crimean Khanates, and other national formations, the fusion of which formed the Russian civilization. This means, finally, recognition of the contribution of the confessions of the autonomous peoples - Orthodox, Muslim, Buddhist religions - to the social and spiritual development of Russia;

secondly, the recognition of the Russian laws of the time of the Russian Empire as appropriate for their time, as well as recognition of the dignity of people who faithfully served tsarist Russia. Recognition of this provision leads to the strengthening of the right of ownership, to the strengthening of confidence in the Russian state as a whole;

thirdly, the recognition of the laws of the Soviet period as appropriate for their time, as well as respect for the dignity of people who served the Soviet state. This ensures the suppression of a radical political trend leading to an escalation of political violence and social conflicts. This brings with it the recognition of the traditions of the community, which developed in the Soviet period in the form of collectivism.

It is on this basis that consent in society is possible, since it is based not on opportunistic, but on deeply national traditions, recognition of the right of the individual in the main issue - the question of property and the free choice by each citizen of his participation in any of its forms, the right of citizens to free participation in all political and economic processes on a truly democratic basis.

Such consent must be given the form of law and considered as an infringement on the rights of the individual and society.

The Russian Idea in its main provisions, coinciding with the main content of the Russian, Eurasian civilization, meets such an agreement, since in itself it never became an instrument of violence, an instrument of national expansion and the assertion of the Russian people at the expense of another, it never contradicted the interests of non-Russian peoples, inhabiting Russia.

It is in this that the unifying essence of the Russian Idea lies, that it:

firstly, it expresses the essence of Russian civilization, in the alloy of which it has always acted as the idea of ​​equality, harmony, the idea of ​​assistance and protection. It is no coincidence that the formation of the Russian Empire in its essence was in the nature of collecting lands, creating conditions for the survival of small peoples and ensuring the security of not only the Russian, but also other peoples;

secondly, growing out of the communal, conciliar spirit, it initially carried the affirmation of the responsibility of the individual to society (community), put the well-being of the individual and the protection of his safety in direct dependence on the well-being of society and its security; it is through this spirit of community

Russian Idea and implements the basic values ​​of Russian civilization: justice, people's self-government, patriotism;

thirdly, it dictated a certain form of Russian statehood, the supra-ethnic nature of which determined its planetary, universal character;

fourthly, it has instilled in Russian civilization a spirit of tolerance for foreign cultures and, at the same time, an alternative path for the development of mankind, which does not coincide in its spiritual basis with the development of Western civilization based on the primacy of individual freedom of the individual;

Fifthly, it has become the basis of non-local. narrowly national, but corresponding to the supranational state of supraethnic patriotism - Russian patriotism;

and, finally, sixthly, in the eyes of representatives of other peoples and nationalities of the former Russian Empire, the former Soviet Union, current Russia Russian

The idea has acted and can again act as a locomotive in the progressive progressive development of the country. And, on the contrary, any fall, perversion, deformation and devaluation of the Russian Idea gives rise to disintegration and spiritual degradation not only in Russian society, since it reduces the significance of those value orientations that were considered fundamental not only for Russian, but also for Russian society, but also leads to more severe consequences for other, non-Russian peoples. The collapse of the USSR and the events that followed it in most of the former republics of the Soviet Union, based on inciting nationalist passions and ambitions of the political elite of these republics, led to severe economic, social, cultural conflicts that took the form of an armed conflict, bloody clashes (Sumgait, Fergana, Tbilisi , war in Moldova, Abkhazia, Tajikistan, Chechnya).

We have already noted that A. Dulles, in his plans to destroy the unity of the USSR and Russia, quite clearly assigned a place to nationalism, especially anti-Russian, as one of effective methods struggle.

Back in the 1970s, Z. Brzezinski published a book, the contents of which are now perceived as a fait accompli or a half-fait accompli ("Game Plan. Geostrategic Structure of the Struggle Between the USA and the USSR." Washington, 1976). The leitmotif of Z. Brzezinski's reasoning is that geopolitical realities, and not universal human values, rule the world. (Our fans and singers of universal values ​​as a priority of state policy, Gorbachev, Yakovlev, Kovalov and glib radical reformers would understand this simple truth). And the starting point of this struggle, according to Z. Brzezinski, is the geopolitical struggle for dominance in Eurasia. In his opinion, whoever controls Eurasia - occupies a dominant position on the globe.

One of the tools for depriving Russia of its dominant position on the Eurasian continent as the most important factor in national security was the incitement of unbridled nationalism. And this process continues. It is stimulated both from without and from within.

So, former ambassador United States in Norway, former presidential staff member

Reagan and the US Security Council staff, Black Wheel explicitly stated in 1994 that the United States would not allow Russian influence on Ukraine and Belarus.

And how did our Russian democratic community react to the statement of the President of Belarus A. Lukashenko about his country's readiness to go for the deepest unification - economic, military, political - with Russia?

Negative. The main argument was that, firstly, Russia had gone far ahead in its economic reforms and the accession of Belarus could slow down this process; and secondly, the economic backlog

Belarus again, as before, will force Russia to bear additional economic and financial costs for the maintenance of the outskirts. What is more here: political calculation, political cynicism or political ignorance?

It's hard to judge. Perhaps both. But, I think that the reason lies, first of all, in the fear that the accession of Belarus would unleash the integrative processes in the CIS in the most serious way, would revive precisely the Eurasian values, and not their Western surrogates, which are so intensely pushing with the help of radical reformers to Russia.

From the point of view of national security interests, both in a purely regional and geopolitical sense, the restoration of unity between Russia and Belarus strengthens the security of the peoples of both countries and, moreover, strengthens significantly. I would like to recall that it was Belarus that took upon itself the first and most terrible blow of fascism at the beginning of the war. It was Belarus among all the peoples of the Union that suffered the heaviest human and material losses.

It was her territory that became scorched earth. It was her people who became one of the most active participants in the partisan movement, demonstrating to the whole world their loyalty to Russian life, the value orientations of Russian civilization.

Security is expensive.

In addition, it is worth finally recognizing that Belarus, having healed the war wounds with the help of the Union and restored its potential in the post-war period, has become one of the most economically progressive republics of the Union, making a significant contribution to the all-Union budget, to the development of the economic potential of the USSR as a whole .

The Democrats, with their position, in words advocating a multinational Federation, in fact have joined forces with the bearers of Russian national statehood, who essentially advocate national isolation, national autarky. They also joined the position of American geopoliticians, who see the achievement of their goal not in the integration of the peoples of the former USSR, but in the deepening of nationalist disintegration processes both on the territory of the former USSR and on the territory of Russia itself.

The perniciousness of the idea of ​​national autarchy, the triumph of the principles of national independence in their nationalistic interpretation, is most clearly seen in Ukraine. Today, the nationalist idea of ​​"independence" has become dominant for the ruling circles of this country, the origins of which have always been Western Ukraine. It must be admitted that the post-war annexation (namely, annexation, not reunification) of Western Ukraine was not only a serious political, but also a historical mistake of the political leadership of the USSR. The reason for this is that Western Ukraine, despite the Slavic community, spiritually, culturally, traditionally, has long departed from the Russian Idea, and from Russian civilization, and from the Orthodox religion. The origins and basis of its development were Western ideological values ​​and the canons of the Uniate (Catholic) Church. In the Eurasian community, it initially was and continued to be a foreign and hostile body. It was enough to deform and devalue the Russian Idea on the territory of Eastern Ukraine, as the ideology of aggressive nationalism began to rapidly take its place and acquire a dominant position, since there was also a well-organized, almost paramilitary (in spirit, discipline) nationalist organization - UNA, taking its own beginning in the organization of military nationalist resistance in the early years of Soviet power in Western Ukraine. The positions of Russian civilization were dealt such a significant blow that the autocephalous church in Ukraine did not stand aside. Having broken with the Russian Orthodox Church, she, with the help of her church hierarchs, practically became involved in political games and thereby complicated both her position and the position of her Orthodox parish. The complexity of her position lies, first of all, in the fact that she found herself face to face with the Uniate Church, and it is this latter that can count on the support of the political regime to a greater extent than the Orthodox Church.

Thus, the Ukrainian autocephalous church (as an organization) moved away from the struggle for the preservation of those values ​​and shrines, on the basis of which the authority of the Russian Orthodox Church grew and maintained, including the Ukrainian autocephalous one, as part of a single whole (Orthodoxy).

The autocephalous Orthodox Church in Estonia found itself in an even more difficult situation, essentially by its own act of breaking with the Russian Patriarchate, siding with the political regime pursuing an openly anti-Russian policy.

Inside Russia, Chechen national separatism has become the cause of a bloody tragedy for the Chechen people themselves, for the Russian people, for other peoples of the North Caucasus. How did the assertion of Chechen "national self-consciousness" begin? From the genocide against the Russian and other non-Chechen population: they were killed, robbed, deprived of their civil rights, "squeezed" out of the Republic, turning them into refugees, into hostages of their security.

At that moment, our decorated democratic defenders of human rights "did not notice" this egregious situation and started talking about human rights only when the armed conflict broke out. In response - the growth of Russian nationalism, as a reaction to injustice. Who benefits from this clash? Neither one nor the other people, except for the victims, gained nothing.

Only those who have won are those for whom any action in the name of "national identity" and "national self-consciousness" is an excellent means of satisfying political ambitions and far from disinterested calculations.

Such is the logic of nationalism - "enlightened", "spiritual", etc. The essence is not in the name, but in the inner nature and in the laws by which it develops.

And precisely for this reason, the establishment of an "enlightened dictatorship" or a monarchy as a purely Russian national state would be a historical regression, futile, if viewed from the standpoint of the Russian, Eurasian civilization, which has been formed over the centuries under the direct, main, leading, organizing principle of the Russian Idea, t .e. Russian people. This would mean admitting that all the sacrifices along this path were in vain and returning - sooner or later - to the beginning of this path: to the Middle Ages. The whole tragedy of such a solution to the problem of statehood in Russia lies in the fact that ethnic nationalism - Chechen, Russian, Tatar, Bashkir, etc. - objectively not inclined to compromise. As a rule, an ethnocracy that has gained power (even under the conditions of an "enlightened dictatorship"), no longer restrained in its "patriotic" feelings, inevitably begins to fight for the creation of an "ethnically pure" state in the conditions of a multinational state formation. If the example of Chechnya says little to someone, then, apparently, the events in Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia should cool hot heads.

No, it is not Russian or any other patriotism that acquires an openly nationalistic or chauvinistic content that has a future. Russia itself, or rather its historical path - all without any exceptions, testifies that only Russian state patriotism, acquiring a supra-ethnic character and absorbing ethnic patriotism as components of a single whole, will allow Russia to follow the path that would provide it territorial integrity, the unity of the people and the status of a Great Power, acquiring planetary significance on the basis of fidelity to its long-suffering development of the value orientations of the Russian, Eurasian civilization.

This is the essence of the security of the Russian and other peoples who have united with him within the framework of a single state.

Ippolitov K.Kh. ideology of national security. Methodology of the problem / Russian Union of Security Enterprises OSP B. - M.-1997.

The Russian idea is not only a deeply popular faith, a product of national civilization, but also a scientific theory of successful development, the revival of the people, the development of which has been going on since its entry into the historical arena. Leaders, princes, their ideologists, first priests, then priests, scribes painfully racked their brains on how to ensure the optimal development of their state, native ethnic group in all areas of socio-economic, political, spiritual and cultural spheres. The age of the Russian idea, as the patriotic philosopher Ivan Ilyin wrote in exile, "is the age of Russia itself."

Thinking about the conceptual origins of our national ideal, we recall the ancient values ​​​​of pre-Christian times, the entire thousand-year history, such works of Russian literature as The Tale of Bygone Years (X-XII centuries), Metropolitan Hilarion’s Word on Law and Grace (XI century) , "Instruction" by Vladimir Monomakh, "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" (XII century), "Charter" by Nil Sorsky (XV century), "Domostroy", "On Poverty and Wealth" by I. Pososhkov (XVII century), "War and Peace ” L. Tolstoy, “Quiet Don” by M. Sholokhov, poems by A. Pushkin, F. Tyutchev and S. Yesenin, works of thinkers and philosophers M. Lomonosov and I. Kireevsky, A. Khomyakov and N. Fedorov, F. Dostoevsky and V. Solovyov, K. Leontiev and N. Danilevsky, I. Ilyin and I. Solonevich, S. Bulgakov and N. Berdyaev, G. Fedotov and P. Sorokin, L. Karsavin and A. Solzhenitsyn, classical works of Russian music, visual and theatrical art.

About the Russian idea, 126

Metropolitan John of Petersburg

Russia is the state of the Russian people, to whom the Lord has entrusted the sacrificial, confessional ministry of the God-bearing people, the guardian people and defender of the shrines of the faith. These shrines are religious and moral principles that allow building personal, family, social and state life. So, to prevent the action of evil and give the greatest scope to the forces of good. This was precisely the historically established self-view of the Russians. This is the basis of the foundations of Russian self-consciousness in the form in which it was formulated by 10 centuries of Russian history.

Battle for Russia, 50

D.M.Balashov

We really need a national idea, an idea of ​​national and state unity, an idea like "Holy Russia". The new Sergius of Radonezh has not yet appeared, and he has not said a symbolic word, but the very idea of ​​​​great Russia, as it were, is in the air. We must again become a nation, love our brothers in Christ, dare to conciliar deeds to save the country. And what we have to do - to find a way out of this crisis - no other nation in the world is able to do now, partly because, fortunately for itself, it has found itself on the periphery of a world catastrophe, partly because all the those formidable conflicts that have already swept through our heads, half exterminating the Russians.

If only we understood the lesson taught us by history! If only they would draw the proper conclusions from it! If only the patriotic forces could finally unite and squeeze out from their midst and from their country all the international traitors, all the haters of Russia, because without this we cannot rise!

Walks in Novgorod, 4

O.I. Ivanov

The essence of the Russian idea, the idea of ​​Christianity, is to do and sow good for people. Good begets good, good returns good to you, to your children, to the children of your children. In the same way, evil returns to you, to your children, to the children of your children. This applies to everyone.

K.P. Pobedonostsev

Parliament is an institution that serves to satisfy the personal ambition and vanity and personal interests of the representative. Power, as the bearer of truth, needs most of all people of truth, people of firm thought, strong understanding and the right word, whose "yes" and "no" do not touch and do not merge. Only such people can be a firm support of power and its faithful leaders.

Great lie of our time, 81

N.S. Leskov

There is, of course, true happiness: it consists in the fullness and correctness of life, and such a life is quite possible only with general well-being, in the absence of everything that opposes such well-being, for everything that opposes general well-being also opposes private and private well-being. vice versa.

With the development of general well-being, the acquisition of means of subsistence, daily bread is facilitated, the urgency to have large means of subsistence, inaccessible to the majority, decreases, the life path and craft of each becomes easier every day, arbitrariness decreases, happiness, accidental happiness, becomes rarer, but incomparably rarer. and misfortune; Gradually, all sorts of Chinese walls between peoples, classes and people in general are being destroyed more and more, a person is becoming more and more completely human, more and more ceases to be an animal, biting and snapping, his life makes him more reasonable, and warmer, and fuller. , and more humane, and therefore happier.

When and to what extent will we achieve such well-being and such a life, that is, a full and happy life, rich in reason and love, the only one worthy of a person? Or never, or soon, or soon. It's in our will.

Honest, 62

V.V. Rozanov

Russians tend to surrender selflessly to foreign influences. Exactly, that's how the bride and wife - to her husband. But the more selfless, pure, disinterested this “giving” is, even to the point of “killing oneself”, the more mysteriously they act on the one to whom the “giving” was. Russians accept the body, but they do not accept the spirit. Strangers, uniting with us, receive the spirit.

Around the "Russian idea", 87.88

L.A.Tikhomirov

Russia represents a country with especially favorable conditions for the development of a monarchical supreme power. In ancient Russia, among the tribes that formed the proper Russian land, and before the beginning of statehood and in the era of its organization, there were embryos of all forms of power: democratic, aristocratic and monarchical. Both first beginnings in places tended to grow into significance

Supreme power, but the total set of conditions gave a decisive victory to the royal idea. Among these conditions, the development of an ideal type of monarchy was especially favorable - religious, social and domestic conditions, and the conditions of the foreign policy of the tribes united in the Russian state. On the contrary, all the conditions for political consciousness were extremely weak in Russia during the entire 1,000 years of its existence and, in their confusion and inconsistency, were almost worse than anywhere else.

Monarchic statehood, 122, 123

N.S. Trubetskoy

We must ruthlessly overthrow and trample on the idols of those social ideals and prejudices borrowed from the West that have guided the thinking of our intelligentsia so far. Having freed our thinking and worldview from the Western blinders that oppress it, we must draw within ourselves, in the treasuries of the national-Russian spiritual element, the elements to create a new worldview.

In this spirit, we must educate the younger generation. At the same time, completely free from admiration for the idol of Western civilization, we must work in every possible way to create an original national culture, which, itself arising from a new worldview, would at the same time substantiate this worldview.

Heritage of Genghis Khan, 129

Elder Philotheus

Two Romes are fallen, and the third is standing, and the fourth will not be.

Message to the Grand Duke Vasily, 76

A.V. Gulyga

The Russian idea is a presentiment of the common and the thought of universal salvation. She was born in Russia, but relied on Western, primarily German, philosophical culture. Its sources: Russian historical experience, Orthodox religion, German dialectics. The Russian idea was aimed at uniting humanity into a high community, transforming it into a factor of cosmic development.

Today, the Russian idea primarily sounds like a call for national revival and the preservation of the material and spiritual revival of Russia. The Russian idea is a component of the universal Christian idea, set forth in terms of modern dialectics.

Creators of the Russian idea, 32

F.M.Dostoevsky

Russia cannot change the great idea bequeathed to it by a number of centuries and which it has followed steadily until now. This idea is, among other things, the all-unification of the Slavs; but this all-unity is not seizure or violence, but for the sake of all-service to mankind. and when, did Russia often act in politics for its direct benefit? Didn’t she, on the contrary, throughout her entire St. Petersburg history, most often serve the interests of others with disinterestedness, which could surprise Europe if she could look clearly, but would not look, on the contrary, always incredulously, suspiciously and hatefully. Yes, in Europe and in general no one will believe in disinterestedness in anything, not only Russian disinterestedness, they will rather believe in swindle or stupidity.

But we have nothing to fear from their verdicts: in this selfless unselfishness of Russia is all her strength, so to speak, her whole personality and the whole future of Russian destiny. It’s only a pity that this force was sometimes rather erroneously directed. If the Russian national idea is, after all, only universal universal human unity, then it means that our whole benefit is that everyone, having stopped all strife, become Russian and national as soon as possible. Our only salvation lies in not arguing in advance about how this idea will be realized and in what form, in yours or in ours, but in going straight to the point from the office all together.

Writer's Diary, 36,37,38

N.Ya.Danilevsky

For every Slav: Russian, Czech, Serb, Croat, Slovene, Bulgarian (I would like to add, and Pole), - after God and His holy Church - the idea of ​​Slavism should be the highest idea, above freedom, above science, above enlightenment, above every earthly good, for not one of them is achievable for him without its realization - without spiritually? , national and politically original, independent Slavs; on the contrary, all these benefits will be the necessary consequences of this independence and originality.

Russia and Europe, 33

P.S. Milyukov

Like the literary language, the Russian national-voluntarist idea is of recent origin. Like him, she is still in the process of education. Finally, like him, it, despite its comparative novelty, can already boast of such achievements, which in themselves guarantee us from any attempt to interrupt this thread of a new cultural tradition or replace it with some other artificially invented to satisfy purely theoretical constructions. New Russia naturally developed from the old, common with Europe ways. It will go further along the same paths, without looking back at the stages it has passed, contrary to the nationalists of all stages of its development.

National question, 72

G.P. Fedotov

Will is, first of all, the ability to live, or to live, according to one's own will, not constrained by any social ties, not only by chains. The will is constrained by equals, constrained by the world. The will triumphs either in leaving society, in the steppe expanse, or in power over society, in violence against people. Freedom is unthinkable without respect for the freedom of others; the will is always for itself. It is not opposed to tyranny, for a tyrant is also a free being. The robber is the ideal of the Moscow will, just as Ivan the Terrible is the ideal of the tsar. since will, like anarchy, is impossible in a cultural community, the Russian ideal of will finds its expression in the cult of the desert, wilderness, nomadic life, gypsyism, wine, revelry, self-forgetfulness of passion - robbery, rebellion and tyranny.

Russia and freedom, 135,136

A.N. Solzhenitsyn

We must build a moral Russia - or no longer, then it doesn't matter. All the good seeds, which in Russia have not yet been trodden down miraculously, must be preserved and cultivated by us.

"The Russian question" towards the end of the 20th century, 112

F.A. Stepun

Among all the ideas born of human genius, the idea of ​​moral perfection is in a certain sense the most human idea. Its purely human nature lies in the fact that neither natural nor divine life is inconceivable standing under its sign. Moral self-improvement is a task facing only man, the only being who bears in himself a split between the natural and divine worlds.

Thoughts on Russia, 119,120

S.L. Frank

The main essence of the disease of the Russian spirit is not socialism or anarchism - both are only manifestations of the disease - but nihilism. we have only two commandments in front of us, sufficient to comprehend, enrich, strengthen and enliven our life: immeasurable love for God as the source of love and life, and love for people, which grows from the feeling of the unity of human life, rooted in God, from the consciousness of brotherhood justified by our common filial relationship to the Father.

And these two commandments are expressible and were expressed as one: we are commanded to strive for perfection, assimilation, to the best of our ability, to our Heavenly Father as a perfect source of love and life. And these two - or one - commandments do not appear before us from the outside, with a cold and incomprehensible authority of moral "norms" or prescriptions. We internally understand them as necessary ways of our salvation, the preservation of our lives.

We are not judged as criminals, over whom an indifferent judge pronounces a sentence in the name of a cold legal law that does not delve into our spiritual need. We are judged by the voice of our Father, who loves us and guides us on the path of salvation; from this inner judgment we simply learn on which path we go to life and which path to death, where our salvation is and where our death is.

Crash of idols, 140, 141, 142, 143

M.M. Shcherbatov

When we will have a Sovereign sincerely attached to the law of God, a strict observer of justice, having begun with himself moderate in the pomp of the royal throne, rewarding virtue and hating vices, showing an example of diligence and condescension to the advice of smart people, firm in enterprises, but without stubbornness, soft-heartedness and constant in friendship, setting an example by his domestic agreement with his wife and driving lust, generous without extravagance for his subjects and seeking to reward virtues, qualities and merit without any predilection, able to divide labor: what belongs to which government institutions and what the Sovereign should take upon himself , and finally able to have enough generosity and love for the fatherland, in order to create and betray fundamental rights to the state, and strong enough to fulfill them - then the banished virtue, leaving the deserts, will establish its throne among the cities and at the court itself, justice will not bend its weights neither for bribe nor for the strong, mz arrogance and timidity will be expelled from the nobles, the love of the fatherland will nestle in the hearts of civilians, and they will not boast of the splendor of life and not of wealth, but of impartiality, merit and disinterestedness. They will not think about who is great at court and who will fall, but having laws and virtue in the subject, they will honor them, like a compass that can bring them to both rank and prosperity.

On the damage to morals in Russia, 152

P.Ya.Chaadaev

We are still very far from the conscious patriotism of the old nations, matured in intellectual labor, enlightened by scientific knowledge and thinking; we love our fatherland still in the manner of those young peoples who have not yet been disturbed by thought, who are still looking for their own idea, still looking for the role they are called upon to play on the world stage; our mental powers have not yet been exercised on serious things; in a word, until now we have had almost no mental work.

Among the reasons that slowed down our mental development and left a special imprint on it, two should be noted: firstly, the absence of those centers, those centers in which the living forces of the country would be concentrated, where ideas would mature, from where fruitful energy would radiate over the entire surface of the earth. Start; and secondly, the absence of those banners around which closely united and impressive masses of minds could unite.

An idea will appear out of nowhere, blown by some random wind, how it will break through all sorts of barriers, will begin to seep through the minds imperceptibly, and suddenly one fine day it will evaporate or hide in some dark corner of the national consciousness, so that then it will no longer emerge to the surface; such is our movement of ideas.

Apologia of a madman. Aphorisms, 147,148

N.V. Gogol

Without love for God no one can be saved, and you have no love for God. You will not find it in the monastery; only those who have already been called there by God himself go to the monastery. Without the will of God it is impossible to love him. And how can you love someone that no one has seen? What prayers and efforts to beg this love from him? Look how many good and beautiful people there are in the world now who passionately strive for this love and hear only callousness and cold emptiness in their souls. It is difficult to love someone whom no one has seen. Christ alone brought and proclaimed to us the mystery that in love for brothers we receive love for God.

One has only to love them as Christ ordered, and love for God itself will come out in the end. Go into the world and first acquire love for your brothers. But how can you love your brothers, how can you love people? The soul wants to love only the beautiful, but poor people are so imperfect and there is so little beauty in them! How to do it? Thank God first of all for the fact that you are Russian. This path is now open for the Russian, and this path is Russia itself. If only he loves Russian Russia, he will love everything that is in Russia. God Himself is leading us to this love.

Without the illnesses and sufferings that have accumulated in such a multitude inside her and of which we ourselves are to blame, none of us would have felt compassion for her. And compassion is already the beginning of love. Already the cries of outrages, lies and bribes are not just the indignation of the noble against the dishonorable, but the cry of the whole earth, having heard that foreign enemies have invaded in countless numbers, scattered around the houses and imposed a heavy yoke on every person; even those who have voluntarily received these terrible enemies of the soul into their homes want to free themselves from them, and do not know how to do this, and everything merges into one tremendous cry, even the unconscious ones are moving.

But direct love is not yet heard in anyone - you do not have it either. You don’t yet love Russia: you only know how to grieve and get annoyed by rumors about everything bad that is not done in it, all this produces in you only one callous annoyance and despondency. No, this is not yet love, you are far from love, it is only one too distant foreshadowing of it. No, if you really fall in love with Russia, then that short-sighted thought that has now arisen in many honest and even very intelligent people will disappear from you by itself, that is, that at the present time they can no longer do anything for Russia and that they already not needed at all; on the contrary, only then will you feel in full force that love is omnipotent and that everything can be done with it.

Gnt, if you really love Russia, you will be eager to serve her; not to the governors, but to the police captain - the last place that you can find in it, you will take, preferring one grain of activity on it to your entire current, inactive and idle life. No, you don't love Russia yet. And if you do not love Russia, you will not love your brothers, you will not be inflamed with love for God, and if you are not inflamed with love for God, you will not be saved.

You have to love Russia. Selected places from correspondence with friends, 28

Avvakum Petrov

Even if there is a hedgehog, be pardoned - be merciful yourself; hoschesh is honored to be - honor; hosheshi eat - feed others; if you want to take it, give it to someone else. This is equality, but according to an excellent mind, wish the worst for yourself, and the best for a sincere one; Wish less for yourself, but more for the sincere. Honor your father and mother kindly and cordially. Just as you will create for your father and mother, so your child will be created for you, and measure to the same measure - it will measure you. True love is about the Lord God and our Savior, Jesus Christ; this is from the labors and sweat of his face.

Feed the greedy; greedy drink; naga clothes; strange, bring it into your house; honor the priesthood and monasticism, bow your head to the ground to them; having come into prison, make rest for those who sit; take care of the widow and the orphan; bring the sinner to repentance; teach the commandment of God to do; redeem the due; intercede for the offended; show the way to the passer-by and bow down. And for everyone and for everything, bring prayers to God, for the health and salvation of all Orthodox Christians. Se bo is the power of love. If time attracts and suffers for the sake of a brother, do not tear yourself away according to Christ's word.

Book of interpretations, 1

I.S. Aksakov

We note here a historical fact that serves as a starting point for us to comprehend the special vocation of Russia in history - its opposition on the world historical arena to the West. It would be completely erroneous to think that here “opposition” necessarily means enmity or struggle in the crude sense of the word, for life and death (as many willingly interpret the attitude of “Rus” towards the West); not at all. In this sense, the West itself opposes itself to the East and Russia, but not Russia. By "opposite" we mean here only an independent manifestation in the face of Orthodox Russia new aspects of the human spirit, different from the West and unrevealed by it, the field for their unimpeded world-historical development is the East and what Europe itself calls the East, but for us, in fact, the South.

World-historical vocation of Russia, 2

A.N. Radishchev

It has already been proven that a true man and a son of the fatherland are one and the same; therefore, there will be a true distinguishing feature of him, if he is thus ambitious. Let him begin to adorn the majestic name of the son of the fatherland, the monarchy. For this he must honor his conscience, love his neighbors; for love alone is acquired; should fulfill his calling as prudence and honesty commands, not caring in the least about repaying honor, exaltation and glory, which is a companion or rather a shadow, always following virtue, illuminated by the not evening sun of truth; for those who pursue glory and praise not only do not acquire them for themselves from others, but rather lose them.

The true man is the true executor of all his laws, provided for the bliss; he sacredly obeys them. Noble and devoid of empty holiness and hypocrisy, modesty accompanies all his feelings, words and deeds. With reverence, he submits to everything that order, improvement and general salvation require; for him there is no low state in the service of the fatherland; serving him, he knows that he contributes to the healthy circulation, so to speak, of the blood of the state body. He would rather agree to perish and disappear than set an example of indiscretion to others and thereby take away children from the fatherland, who could be an adornment and support of it; he fears to contaminate the juices of the prosperity of his fellow citizens; he burns with the most tender love for the integrity and tranquility of his compatriots; nothing so eager to see as mutual love between us; he kindles this beneficent flame in all hearts; is not afraid of the difficulties that he encounters with this noble feat of his; overcomes all obstacles, tirelessly vigilant over the preservation of honesty, gives good advice and instructions, helps the unfortunate, saves from the dangers of delusion and vices, and if he is sure that his death will bring strength and glory to the fatherland, then he is not afraid to sacrifice his life; if it is needed for the fatherland, then it preserves it for the full observance of natural and domestic laws; as far as possible, he turns away everything that can stain the purity and weaken the good intentions of them, as if destroying the bliss and perfection of his compatriots.

In a word, he is good-natured! Here is another true sign of the son of the fatherland! The third and, as it seems, the last most distinctive sign of the son of the fatherland, when he is noble. Noble is he who made himself famous for his wise and philanthropic qualities and his deeds; who shines in society with reason and virtue and, being inflamed with truly wise piety, all his strength and efforts are directed solely towards this, so that, obeying the laws and the guardian of these, who hold the authorities, both all of himself and everything that he does not have, revere otherwise than as belonging to the fatherland, use it as a pledge of good will of his compatriots and his sovereign, who is the father of the people, entrusted to him, sparing nothing for the good of the fatherland.

He is directly noble, whose heart cannot but tremble with tender joy at the single name of the fatherland and who does not feel differently at that memory (which is incessant in him), as if it was said about the most precious part of everything in the world. He does not sacrifice the good of the fatherland to prejudices that rush about, as if brilliant, in his eyes; he sacrifices everything for its good: his supreme reward consists in virtue, that is, in that inner harmony of all inclinations and desires, which the wise creator pours into an immaculate heart and which nothing in the world can imitate in its silence and pleasure. For true nobility is virtuous deeds, enlivened by true honor, which is not found elsewhere, as in uninterrupted goodness to the human race, but mainly to one’s compatriots, repaying everyone according to their dignity and according to the prescribed laws of nature and government.

Adorned with these only qualities, both in enlightened antiquity, and now, they are honored with true praises. And here is the third distinguishing sign of the son of the fatherland! But no matter how brilliant, no matter how glorious, or delightful for any well-meaning heart, these qualities of the son of the fatherland, and although everyone is akin to have them, they cannot, however, not be unclean, mixed, dark, confused, without proper education and enlightenment with sciences and knowledge, without which this best ability of a person conveniently, as it always was, turns into the most harmful motives and aspirations and floods entire states with wickedness, unrest, strife and disorder. For then human concepts are obscure, confused and completely chimerical.

Why, before anyone wishes to have the aforementioned qualities of a true man, it is necessary that he first accustom his spirit to industriousness, diligence, obedience, modesty, intelligent compassion, to the desire to do good to everyone, to the love of the fatherland, to the desire to imitate great examples in that, also to love for the sciences and arts, as much as the title sent in the hostel allows; it would be applied to an exercise in history and philosophy or wisdom, not school, for word dispute only addressed, but in the true, teaching a person his true duties; and to purify the taste, I would love to look at the paintings of great artists, music, sculpture, architecture or architecture.

Conversation that there is a son of the Fatherland, 83

D.L.Andreev

Composed of motley ethnic elements, like the people of Egypt in its time, the Russian nation turned out to be, like him, the strongest creative force in the circle of smaller peoples combined with it in a single culture. Sooner or later, the Russian superpeople will become the head of the creation of interreligion and interculture. It is possible that in the future the leading roles in this process will pass to other peoples, but the task of laying the foundations will, apparently, fall on their shoulders. Such a people, more than any other, needs not only knowledge, but also a spiritual understanding of other people's psychologies, the ability to synthetically translate and love other mental structures, cultural images, life ideals, other racial and national expressions of the spirit.

What could contribute more to this than mutual penetration, friendly and, of course, not of a few, but of broad strata, with the historical realities of other cultures? What else could so save from imposing on other peoples precisely their own and only their own socio-political system, it is precisely in our worldview that prevails at the moment? It should have been in our history, but, to our great grief and the whole world, a cultural pilgrimage to the East and South did not take place. Until we get rid of our national and cultural arrogance, until we stop feeling as if Russia and in was indeed the best country in the world, until then nothing but a despotic threat to mankind will come out of our vast array.

Rose of the world, 3

A.V. Kartashev

We do not suffer from an excess of sobriety, practicality, methodicalness and organization. Our weakness and danger is just the opposite: dreaminess and passivity, the expectation that everything will somehow work itself out. The very faith in Holy Russia, the conviction that outside of it there are no saving ways for Russia - this is the main spiritual capital, without which we - nothing. But faith without works is dead. Creative faith requires not only contemplation, but also action. And action requires a plan, method, technique, organization and patient work. Otherwise, nothing comes out of nothing. Otherwise, the dream will be ruffled by violent winds of hostile dark forces who triumph in this world and are unwilling to lay down their arms until the end of time. These forces are devilishly tense, tirelessly active, armed with all the latest techniques of ideological agitation, organization, power and strength. You can rise up and defeat them only with equal weapons. No one will do for Holy Russia if we do not do it ourselves.

Water does not flow under a lying stone. We are not a backwater of Balkanized Europe. We are a great continental multi-tribal empire. And at the same time, not some kind of trading company, but a genuine Third Rome, which has a worldwide cultural Christian mission. To create an imperial world of pax russica in the spaces allotted to us by Providence, to consolidate the influence of Russian culture on them and internally transform it with the spirit of Orthodoxy is a task for a genius. It is an irrevocable, God-ordained way of service. Great Russia, internally - Holy Russia. This is a historical mission born to us by Russians. The cause of the re-creation of Holy Russia is not our only home affair, but a worldwide one. We have no right to disgrace ourselves at this world examination of the positive construction of Holy Russia.

Restoration of Holy Russia, 56

I.L.Solonevich

Every nation, especially every great nation, claims that it brings some idea of ​​its own to mankind. I defend the idea of ​​Russian imperialism, that is, the idea of ​​building a great and multinational "commonwealth of nations." Finally, we must call a spade a spade: every people is an imperialist people, for everyone wants to build an empire and everyone wants to build it on his own model: the Germans on the basis of racial discipline, the British on the basis of commercial calculation, the Americans on their business methods, the Romans built on the foundations of law, we are building on the foundations of Orthodoxy. I naturally consider the Russian system to be the best.

We must state the fact that the dream of uniting humanity into a "one herd", into a single community, is the most ancient dream of all human culture. It must be stated as a fact. Dozens state formations, dozens of religions, hundreds of philosophies and other things tried to unite, if not the whole world, then at least its cultural part. At one time, Rome almost succeeded. At present there are two and only two competitors: Russia and the Anglo-Saxon world. And now, as always, there are three and only three options for the "peace of the whole world": dictatorship, monarchy and republic.

People's Monarchy, 116

A.S. Khomyakov

Our original history is not stained with conquest. Blood and enmity did not serve as the basis for the Russian state, and grandfathers did not bequeath to their grandchildren traditions of hatred and revenge. The Church, having limited the circle of her activities, never lost the purity of her inner life and did not preach to her children the lessons of injustice and violence. The simplicity of the regional structure was not alien to human truth, and the law of justice and mutual love served as the basis for this life, almost patriarchal. Now that the epoch of the creation of the state has come to an end, when the colossal masses have become bound together, indestructible to external enmity, it is time for us to understand that a person achieves his moral goal only in a society where the strength of each belongs to everyone and the strength of all belongs to everyone.

Thus, we will move forward boldly and unmistakably, occupying the casual discoveries of the West, but giving them a deeper meaning, or discovering in them those human principles that have remained secret for the West, asking the history of the church and its laws - luminaries guiding our future development and resurrecting the ancient forms of Russian life, because they were based on the sanctity of family ties and on the unspoiled individuality of our tribe. Then, in enlightened and slender proportions, in the original beauty of a society that combines the patriarchal nature of regional life with the deep meaning of the state, representing a moral and Christian face, ancient Russia will resurrect, but already conscious of itself, and not accidental, full of living and organic forces, and not wavering eternally between life and death.

Great and noble is the feat of every man on earth: the feat of a Russian is filled with hope. Do not regret the best past, do not grieve about once former Vera we must, as a Westerner; but remembering with joy the living Faith of our ancestors, to hope that it will illuminate and penetrate even more fully our descendants; remembering the wonderful fruits of the divine beginning of our enlightenment in old Russia, to expect and hope that, with the help of God, that wholeness, which was expressed only in individual manifestations, which ceaselessly disappeared in the turmoil and revolt of long-suffering history, will be expressed in all its many-sided fullness in the future peaceful and conscious Russia.

The West, self-condemned by the power of its developed rationalism, offers its sons only a choice between two equally painful existences: either the hopeless search for truth along paths already recognized as false, or the renunciation of all its past in order to return to the truth. The Russian land offers its children, in order to abide in the truth, a simple and easy means for an uncorrupted heart: to love her, her past life and her true essence, without being embarrassed or tempted by any random and external influxes that no people could avoid new history who created a society of peoples unknown to antiquity. Truth is given to those who seek it in good faith, and every truth serves God. Let each of us fulfill his duty to the best of his ability, working on his mental and moral improvement and, as much as he can, enriching his brethren with his mental acquisitions.

About old and new. Regarding the article by I.V. Kireevsky, 144,145,146

I.V. Kirievsky

Russia did not shine either with arts or scientific inventions, having no time to develop in this respect in its own way and not accepting someone else's development, based on a false view and therefore hostile to her Christian spirit. But on the other hand, it contained the first condition for the development of the correct one, requiring only time and favorable circumstances; in it gathered and lived that organizing principle of knowledge, that philosophy of Christianity, which alone can give a correct foundation to the sciences. All the Greek holy fathers, not excluding the most profound writers, were translated, and read, and copied, and studied in the silence of our monasteries, those holy embryos of failed universities. And these monasteries were in living, unceasing contact with the people.

Answer to A.S. Khomyakov, 57.58

K.D.Kavelin

The eastern branch of the Russian tribe was formed partly from settlers from Little Russia and the northwestern region on Finnish soil, partly from Russified Finns. Russian settlers, under the influence of new conditions, on new soil, acquired a different character, different from the original root from which they separated; on the other hand, the Russified Finnish tribes introduced new blood, new physiological elements into the younger branch of the Russian tribe. This branch has long been distinguished from its relatives by noticeable, outstanding moral and physical features and, consequently, has long managed to form and get its own special physiognomy.

By the time it began to take shape Moscow State, the process of its formation has already been completely completed, a new tribal branch has fully developed. In the formation of the Great Russian branch, its resettlement and Russification of the Finns, lies the intimate, inner history of the Russian people, which has hitherto remained somehow in the shadows, almost forgotten; and yet it is precisely in it that lies the key to the whole course of Russian history. The most important and curious time is precisely the beginning of the colonization and Russification of the Finns, when the Great Russian branch began to take shape. In the 11th or 12th century, the settlers moved in different ways from Western Russia to the east, to the Finnish lands.

The natives, the Finnish tribes, scattered over the vast expanse of present-day Great Russia, gradually fell under the power and influence of the settlers and, perhaps, mixed with them, most likely - they began to gradually become Russified, and thus introduced new blood, new elements into the Russian principle brought by the colonists from the west. Under the influence of the new soil, the new situation and the influx of Finnish blood, a new branch of the Russian tribe gradually took shape. The character of the Great Russians was reflected in the history of their origin and gradual formation; and this character, in turn, determined the features of the civil and state system, which was formed among this amazing people. The settler became a colonizer on the new soil and gradually spread over a vast territory. In the centuries-old labors of settlement, that mobility was formed, that ability to find oneself in difficult circumstances, that practical tact in relations with foreigners, which distinguishes the Great Russian in front of his fellow tribesmen.

The Western Russian settlers were already Christians when they crossed over to their new homeland, and transferred to Finnish soil the church of the Eastern confession, with all its institutions. Despite the fact that the pagan worldview stubbornly held out among the colonists, the name Christian became their distinguishing feature among the pagan natives and for a long time replaced the consciousness of the people. Russian and Orthodox, in the popular concept, are one and the same; Orthodox, even if not Russian in origin, is still considered Russian; natural Russian, but not of the Orthodox faith, is not recognized as a Russian.

And so in Great Russia, the Christian faith of the Eastern confession became the banner of the people, taking the place of the people. This explains the enormous political significance of Orthodoxy in Great Russia. A characteristic phenomenon of Russian life, which received its special shade in Great Russia, is a tendency to youthfulness, to revelry, to unlimited freedom - a daring that knows neither goal nor limit.

Thoughts and notes on Russian history 51.52

S.S.Uvarov

In the midst of the rapid decline of religious and civil institutions in Europe, with the widespread spread of destructive concepts, in view of the sad phenomena that surrounded us on all sides, it was necessary to strengthen the fatherland on solid foundations on which the prosperity, strength and life of the people are based; find the principles that make up the distinctive character of Russia and belong exclusively to her; to gather into one whole the sacred remains of her people and to strengthen the anchor of our salvation on them. Fortunately, Russia has retained a warm faith in salvific principles, without which it cannot prosper, grow stronger, and live. Sincerely and deeply attached to the church of his fathers, the Russian from time immemorial looked upon it as a guarantee of public and family happiness.

Without love for the faith of their ancestors, the people, like a private person, must perish. A Russian, devoted to the fatherland, will just as little agree to the loss of one of the dogmas of our
orthodoxy, as well as for the theft of one pearl from the crown of Monomakh.
Autocracy constitutes the main condition for the political existence of Russia. The Russian colossus rests on it, as on the cornerstone of its greatness. The saving conviction that Russia lives and is guarded by the spirit of a strong, philanthropic, enlightened autocracy must permeate popular education and develop with it. Along with these two national principles, there is a third, no less important, no less strong - nationality.

The question of nationality does not have the same unity as the previous one, but both stem from the same source and are connected on every page of the history of the Russian kingdom. With regard to nationality, the whole difficulty lay in the agreement between ancient and new concepts; but nationality does not force you to go back or stop; it does not require immobility in ideas. The composition of the state, like the human body, changes appearance your own according to age: features change with age, but the physiognomy should not change. It would be inappropriate to oppose this periodic course of things.

It is enough if we keep inviolable the sanctuary of our popular concepts, if we take them as the main idea of ​​the government, especially in relation to domestic education. These are the main principles that should be included in the system of public education so that it combines the benefits of our time with the traditions of the past and with hopes of the future, so that public education would correspond to our order of things and be not alien to the European spirit. The enlightenment of the present and future generations, in the combined spirit of these three principles, is undoubtedly one of the best hopes and the essential needs of the time.

Decade of the Ministry of Public Education. 1833-1843, 131

N.G. Chernyshevsky

It is precisely out of dissatisfaction with our present development, out of despair induced by the nature of our society, that dreams are born of some exceptional position and calling for us in the future. The opinion that it is we who should become the leaders of mankind, in the development of the higher phases of civilization, is based on two assumptions preached in most books, not only here, but also in the West, but nevertheless completely false. In the first place, it is assumed that the peoples of the Latin and German tribes have already brought into historical affairs all the forces at their disposal, so that they have no new forces to create a new life, completely different from the former; secondly, it is assumed that we are a completely fresh people, whose character has not yet been formed, but is only now being formed for the first time, whose forces have not been spent on anything. We have already said that this is not true.

We also had a history of our own, a long one that shaped our character, filled us with traditions that are as difficult for us to give up as it is for Western Europeans to give up their concepts; we also must not be educated, but re-educated. Our basic concept, our most stubborn tradition, is that we introduce the idea of ​​arbitrariness into everything. Legal forms and personal efforts seem powerless and even ridiculous to us, we expect everything, we want to do everything by the power of a whim, an uncontrolled decision, on conscious assistance, on the spontaneous readiness and ability of others, we do not hope, we do not want to conduct business in these ways: first the condition for success, even in just and good intentions, for each of us is that others unquestioningly and blindly obey everything. Each of us is a little Napoleon, or, better to say, Batu.

But if each of us is a Batu, then what happens to a society that all consists of Batu? Each of them measures the strength of the other, and, according to a mature consideration, in every circle, in every deed, there is an arch-Batu, to whom the simple Batu obey as unconditionally as the Baskaks obey them in turn, and the simple Tatars obey the Baskaks, of which each also keeps himself Batu and in the circle of the conquered tribe, subjugated to him, and, most charmingly, this tribe itself is accustomed to believing that this is how things should be and that it is impossible otherwise. All this host of Asiatic ideas and facts makes up a dense chain mail, the rings of which are very strong and very tightly interconnected, so God knows how many generations will pass on our earth before the chain mail rusts and in its holes reach our chest feelings, decent civilized people. The West, far ahead of us, has not yet exhausted its strength - in this respect it is the same as we are: a country barely cultivated in a few places, boundless valleys that have not been touched by a plow. New life arises in these spaces that are just beginning to come to life.

Works, 149

K.N.Leontiev

Byzantine ideas and feelings rallied half-wild Russia into one body. Byzantism gave us the strength to endure the Tatar pogrom and long tributary. The Byzantine image of the Savior overshadowed the believing troops of Dmitry on the grand ducal banner on that battlefield where we first showed the Tatars that Moscow Rus was no longer the former fragmented, torn Rus! Byzantism gave us all our strength in the fight against Poland, the Swedes, France and Turkey. Under his banner, if we are faithful to him, we, of course, will be able to withstand the onslaught of an entire international Europe, if, having destroyed everything noble in itself, it would someday dare to prescribe the rot and stench of its new laws on petty earthly things to us. all-bliss, about earthly radical vulgarity!

Byzantine spirit, Byzantine beginnings and influences, like a complex fabric nervous system, penetrate through and through the entire Great Russian social organism. the same tribal and religious monarchical principle that created all our state greatness. Stenka Razin's rebellion could not resist as soon as his people were convinced that the sovereign did not agree with their chieftain. In addition, Razin constantly tried to show that he was not fighting against the royal blood, but only against the boyars and the clergy who agreed with them.

Pugachev was smarter to fight against the government of Catherine, whose strength was incomparably greater than the forces of pre-Petrine Russia; he deceived the people, he took advantage of that Great Russian legitimism that I spoke about. Our young European Jacobins of the 1920s also wanted to use something similar. The monarchical principle is our only organizing principle, the main instrument of discipline, and this same principle serves as a banner of rebellion? Yes! This is so, and this is still a small misfortune. No great nation can live without great unrest.

But there are different concerns. There are unrest at the right time, early, and there are unrest at the wrong time, late. The early ones contribute to creation, the later ones hasten the death of the people and the state. Until now, all our unrest came in time, and it was precisely because they could be dealt with that there were deep conservative beginnings in the souls of the rebels, because all our revolts had more or less self-styled or an allegedly legitimate character. This is the time. On the other hand, there is nothing unnatural here. If any principle is as strong as our monarchical principle, if this principle penetrates so deeply the entire national life, then it is understandable that it must, so to speak, squirm in various ways, twist and even be distorted sometimes under the influence of heterogeneous and transient conditions. I even dare, without hesitation, to say that no Polish uprising and no Pugachevism can harm Russia in the way that a very peaceful, very legitimate democratic constitution could harm it.

Byzantism and Slavism 60, 61

I.S. Shmelev

Undoubtedly, the democratic ideal is beautiful. But where is the implementation? !The basis of democracy is people's rule. But with a low culture of the masses, "leaders" are inevitably put forward over the masses for control, not always flawless, and democracy degenerates into the "management of a handful", which jealously clings to power, playing on the weaknesses of a naive people, on their passion for equality, even if to illusory equality, even if only in slavery to poverty! Well, they give him both. True, in none state form not meet perfection. Without "people" any form is nothing. Wonderful wine will be wonderful - whether you drink it from a royal brother or from a republican glass. It's all about the people! The matter is not in the forms, but in something completely different. Find the essence that commands without violence, without suppressing a person - life will flourish wonderfully - under all labels. I see only one such essence: the revival of life on the basis of a religious, on the basis of a highly moral, - the Gospel teaching of active Love.

So there are three kinds of paths. The first is down with the imperatives of a higher, moral order, and let material interests, the goals of production and consumption, rule under the dictatorship of the proletariat, or rather, a handful. The second is that moral motives also guide the government, as it were, of "aristocratic salt." But without religious revival, without highly spiritual inspiration—this path will be blown up by those who thirst for earthly blessings—it will be lost and wither away. But a living path is outlined; the dispensation of life on the basis of religious and moral fervor, on the thirst for active love. On this path, peoples must recognize, after the bitterest experience, that there is a Divine will in the world, before which, as before the Supreme Judge, as before the Ideal, the erring will of man, this unfortunate Prometheus, who lost all fire, must bow.

The future depends on it. Which path will Russia choose? Revival will take place if the true word of Christ is taken as the basis for construction, in all its depth: no malice, no divisions into the washed and the unwashed, into the Jews and the Greeks, into the poor and the rich. All are citizens, and all are brothers, and all are one! Only such a power, only with such commandments, will lead to a wonderful Ideal, about which it is futile to dream of democracy. The power of the workers of love and will, obedient to God? Word as the Higher Will. What will it be called - who can say? But will such a power be created - it borders on a miracle! If they manage to understand the spiritual depths of our people, if the people believe that they are not being deceived, a miracle can happen. The people can give birth to this miracle from the depths. For the Sun craves after pitch darkness. Heaven - after flooded mud. The path of religious renewal of life is the true path of spiritual democracy. there will be no other way to revive. Or - there will be no revival.

The paths are earthly and dead. Soul of Russia, 151

P.N.Savitsky

A healthy social coexistence can be based only on the inseparable connection of a person with God, religion; non-religious coexistence, non-religious statehood must be rejected. A society that gives in to exclusive concern for earthly goods will sooner or later be deprived of them too - such is the terrible lesson that shines through from the experience of the Russian revolution. Eurasians are Orthodox people. And the Orthodox Church is the lamp that shines on them; to Her, to Her Gifts and Her Grace they call their compatriots... The Orthodox Church is the realization of the highest freedom; its beginning is concord, as opposed to the beginning of the power that prevails in the Roman Church that separated from Her. And it seems to the Eurasians: in the harsh affairs of the spiritual and church - only grace-filled freedom and harmony are good leaders. From the point of view of the Eurasians, the task is to atone for abomination and crime and transform religious era, which would melt the sinful, dark and terrible into something that emits light.

And this is possible not in the order of the dialectical disclosure of history, which would mechanically, "according to Marxism", turn everything "evil" into "good", but in the process of internal accumulation of moral strength. The only immaculate expression of Christianity is the Orthodox Church, which has now reached the greatest disclosure in Russian Church, which dominates among other Orthodox and has taken upon itself the main onslaught of evil. The historical task of the Russian people is that it must fulfill itself in its Church and must, by developing itself in it, that is, by fulfilling and knowing it, through confession and self-disclosure, create the possibility of self-disclosure in Orthodoxy both for the "unfruitful pagan Church" and for a world that has fallen into heresy. It is obvious that the Orthodox idea for its implementation requires not hatred, but love, that it denies murder, violence, robbery and deceit.

Eurasianism, 105,106,107

I.F. Stravinsky

The great dispute between the “Slavophiles” and the “Westerners”, which became the main theme of all Russian philosophy and culture, did not solve anything. Both of these opposite systems equally collapsed as a result of the cataclysm produced by the revolution. Russia will choose a historical path, completely new and not dependent on the old Europe, before which they bowed only as before a sacred grave, the communist revolution threw Russia into the arms of Marxism, the most European, Western system. But, amazingly, this hyper-national system itself underwent a change rather quickly, and Russia fell back into the purest nationalism and chauvinism, which again radically separated it from European culture.

This means that 21 years after the catastrophic revolution, Russia failed, did not want, could not solve its main historical problem. However, how would she have done it if she had never succeeded in either bringing stability to her culture or strengthening her traditions? As always, it stands at the crossroads, opposite Europe, but with its back turned to it. At various periods of its development, its historical metamorphoses, Russia has always betrayed itself, always undermined the foundations of its own culture and subverted the values ​​of the previous stages. compelled to return to her traditions, she is satisfied only with their scheme, not realizing that their inner meaning, their very life, has completely disappeared.

Such is the knot of this great tragedy. Renovation is fruitful only when combined with respect for tradition. The dialectic of life demands that renewal and tradition develop and confirm each other in a simultaneous process. So, Russia saw only conservatism without renewal or a revolution divorced from tradition, which is why this grandiose vacillation over the abyss occurs, which always made me dizzy.

Problems of the idea of ​​the greatness of the Russian language

IN last years ideas of the special role of the Russian language, its superiority over other languages, its primogeniture, etc., have gained wide popularity in Russia, as well as among the Russian-speaking population of other states (primarily post-Soviet ones). These views are usually closely intertwined with ideas about the special significance of the Russian, Slavic or East Slavic people (although the very concept of the Slavic or even East Slavic people is rather vague, but this is not the point here). Actually, such views on the Russian language are an important ideological basis for such views on the Russian people, and, on the other hand, push to similar conclusions. Below, we will not even talk about whether these ideas about the Russian language are correct or incorrect, but about what they are based on by the vast majority of their adherents and the problems that these foundations are built out of thin air. In the opinion of the author of the article, of course.
So, let's go point by point, noting in passing that it is not meant here that each of these points concerns any representative of these views. Rather, it is a collection of phenomena that, in one combination or another, concern the vast majority of adherents of these positions in relation to the Russian language. So let's go:

1) In a huge number of cases, the greatness of the Russian language is determined by comparing it with English. Obviously, this is due to the fact that those who compare foreign languages ​​are very often more or less familiar only with English. But it is completely incomprehensible how a comparison of Russian with only one other language can provide grounds for conclusions about its greatness, superiority over other languages, originality, and so on. The status of the international language that English has today does not affect this in any way, because there is no reason to believe that the most powerful, most expressive, and so on, language is becoming international. People who prove for someone or for themselves the universal greatness of the Russian language in this way seem to agree with these arguments (I don’t know if in all cases), but at the same time they still continue to partially base their views on this ground. Although, as we see (I think this is obvious to any sane person), there is no ground here.

2) In itself, comparison with English, as well as with other languages, is usually carried out without any understanding of how to do this. A person compares his native language (Russian) with another, without realizing or making a full allowance for the fact that, firstly, you not only know your native language much better, but you also feel it in a completely different way, and secondly, that you know a person is usually with relatives and strangers from completely different sides. All this is discarded, and even when it seems to be taken into account, it is only formally. In fact, there is a head-to-head comparison of the native language and a foreign one, which, of course, is blurry and simply inadequate. And on this basis, some conclusions are made about the compared languages, although no conclusions can be drawn here. No, you can compare something, but in a completely different way, carefully comparing, without focusing on your knowledge and feelings, as a carrier. And even more so, it is impossible to draw conclusions from the sensations that both compared languages ​​evoke, because one of them is native. Alas, the overwhelming majority do not take all this into account, and the conclusions obtained at the output are false. Namely, they are another pillar that strengthens the views of these people.

3) On the example of comparing the Russian and English languages, one can see that in the majority or even the vast majority of cases, the comparison is carried out inadequately, because the one who makes this comparison is familiar with the compared languages ​​at a completely different level. This person usually did not read almost any literature on English language, is familiar with him either superficially or at an average depth, does not know a lot about him expressive means, but at the same time, of course, he is perfectly oriented in Russian due to the fact that he is its carrier. And in such a situation, in all seriousness, expressiveness, a variety of means of two languages, and so on are compared, although this comparison can no longer be adequate. After all, it may well turn out to be blurry even in a situation where it will be carried out by a native speaker of Russian, who knows English very well. What can we say about the bulk of the cases. Moreover, in this bulk of cases, people begin to compare the language that they use at a colloquial level and are familiar with this form very well, with a language about which they have 95 percent only academic ideas, which in itself makes this comparison is almost meaningless or very blurry. But then again - this is one of the foundations for confirming views, foundations made of air and nothing else. And this, of course, concerns not only the comparison of Russian with English, but also with any other language.

4) Again, we take a comparison with English as an example. Often it happens like this: here we can say “castle of sand” and “castle of sand”, and in English there is only “castle of sand”. And the one who compares, in all seriousness, believes that in this way the great expressiveness of Russian is proved, that it happens precisely at this level. Completely unaware that this is an element torn out of context, a comparison on which does not say anything, because, firstly, the comparer does not have enough knowledge of English to check whether there are really different ways of expressing, and secondly, what is more important in this context, indeed, in certain moments one language will be more expressive than another, and in others it will be vice versa. Elements at once, apparently, are more easily pulled out where there is possibly a superiority of the native language. And for a full-fledged comparison, you need to ask an English speaker (or a native speaker of any other language with which the comparison is being made), who is more or less familiar with Russian, to do the same. Although even here the assessment may be blurred, because two different people do it, but let's leave it. Of course, all these things are not taken into account, such a comparison is made, from which something like this conclusion is made: "Well, here's another example." The conclusion, of course, is out of place and off topic. Another ground for views that does not exist.

5) Comparators for the most part do not understand that a head-to-head comparison of synthetic and analytical languages, which is inevitable when comparing Russian with all the languages ​​of the world and, in particular, with English, is erroneous and should be carried out taking into account such a difference between languages. This, for example, leads to the understanding that the same Russian and English naturally have different ways of expression, which in direct comparison will be unequal, but it is important to compare the systems as a whole. For example, in Russian, due to the freer word order, greater expressiveness is created, compared to English, the emphasis is on shades of intonation, and so on. And in English, its analytical structures with many tenses of the verb make it possible to reflect shades of reality that are not so distinguished in Russian. Or we can talk about the fact that in Russian, due to inflection, some things show through more clearly, and in English, due to the variety of analytical structures, which are much less in Russian, others. In general, it is precisely such a full-fledged comparison of the two systems, taking into account the difference between them, that can tell us something. The main, overwhelming mass of those who compare, rather, will blink their eyes in surprise when they hear such concepts as a synthetic language or inflection. And he will answer something like: “Well, we don’t go deep into this, there are specialists, but we just do it.” Although there simply cannot be anything here, and if one does not go down to these depths, then there will simply be no adequate comparison and adequate analysis. And since there is no sinking to these depths, there is no understanding of what intellectual work is being done with, it means that all this work does not give any serious, full-fledged results that can be used as a basis for something. However, it is also one of the pillars. All the same empty and, in fact, absent.

6) In general, reference to serious studies and specialists is a problem in itself in this (as in many other similar) issues. An average comment from a bearer of the views described above about the Russian language: “I don’t know well, there are studies, read it if you want to find out.” So if you are not familiar with these studies, if you are really not seriously acquainted with this theory, then what is there to talk about? If the answer to the bulk of serious questions and clarifications is “I don’t know, there are studies”? Then, it means that you simply do not know anything, you are only familiar with the reflections on the walls that you somehow liked, and no more. Well, what else can you conclude?

7) The problem with references to specialists and research has another side. The argument “many researchers said this about the Russian language”, “many researchers say this about the Slavic peoples” is often almost direct proof of their correctness in the mouths of representatives of these views. The fact that there are a lot of specialists who refute these studies, that in history and linguistics, as well as their combinations with other sciences, there are many elements that can be rotated in different directions and which are often only hypothetical, as if they do not mean anything. Not to mention the fact that, as mentioned above, people are not familiar with the foundations of many of these theories. And the problem here is not that they generally refer to these theories and studies, no. Almost all of us, in one way or another, base our ideas about the world and our views on certain theories and studies, which are far from known to everyone and which are often not tested in practice. Another thing is important here - categorical and one-sidedness.

8) The problem is also that for many representatives of such views about the Russian language, any objections or serious doubts in these views look like unwillingness to accept new knowledge, like unwillingness to agree with something. The fact that doubts can be caused by other factors, many of them do not take into account at all. However, it is obvious that this concerns not only this issue, but also many other ideological issues around the world.

9) One of the main mouthpieces of these ideas about the Russian language is the Russian humorist Mikhail Nikolaevich Zadornov. Indeed, many adherents of such views are only familiar with what Zadornov is talking about, they either did not go deeper into it, or are only superficially familiar with the works of the same Chudinov. Therefore, it would be appropriate here to analyze the information that Zadornov conveys to the people, because it is she who is the base platform for many of the carriers of these views.
Let's start with the idea that the combination -ra- is one of the forefathers of the Russian language. The idea is that Ra is the name of the sun god, and the root -ra- is present in Russian words associated with light. It raises some doubts that the root -ra- is absent in modern Russian, it is strange that it has not been preserved. But this is not so important, you never know what the processes were. It is important that there are few words that have -ra- in their composition and are directly related to light in Russian: sconce, headlight, ramp, chandelier, dawn. Surely I forgot something, but you will find very few such words. Zadornov himself referred here such words as “mountain”, “early”, “burrow”, “fool”, and so on, but this is already an assumption on an assumption, here the words are included in this group already on the basis of the conclusion that -ra - is the praroot associated with light. At the same time, against this background, the presence of a large mass of words that have a combination of the letters -ra- in their composition, but are in no way connected with the light is surprising: grass, barracks, marriage, ram, drum, cuttlefish, cockroach, ram, moratorium, poacher, catamaran, work, infection, and so on.
In addition, let's consider, for example, some words that are somehow related to sweets and confectionery. So: confectioner, cake, gingerbread, candy, chocolate. Pay attention - everywhere there is a combination -ko-. Maybe it's a praroot associated with sweets? Of course, this example looks much less solid than the idea about -ra-. Well, I came up with it in a quarter of an hour, without seriously digging and just picking up some common element from words that can be combined with something. I just wanted to show that there are probably a lot of such coincidences in the language, and this is not strange. In general, if we take what exactly Zadornov said about -ra-, then this construction looks very doubtful, because no explanation is given as to why this root has not been preserved at all in modern Russian, why this combination is available in much more words that are not related to light and the Sun, rather than vice versa, where does the idea that this combination is the root come from. There are only a few vague references to Chudinov's work related to Russian runes, but nothing more. For the majority of the carriers of the views, it was Zadornov’s words that became the basis for the adoption of the views described above about the Russian language, they did not analyze the works of Chudinov and are not familiar with the grounds for the theory of o-ra-. Grounds that, in the opinion of the author of the article, have no integrity and cannot be grounds.

10) One of the evidence cited by Zadornov causes a frank shock to the author of the article. Mikhail Nikolayevich pointed out that the special strength and advantages of the Russian language are manifested in the fact that speakers of other languages ​​who are familiar with Russian (as far as I understand, it was either about Americans, that is, speakers of English, or about speakers of US and Western languages). Europe), do not understand, for example, such a meaning of the word "hare" as "traveling without a ticket." That is, generalizing, they do not understand such secondary, not directly related to the main meanings of words. It is difficult even to somehow fully comment on such things, which your obedient servant personally considers outright nonsense. Of course, most foreigners who are familiar with the Russian language will not understand this meaning of the word "hare". Only not because of the strength of the Russian language and not because of the weakness of their native languages, but for the simple reason that they simply do not know this meaning. They have learned the word "hare", they know that it denotes an animal of a certain species, and that it is also used in this sense is simply unfamiliar to them. Not everyone, some, of course, know, especially those who study Russian professionally, but the bulk, of course, do not. Just like a Russian-speaking person who studies English, German, Spanish, Farsi, Arabic, and so on, does not know about such meanings of words in these languages. He does not know and, in the event of a collision, does not understand what is at stake. Because such cultural elements in different languages ​​very often do not coincide. And the English word "hare" for a hare animal does not mean a person traveling on public transport without a ticket. BUT Russian word"fox" does not denote coins of a particular kind, while the German "Fuchs" has such a meaning. And it is understandable that a Russian-speaking person studying German, faced with such a use of this word, may wonder: “What does the fox have to do with it?”. But does this testify to the weakness of the Russian language or the strength of German? This will only say that in these two cultures this element does not coincide, which led to misunderstanding. Or, say, an English-speaking person may not understand why it is said that you do not need to go to Tula with your own samovar. But the Russian-speaking is unaware of what is wrong with going to Newcastle with your own coal. No, you can guess here, I just give as an example analogs of cultural elements that are different for different cultures and reflected in different ways in the languages ​​these cultures represent.
Considering that Zadornov cited this as one of the arguments in favor of the Russian language, doubts instantly arise about the correctness and adequacy of his other constructions on this topic. No, this does not mean that they are wrong. It only gives rise to doubt. And even more, this gives reason to evaluate the views of those who began to adhere to such views on the Russian language and its role, primarily because of the words spoken by Zadornov. Indeed, many of them consider this argument reasonable, relevant, and one of those that reinforce their ideas. Which indicates that they do not understand what they are dealing with at all.

11) It is also important to refer to representatives of certain mystical and esoteric movements and views on reality, who speak of a special role, the originality of the Russian language, the special role of the Slavs, and so on. The author of the article is himself a mystic and esotericist, and he sees no reason to dismiss these views. He notes something else: far from all mystics and esotericists, spiritual mentors, and so on, adhere to such views, and the fact that some adhere to does not mean that they need to blindly follow or blindly believe, because these people developed spiritually, began to see the world much brighter and clearer, but at the same time they also strengthened their qualities, strengthened their settings, which they had even before joining the new way, and it is difficult for someone who does not go along with them (and even sometimes even to that) to assess whether part of their ideas is a distortion, enhanced by the energy changes that have occurred in them. Again, I'm not saying that this is the case. I just wanted to note that it is also impossible to consider this an unambiguous basis for conclusions. If all of them, from all corners of the world, said this, then it would be a different story. But it's not. And here it is important to note that there are many interpretations that reveal the words spoken by those of the mystics, esotericists and thinkers who, from our point of view, have already died, from this side. But interpretation is something completely different, it is not direct words.

Actually, much more can be analyzed in this light. The idea of ​​the article was not to delve into this issue as much as possible. It was about the analysis of the main or most of the main elements of the foundation, on which the ideas of the majority, the vast majority of those people who support the idea of ​​the greatness of the Russian language over other languages ​​of the world, its originality, a special role, and so on, are based. Moreover, the author of the article was not going to refute this theory itself or analyze its basic elements - he himself is not so familiar with them, although he partially got acquainted. To a much greater extent, I wanted to point out that the main, overwhelming mass of those who hold these views is not critical enough or not critical at all, analyzes this issue from the wrong positions and then draws completely unfounded conclusions, considers this issue one-sidedly, approaching many things with positions of double standards. Unconsciously, of course. Or, in most cases, unconsciously. Which, perhaps, indicates that these views, this theory are accepted by 90% of its carriers, because they like it and / or because those who convey it to them use the peculiarities of thinking of the bulk of the Russian-speaking population of the world, first of all - Russia. In my opinion, I have given in my article enough transparent and understandable arguments for a person who carefully reads them to be convinced that this is the case. Well, how the readers of the article will evaluate these arguments and what conclusions they will draw is another story. Actually, the author of the article, that is, me, is open for discussion and answers :)
Unfortunately, many of the bearers of this theory, these views, or, rather, the bulk of them, in my opinion, do not realize that such theories have already taken place in the history of mankind. From slightly different angles, with slightly different accents, but they were there. And now there are a lot of them, just this one got enough wide use among our population. The same ideas about the Aryans, about the significance of the German people, and so on, which dominated the Third Reich, had certain historical justifications (by the way, work was also carried out there with the German language, which was cleared of words of foreign origin) and were not at all simple sucked from the finger. It's just that there are many historical and cultural moments that can be interpreted in different directions, and you can also take only the right part, mix truth with lies, place accents in the right way - and you get certain conclusions, harmonious and logical. Alas, most of the bearers of a certain ideology are not ready to look at theories that they liked in this way. Moreover, among them there are always highly intelligent people who think that they fit reasonably. But it is very important to understand that any serious ideology is created for different segments of the population, including smart people who should experience the feeling "everything is reasonable, everything is logical." Yes, such people do not make up the bulk of the population, but they also need to be lassoed with ideology, because they are the important generators of further ideas, a dozen others can listen to one such person. So the ideology must be stratified - levels for the main mass, levels for more developed representatives. What, in fact, we can easily observe in this case. And again, this is not about the correctness / incorrectness of certain ideas, but about the essence of how it is presented and how it is turned into an ideological base.
In principle, this has been happening for a long time, it takes place to a greater or lesser extent all over the world, and therefore one could simply observe, and that's it. But your humble servant, seeing how these things entangle his friends and good acquaintances, was unable to just silently look at all this.

One scoundrel in our community wrote a vile post about my country - Russia. About the country in which I live and which I love, no matter how pathetic it may sound. Wrote vilely about my people. About the people of which I am a part. But I consider him a scoundrel not because he has a different opinion than me, and not even because he has his own view of Russia and Russians, but because he wrote cowardly.
Stressing that the purpose of his writing is not to insult the Russians and Russia, in fact, it is quite obvious that his post was written only for this purpose. I can't stand this rottenness and double-mindedness in people.
I traveled a lot. Both in Russia and around the world. Seen a lot. In the world there are so many amazing and beautiful places. But every time I returned to Russia, I experienced a special feeling - the joy of returning home. Every time I heard Russian speech around me, my ears rejoiced at its beauty and harmony.
Everywhere in Russia I am at home. And in St. Petersburg, and in Novosibirsk, in Kazan and in Min.Vody, in Gorno-Altaisk and in Sochi. Everywhere native people. They are different - there are bad ones, there are good ones, but they are all ours.

For me, Russians are both Russians and Tatars, and Altaians, and Belarusians, and Yakuts, all who live on our common land.
In that provocative post, the question was asked: "What is your greatness, Russians?"
Indeed, what is our greatness? And in general, is there any greatness? Maybe it's just our chimera? A fiction that amuses our pride?
There are many statements by Russian writers, politicians, generals about the Russian people. But someone can accuse them of bias.
Then others should say a word about our people. Let representatives of other peoples of the world testify about us. And on the basis of these statements, everyone will decide for himself - WHAT IS THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE?

"Russian people will never be happy knowing that injustice is happening somewhere" - Charles de Gaulle, French statesman, President of France

"Russian people do not need the materialistic "values" of the West, they do not need the dubious achievements of the East in the field of abstract spirituality that has nothing to do with reality" - Albert Schweitzer, German-French thinker

"Russian people need the Truth, and they are looking for it, first of all in life" - Francois de La Rochefoucauld, French moralist writer

"To live according to the Truth is in Russian!" - William Thomson, English physicist

"Russian people work conscientiously and free of charge if society has a moral idea, a righteous goal" - Friedrich Hegel, German philosopher

"The concept of good morality - to live in conscience - this is Russian" - Winston Churchill, Prime Minister of Great Britain

"Russianness is the worldview of a just life-building" - Stanislav Lem, Polish writer

"For the sake of a righteous idea, Russian people work with joy, even when they are imprisoned, and then they do not feel like prisoners - they gain freedom" - Adam Smith, Scottish economist and philosopher

"To work for the good of the people, of all mankind is in Russian" - Niccolo Machiavelli, Italian political thinker

"Community is in the blood of the Russian people" - Imre Lakatos, English mathematician

"The Russian soul is generosity that knows no bounds" - Dalai Lama, spiritual leader of the Tibetan people

"Non-possessiveness is characteristic of Russian people. Russian people never intoxicate themselves" - Karl Marx

"Russian people do not need anything beyond measure" - Beecher Henry Ward, American religious and public figure

"Measure is the essence of Russian civilization" - Claude Helvetius, French philosopher

"Russian culture does not accept debauchery" - Johann Wolfgang Goethe, German writer

"Russian people do not tolerate any abomination!" - Henry Ford, American engineer,

"Russian people never live by the principle "my hut is on the edge, I don't know anything"" - Thomas Jefferson, American educator

""Living for yourself", "working for yourself", living life in various pleasures - this is not Russian," - Mother Teresa (in the world Agnes Gonja Boyadzhiu), founder and abbess of the Catholic Order of Mercy

"It is no coincidence that the meaning of the word "joy" in Russian is different from the meaning of the word "pleasure"" - Stevenson Robert Louis, English writer

"The joy of the Russian people comes from a clear understanding of the meaning of life: to do everything possible (and impossible) so that future generations are not born in a slave-owning crowd-elitist society" - Heisenberg Werner, German theoretical physicist

"Russian people are tirelessly working to transform themselves and those around them from anthropomorphism to Humanity!" - Alexander Dumas, a famous French writer

"To live in Russian means to live like a human being!" - Adolf Diesterweg, German teacher

"Happiness for the Russian people is to feel part of the great Unity and participate in the creation of a just world order on Earth" - Benjamin Franklin, American educator, statesman

Something like that.
Long live the Russian Spring!

Saved