What factors influence the development of the state. Features of the historical path of development of Russia
Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation
Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Ural Federal University named after the First President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin"
Institute of Radio Electronics and Information Technology - RTF
Department of high-frequency means of radio communications and television
Discipline "History"
“The role of geopolitical, climatic and ethno-confessional factors in the development and fate of Russia”
Lecturer: Rogova E.M.
Student: Anchutin M.P.
Group: RI-120501
Ekaterinburg
1. Introduction (1)
1.1 Relevance
1.2 Purpose of the study
1.3 Objectives of the study
2 Factors affecting the fate and development of Russia (4-16)
2.1 Geopolitical factor.
2.2 Natural and climatic factor.
2.3 Ethno - confessional factor.
3 Conclusion (17)
4 References (18)
Introduction:
The relevance of this topic is quite high, since the development of Russia very much depended on the data in the problem of factors.
Objective: to investigate the factors stated in the topic.
The objectives of the study: to identify the factors that contributed most to the development of Russia, as well as to analyze each separately to form a holistic picture of the development of Russia.
Chapter 1: Geopolitical factor. The essence and its role in the development of Russia.
First of all, I would like to say what geopolitics and geopolitical factors are in general. Geopolitics is the science of control over the territory, the laws of distribution and redistribution of spheres of influence of various states and interstate associations. Geopolitical factors are the geographical position of a country, the availability of natural resources, climate, etc.
Further, I would like to talk about the geopolitical factor regarding Russia. Most often, the following geopolitical conditions are noted: a large, sparsely populated territory, a border that does not have natural protection, isolation from the seas, and an abundance of rivers.
The most strongly geopolitical factor influenced the nature of agriculture. The soil and climate of Russia have long been unfavorable for agriculture, but Russia has always been considered a rich country. The wealth of Russia can be explained by the presence of huge reserves of wood, furs and other natural resources. And this circumstance very negatively influenced the further fate of Russia.
Since Russia had a very large territory, people used the extensive way of doing business, i.e. the introduction of new territories, instead of old ones. In my opinion, this is wrong, because the extensive way of doing business is not effective and wastes the country's natural wealth. To prove this, we can cite Western Europe as an example, everything is regulated here because limited space. In order to survive, in order to make a profit, a person needs to conduct intensive farming in order to get everything he needs from a small plot of land. And, thanks to the intensive economic path, Europe is now very developed.
According to many historians, before the 18th century, Russia could not be called a state, since it did not have specific borders. In the east, Russia delineated the borders only in 1861 in the Beijing world. If new land was required for farming, one could simply move east, farther and farther. Throughout the 20th century, Russia moved east. Various reforms were carried out - resettlement, Witte, Stolypin reforms, five-year construction projects, etc.
Until the second half of the 20th century, Russia existed comfortably due to the extensive type of economy. However, this could not continue for a very long time, and by the end of the 50s of the 20th century the reserves of the extensive path had run out. For the further development of the country, a way out was necessary and in the late 50s Khrushchev’s reform was ripening on the transition to an intensive path. In 1965, this reform began to be implemented: the transfer of the country to intensification, the development of technology, began. However, in 1966, Tyumen oil was discovered - and the country had finances, and, accordingly, extensive resources appeared. The reform of the intensive way of the economy turned. In the 70s of the 20th century, oil prices fell, and Russia pumped oil almost for free. This greatly depleted the country's economy, so in the mid-80s, perestroika began.
The geopolitical factor also influenced the military fate of Russia.
Russia did not even chalk natural barriers (like Japan - the sea, or India - the mountains). Russia, a resource-rich country, was open to conquerors. Therefore, there were many who wanted to capture Russia.
The famous Russian historian calculated that Russian lands, starting from the age of 9, were attacked every 4 years. Then, for 240 years, the Russians were under the yoke of the Tatar-Mongols. And then from 1480 to 1880, Russia fought two-thirds of all time, and sometimes wars were permanent.
The destruction of productive forces constantly occurred, which contributed to a slowdown in development, which is why Russia has become a warlike country. Another reason for Russia's aggressiveness is the extensive nature of development. It was necessary to constantly expand the sources of raw materials, new lands were needed, new workers were needed. Because of this, Russia pursued an aggressive policy. But aggressiveness was not national. The Russians did not kill all the people living in the occupied territory, as the Germans did. The seized lands only poured into the general fund.
Further, the geopolitical factor affected statehood, since Russia had a military fate, it was necessary to have a strong army. And it is possible only in a strong state. However, a large army is a big waste. Since there was an extensive policy in Russia, serviceable estates emerged - the nobility and the Cossacks, who receive land for their service, not salaries. The land itself did not make sense, so the land was supplied with working hands. What was unique to Russia was serfdom.
Also, the geopolitical factor was reflected in the culture. The internationality of Russians was reflected in cultural traditions. When relatives gather at the festive table, dumplings, pilaf, cabbage rolls are on the table. Songs are sung in Russian families - that's it. In other words, traditions are international. In addition, Russians in general, in the sense of psychology, are not closed. Because the Russians have sympathy for the grief of others does not have a national color. Another feature characteristic of Russians is mobility. Russians easily change their place of residence. The history of no country knows such massive migrations (to the east). In the 20th century alone, more than 10 million people migrated east.
However, in addition to adverse factors, there were also favorable for the development of Russia.
Firstly, it is the specificity of the river network of the East European Plain. Since the largest rivers flow east and southeast, the Russian state region spread in that direction. The rivers promoted state and popular unity, since special river systems determined the special systems of regions and principalities. Thus, we can conclude that the river network united the country both economically and politically.
Secondly, it is the fact that most of the “Great Silk Road” from China to Europe passed through the territory of Russia. Many countries were interested in maintaining political stability on the territory of Russia, so that trade would take its course and there would be no unnecessary problems. In other words, the trading countries were interested in the existence of the Eurasian Empire: at first, the empire was the state of Genghis Khan, and then Russia.
Chapter 2. The climatic factor.
The climatic factor in the development of Russia played a rather significant role, since the country's development directly depends on agriculture, which in turn is closely related to climate and nature.
According to many historians, in the central part of Russia, which was the basis of the Russian state, the agricultural work cycle was very short, it was 125-130 days, which greatly affected the development of Russia. The central part of Russia is located on the East European Plain, where there is a sharply continental, severe climate. Adverse soil - 3% of chernozem, and the rest is clayey and other low-fertile soils. Accordingly, we can conclude that in Russia there is a very poor soil quality. However, the quality of the soil is not the main thing. The quantity and quality of the crop is more dependent on the quality of processing than on the quality of the soil. Due to the very short cycle of agricultural work, the Russian people had little time for tillage, respectively, the quality of the cultivation was low.
In the feudal era, the agricultural work cycle was about 140 days a year. Therefore, Russian people needed to grow only the most necessary. Thanks to this, cereals become the main agricultural product. Gardening was not practiced. Planted only those plants that grow without proper control: turnip, rutabaga, peas. Around the cities there were always gardens (dachas), since the townspeople themselves took care of food in the summer, i.e. were gardeners. This influenced the nature of the craft in Russia: in the summer - a gardener, in the winter - a craftsman.
For four centuries, the Russian peasant was in a difficult position: the infertile soils required high-quality cultivation, but there was not enough time for tillage, as well as for the preparation of feed for livestock. At the disposal of the peasant were only primitive tools, so he could only with minimal success cultivate the soil. Thanks to this, the life of the peasant most often depended on soil fertility and weather changes. With such a budget of working time, the peasant could not always return even seeds to the crop. Accordingly, the peasant had to work without sleep and rest, all day, using all the reserves of the family. This was not the case in Europe, since the duration of the work season was much longer. Of course, this provided a more favorable pace of work. This is precisely the fundamental difference between Russia and Europe, which has been going on for centuries.
Severe working conditions in Russia led to greater stability of community-based institutions, which were the guarantee of the survival of the majority of the population. Land redistribution and equalization, as well as various peasant “help”, remained in Russia until the 20th century.
Since in Russia many people in the summer were peasants, and the rest of the time artisans, crafts and trade acquired a unique character and quality. Shops arose only at the end of the 18th century. Until this time, merchants walked, exchanged and distributed goods. From this it follows that each craft product was manufactured for the abstract consumer. In Europe, the opposite was true: if you make a poor or poor-quality product, then the workshop or brand under which the artisan works will have a worse reputation, and there will be less buyers in the future.
It should also be said about the influence of the climatic factor on the loss ratio of livestock. In early spring, the quality of the land is very low and there is nothing to sow, therefore, there is no food for livestock. Therefore, the peasant harnesses himself and plows the land.
Agriculture provided a very low surplus product, in other words, a very low cost of living. This gave rise to a feature of the state structure. The country lived off taxes. If there is no surplus product, then it is difficult to take taxes from the population; accordingly, the state must be strong, therefore a despotic state existed in Russia.
Over time, the social structure is changing. Due to the lack of a surplus product, society cannot contain the intelligentsia, which provides the country with health care, art, and science. However, the people need health care, and art, and science. Since there is no intelligentsia in the country, these functions are performed by religion.
Therefore, in Russia, before the growth of the surplus product, there was no intelligentsia, there was no secular literature, music. Russian culture had a religious character.
The climatic factor influenced the social structure. In the leading countries of Europe, the community disappeared, and individual farming came. However, in Russia, the community structure remained until the 20th century. Even the famous reforms of Stolypin did not change anything. In other words, a community organization existed in Russia. Many reformers tried to create farms, but these attempts did not lead to anything.
Also, the climatic factor influenced the psychology of society. Community psychology is taking shape in Russia. From this follows a consequence - the equation of people. This can be explained by an example: if in a community one of the people became rich, then the whole community breaks down. Accordingly, the equation of people is a way to self-preservation of communities.
Since the Russian people were very dependent on nature and weather, people believed in a miracle. Which greatly affected folklore. All Russian characters of fairy tales received life joys only by a miracle.
The climatic factor has greatly influenced the peculiarities of the Russian national character. A Russian person can do something stubbornly for a long time to the extreme exertion of forces, devote all his physical and spiritual strength to the cause for a relatively long period of time. However, the constant lack of time, the lack of correlation between the quality of work and productivity has developed in the Russian person a clear lack of thoroughness, accuracy in work, etc.
Chapter 3. Ethno-confessional factor.
First of all, it is worth mentioning the ethnic factor in the history of Russia.
Russia is one of the most multinational countries. Multinationality has long been a feature of Russia, so the ethnic factor played an important role in the development of Russia.
The following are the main ethnic groups of Russians.
Northern zone. This group of Russians has a peculiarity: there are fewer cultural groups and local dialects. This feature can be explained by the fact that the development of the Russian North was spontaneous. The northern zone is characterized by the presence of a specific dialect, the so-called North Russian dialect, as well as various cultural features, such as small-yielded rural settlements and monumental dwellings. The largest ethnographic group of the North Russian population is Pomors.
South and central zones. These zones received the main developmental features due to the nature of the settlement of the forest-steppe and steppe strip of Russia. In the 13-15 centuries, the forest-steppe and steppe zones were devastated due to the Tatar-Mongol invasions. However, later they were again settled by immigrants from various places, since the Russian state was pushing its borders south. Thanks to this, many features of this zone were formed.
Siberia and the Far East. The main groups of people living here were masons and “Poles”. Masons are descendants of Kerzhaks from the Nizhny Novgorod province. "Poles" - the descendants of Russian Old Believers from the Kaluga, Tula, Ryazan and Oryol provinces.
The ethnic composition of Russia has changed over time. So, for example, in the 18th century there were serious changes in the ethnic composition of the country. The following factors contributed to this: the expansion of the country's borders, the inclusion of Lithuania, Belarus, the Baltic states, Ukraine, and Crimea. However, at the borders of the 1720s, the number and specific gravity of the peoples living there did not change, since there were internal migrations, as well as a natural increase.
The table below illustrates the changes in the number and specific gravity of the peoples of the empire in the 18th century.
The main ethnic group of Russia were Russians. However, their share during the 18th century decreased by 30%. This fact is due to the fact that at that time there was a rather low natural increase in the central regions of Russia. The share of Russians in the 18th century decreases in the main regions of indigenous habitat, since other people emigrated very actively to these regions, or Russians were evicted from their settled lands (Northern Urals).
However, in many other regions of the country the proportion of Russians increased quite significantly, for example, in the Lower Volga region.
A special stage in the life of Russia can be considered the time when the country was under the yoke of the Tatar-Mongols. In this period of time, the entire Russian population, as well as their number as a whole, decreased markedly, which directly affected the country's further development.
Thus, we can conclude that for centuries Russia was a multinational country. The presence of a high number of ethnic groups directly influenced the development of Russia.
Confessional factor.
The fact that there were many nations in Russia implies the obvious conclusion - the abundance of religions. Indeed, different nations adopted a different religion. According to historians, in the 18th century, Russia was completely formed in terms of nations, therefore, in order to show a picture of the spread of various religions in Russia, the following table can be presented.
Since religion is the main tool for managing people, the difference in the religious composition of the country created great problems for the authorities.
Religion on the development of the country has had a strong influence. First of all, it is a culture. Since ancient times, in Russia there are many works of art related to religion: temples, churches, icons, etc.
However, according to the prominent historian A. Timoshenko, the main role of religion in the development and history of the country is negative. Over the centuries, the bulk of people have been ruled by religion. Many bloody wars were covered up precisely by religion.
It should also be said that a large number of religions in the country often generated conflicts within the country, which negatively affected the further development of the country.
Conclusion
Russia is a great state that has existed for a millennium. All of the above factors brought both positive and negative interference into the fate of Russia. Positive, of course, helped the development of Russia and made the country stronger. Negative, of course, negatively affected development, but all the problems only strengthened the character of the Russian man and made him stronger. Thus, we can conclude that Russia is a great state, and Russian people who have experienced so many troubles and problems are one of the most persistent and enduring.
List of references.
1) http://www.atheism.ru/library/tim_1.phtml
2) History of Russia. 1900-1945 Grade 11. Ed. Danilova A.A., Filippova A.V.
3) History in diagrams and tables. Severinov K.M.
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/
Federal Agency for Education
State educational institution of higher professional education
Siberian State Aerospace University named after academician Mikhail Fedorovich Reshetnev
Faculty of Humanities
Department of Philosophy and Social Sciences
in political science
on the topic: Russian statehood: features, contemporary problems and prospects
Made by:
student of the BEF group 11-01
Paranina A.M.
Checked by the teacher:
Sidorov I.G.
Alexishen A.S.
Krasnoyarsk 2012
Introduction
4. Russian statehood in modern Russia
Conclusion
Introduction
Russian statehood has its own characteristics, its own originality. Her study is one of the central parts of the course of the theory of state and law. A.B. Vengerov noted: "The course of the theory of state and law would be incomplete if it did not address some of the most important theoretical questions of Russian statehood." Theory of Government and Rights. Part 1. Theory of the state / Under the total. ed. Doctor of Law, prof. A.B. Vengerova. M., 1995. This is a key area of \u200b\u200bRussian legal science, which allows us to verify the applicability of fundamental theoretical constructions and categories to Russian society and the state, to trace the change in Russian statehood under the influence of certain conditions and factors.
The policies of the Russian leadership in recent years, the strengthening of the state and its rather rigid dominance in the political field have intensified disputes about the "power vertical". Some saw in its strengthening the means necessary to ensure the unity, strength and effectiveness of the state, others saw a forced and temporary measure caused by the terrorist threat, others saw a course towards curtailing democracy in Russia and undermining fragile democratic institutions. Without claiming to be the ultimate truth, one thing can be firmly affirmed: without turning to Russian history, it is impossible to understand this issue. statehood territorial orthodoxy
The history of the Russian state has developed a number of features that cannot be ignored when building a new political course. Modern politicians, trying to learn the Western practice of state administration and get away from the Soviet system of government, do not take into account the differences in the formation of Russian statehood.
In determining the features of Russian statehood, it is advisable to consider at least three substantive categories: state, society, citizen. These categories are related, but also independent. Is everything good for the state good for society? Is everything good for society good for a citizen? And in the name of what (whom) both society and the state exist (should exist)? The history of the people and their fate depend on the substantial characteristics of these categories, their interdependence, role and place in the life of the people.
1. Statehood: concept and formation
The state is an organization of political power in society.
Statehood is an integral system of ideas and views used in the organization and activities of the state itself.
The concept of "statehood" is a relatively new category for domestic legal science. First of all, the question arises: state and statehood are two different concepts or are they synonyms.
It should be noted that a clear, generally accepted concept of "statehood" is absent in legal science. Most often, both categories are identified.
One of the first attempts to formulate the concept of "statehood" as applied to Russia was made by A. B. Vengerov. He distinguished between the concepts of “Russian statehood” and “Russian state”, believing that Russian statehood should be approached not only from political, economic, social positions, but also from cultural studies, i.e. it is necessary to see great cultural value in Russian statehood.
He interpreted statehood not only as a combination of political, economic, social and cultural processes inherent in a given state, but also as a historical process, covering a significant period of time during which the life of a society is carried out.
Obviously, the concept of "statehood" is broader and deeper than the concept of "state", but it certainly includes the state as its component, but it does not come down only to it.
· Statehood - a complex set of elements, structures, institutions of public authority, due to the identity of the socio-economic, political, spiritual and moral conditions of life of a particular people or the unification of peoples at a certain stage in the development of society.
· Statehood is a property, quality, state of society at a particular historical stage. This is a system of social relations that affects not only state power, but also other public institutions.
In a state-forming society, a certain idea is historically formed about the role, place and purpose of the state. Hence it can be said that in one state-forming society, a different opinion may emerge about the necessity and value of the state and state structures. All this depends on the activities of the state, its institutions, as well as on what values \u200b\u200bthe state relies on in the process of organizing the administration of its functions. Therefore, historically, opinions were expressed regarding the unnecessary state, the harmfulness of its activities, but quite a decent attitude to the activities of the state has developed and is taking shape in many countries, and therefore in these countries they think about improving state structures. Within the framework of statehood, mainly cultural people live. A cultured person is inconceivable without a state. Therefore, cultural, civilized people should always think about improving the state and its institutions, about bringing the activities of the state closer to their interests.
In the process of forming statehood in modern conditions, it is customary to rely on universal human values, to approach the characterization of the state as an objectively necessary, cultural and value phenomenon. And indeed, there are universal, so-called, eternal values, which should be the basis of statehood. These include, for example: “the source of sovereign power in society is the state-building people”; “The supreme function of the state is to protect the life, security and property of its citizens”; “What is not protected by law is permitted”; “The state should ensure free expression of thoughts and opinions”; “everyone shall be presumed innocent until found guilty by an independent court”; “everyone has the right to demand a substantive response to his complaint”, etc. This should also include the provision on that “a society where there is no guarantee of rights and the separation of powers has not been carried out does not have a Constitution.” Based on these values, the state can always bring its activities closer to the interests of the state-forming people and increase public interest in statehood.
Statehood today should be seen as a conscious process of realization by the state, as an organization of political power of a particular society, of its functions. Statehood is, as it were, ideas and views on the state realized in practical matters. Statehood generally consists of the practical activities of state structures and state institutions.
In connection with the foregoing, I would like to note that the state, although it is an organization of the political power of a certain society, in real life it consists of various structural units that are relatively autonomous from each other and perform certain tasks and functions. These relatively independent structural units, which together make up the whole concept of “state”, are commonly called state institutions.
State institutions, which are actually functioning state structures, must be distinguished from legal institutions, which are understood as a system of separate legal norms specializing in the regulation of a certain kind or type of public relations (for example, the institution of sale, contract, inheritance, etc.) .
· The following elements are included in the concept of "statehood":
1) the central link - the state, which determines the nature of all political relations in society;
2) the economic system of society, where the leading place belongs to property relations;
3) the social organization of society, including national, religious, other interpersonal relations;
4) the spiritual and moral (cultural) organization of society;
5) the legal system;
6) information system, since information is the main production resource of the company;
7) a person as a subject of social development, a carrier of the most important types of social relations and the main goal of the functioning of statehood.
The named components constitute a kind of subsystem that interact with each other and enable society to function as a whole.
2. Factors affecting the development of Russian statehood
The following factors influence the development of statehood in Russia:
a) the peasant question, i.e. the question of how best to combine the peasant with the land and secure the most profitable way of managing for the peasant and society;
b) the national question, which has always been important for the development of Russian statehood, since the population of Russia is multinational;
c) the geopolitical question, i.e. realization of the territorial interests of Russia and the influence of the country's geographical position on the state organization of society. The geopolitical position of Russia affects the ethnocultural strata of the population, their way of life, traditions, consciousness, etc. And this, in turn, directly affects the organization of public life in the country. The conquests that Russia waged in the past, joining new territories, also influenced the organization of political power: the state should always be ready to protect the peoples of the outskirts from possible revenge.
Geopolitical interests are present in almost all peoples, including in the modern period;
d) production and consumption of alcohol
Prohibition under V.I. Lenin; vodka monopoly under I.V. Stalin, introduced in 1924; attempts N.S. Khrushchev limit the production and consumption of alcohol and, conversely, increase its sales by three times under L.I. Brezhnev; attempts to solve the problem by cutting down vineyards under M.S. Gorbachev; the introduction again of the state monopoly on the production and sale of alcohol - all these were ways to solve the alcohol issue in Russia.
The problem of the influence of this factor on the development of statehood is controversial, although it has a general social significance;
d) modernization, i.e. change in quality of life. Currently, modernization is understood as pulling up Russian society in certain areas to the level of world standards, including the protection of human rights.
Scientists who study the problems of Russian statehood unanimously note its specificity in comparison with Western states, emphasize its special state-legal spirit. For example, in philosophical and sociological literature they name four main features inherent in Russian statehood:
1) Orthodoxy as a form of collective consciousness;
2) autocracy, i.e. strong state and centralization of state power;
3) community. In Russia, longer than in other countries, the community remained as a convenient form of life for peasants. And this everyday side of the life of the Russian peasantry, which made up the bulk of the country's population, left its mark on the state organization;
4) colonization, i.e. transfer of traditional forms of organization to new territories.
All scholars, emphasizing the Russian specifics, call the special mentality of the peoples of Russia, manifested in the uniqueness of the economic structure, political and legal life, spirituality and psychological characteristics of the perception of the world.
3. Features of Russian statehood
The question of Russian statehood is unusually complex, since the history of the formation of Russia itself is unusually complex, it combined an amazing variety of ethnic groups, customs, cultures and religions. At the same time, it should be noted that the vast majority of works devoted to the analysis of state problems were carried out in the framework of the so-called Eurocentric paradigm in which any state is correlated with the Western one as a reference model.
The main drawback of such works is that they all neglect the question of the uniqueness of the Western state, related to its genesis, real power and general sociocultural dominant. Often in numerous publications, the traditional point of view of Western researchers on the Russian state as undeveloped, lagging behind in its development and despotic is reproduced. This traditional western characteristic of the Russian state does not allow us to see the sources of its internal development, the factors of its conformity to people's moods, and also to understand the origins of the victories and achievements of our country.
It should be borne in mind that neither Western researchers, nor Western public opinion as a whole have ever identified and do not identify Russia and Europe. They see in Russia a special cultural world, a special civilization, different both from the West and from the East. Russian civilization, numbering more than 1000 years, was built on other grounds than the West. And one of the foundations of the originality of Russian political development was the understanding of the place, role and significance of the state in society, its attitude to it and its policies.
The concepts of “Russian society”, “Russian power”, and “Russian state” reflect Russia's own unique experience, the archetypes of which are reproduced throughout political history, up to the present.
Researchers have long noted the special role of the state in the history of Russia. For Russia as an original country, some problems of statehood are characteristic, which can be considered in five issues.
The first question of modern Russian statehood lies in the selection of guidelines. We all know the classical definitions of the state, and regardless of which classics of which direction of scientific thought they belong, in essence, they come down to a trinity: people, territory and power. The state is a people that independently and sovereignly manage themselves in their historical territory. But one must not forget the fundamental: there are no ideal once and for all constructed models of the state, its organs and institutions. None of the states of the world, judging themselves soundly, can declare that they embodied the model of an ideal state, the aspiration for which was still indicated by Plato in his “Republic”.
At each stage of the thousand-year development of Russian statehood, we, Russians, Russians, as a state-formed people, ask a significant question: what is the purpose of our state. The beginning of the new millennium was no exception. We ask ourselves the question: what does the world and domestic experience of state development give, what does Russia need to rethink today to ensure the security and well-being of the Russian people? Once again we are forced to admit that Russia is characterized by a number of “uniqueness”. Moreover, this is not lyrical thoughts about the "mysterious soul" and the "special way", and not an object of national pride of the Great Russians, but a recognition of the objective difficulties of managing such a country. In Russia, paternalistic relations have always existed (and exist now) between citizens and the authorities, when the state appears as the “father”, the owner, and the citizen as the ward, the petitioner. From the totality of precisely these relations, the political tradition of personifying power, the linking of all appointments and transformations with the name of the leader, leader, grows.
Against this background, statements about the state, which exists solely and exclusively to provide services to the population, that we can afford a weak state and a weak state apparatus, and most importantly, that business and civil society flourished, look somehow unconvincing. I’m unlikely to say better than the President of Russia in the Address to the Federal Assembly for 2003. “All our historical experience testifies: a country like Russia can live and develop within its existing borders only if it is a strong power. In all periods of weakening of the country - political or economic - Russia always and inevitably faced the threat of collapse. ”
The second question of modern Russian statehood. Can a strong Russia exist without a strong central government? No.
From the very beginning, our country emerged as a country where the interests of the state were more important than the dominant national groups, classes, estates, dynastic interests, etc. The role of the state in relation to all spheres of public life was extremely large in pre-revolutionary Russia. It grew even more during the Soviet period in the history of Russia, when the party-state apparatus tried to bring almost all aspects of public and private life under its control. In the interaction of society and the state, the state has always played the main role. All the most significant transformations and perestroika were initiated by him, and society is only mobilized for the implementation of the next public project. Despite the fact that the state power itself experienced "weaknesses", was experiencing crises, relations between the state and society never significantly changed.
Therefore, today we have no alternative to the development of a strong presidential power. Therefore, we can very well talk about the triad: a strong economy - a strong presidential power - a strong power. Moreover, the characteristic “strong power” does not conflict with the tasks of establishing a democratic system and the principles of the rule of law, while a “strong power” inevitably assumes the existence of a powerful military machine, without which Russia simply cannot find a place on the political map of the world. The state in Russia has always been thought of as person-centric, when rulers absorb the political whole, embodying its basic parameters.
The third question of modern Russian statehood, can Russia survive as a strong united state, remaining multiconfessional, multinational? Our main ally in this matter is the history of Russia. I dare to assert that despite all the difficulties of expanding the territorial limits of the Russian state, Russia has never known interethnic and religious wars. Tolerance was characteristic of the peoples of Russia not so much because of spiritual kindness, but as a subconscious sensation that otherwise leads to war and the death of the state.
A strong modern Russian state is predetermined to be a federal state. There are limits to both decentralization and centralization of Russia. But it is precisely the strong central state power that will be able to guarantee every citizen of the country, in whatever of its many regions he is, the full protection and observance of his rights and freedoms. The Russian state and Russian society, asserting the federal structure of the country, should consider the federal structure not as an end in itself, but as a means of more effective government.
The fourth issue of modern Russian statehood. This is a local government issue. All measures to divide powers between levels of government, to improve legislation, especially in the field of social policy, to empower local authorities with additional powers were carried out with the same error: a Russian citizen was suspended from his decisions, he was not very consulted, he was interests are often simply not taken into account. A new quality of the Russian state cannot be achieved without a new quality of local authorities. It is at this level that a qualitative change in priorities should occur. The purpose of the regional and local authorities is not in management, not in administration, but in the provision of services to citizens and businesses. And this is a question not only of the quality of institutions, but of the quality of life of people.
Here we come to the fifth issue of modern Russian statehood. Services are provided to citizens by public servants, that is, the same citizens, but with the authority to resolve a particular issue. And this is no longer a question of the quality of institutions, but a question of the quality of the management process itself.
Indeed, it is possible in a historically short time to change the structure of state power and the system of government. It is much more difficult to change the managerial mentality, to confirm in the mind of the official the perception of the citizen who addressed him not as a bothering burden (this is, at best, at worst, as an additional source of monetary allowance), but as a consumer of the services that he is obliged to provide to this citizen. Therefore, the problem of getting rid of corruption is one of the important problems, the solution of which will create a strong Russian state.
These problems are extremely relevant for modern Russia, since the weakening of state structures, the active lobbying by oligarchic structures of their narrow group interests, which often go against the national ones, are quite clearly expressed.
4. Russian statehood in modern times
The study of Russian statehood is important for determining the attitude of Russian society towards Western models and values. Failure to take into account the identity of the peoples of Russia can lead to the fact that many models that have justified themselves in the West can be rejected in Russian society.
The main sign of modern statehood in Russia is its transitional character, transitional to a new social system.
What is the new social system? This question does not have a clear answer. At the same time, it is obvious that Russia has abandoned the socialist model of organizing the life of society, the socialist structure of state power, the socialist mode of production. In Russia, a market economy is emerging, based on a variety of forms of ownership, free enterprise. At the same time, Russian society cannot build the capitalism that existed during the development of Marxist theory, since that capitalism practically does not exist. Modern Western society, on the model of which it is supposed to transform our society, is called post-industrial. Its distinguishing features are:
1) the balance of interests of various groups, strata, individual individuals;
2) the balance between private initiative and the general laws of market relations;
3) a combination of freedom and justice - the eternal ideals of mankind;
4) the formation of the rule of law.
On the ways to achieve these goals lies a certain transition period. Among the specific features of the transition period in which modern Russian society is located, it is worth mentioning the presence of elements of a totalitarian past and at the same time a number of democratic institutions, for example, a multi-party system, openness, the division of a single state power into three branches, and the institution of a referendum. As for the totalitarian elements, we can state the preservation in some areas of the old administrative practice, the desire to return some of the old order. The combination of elements of the new and the old leaves its mark on the organization of state power, on the state-legal regime, the relationship between the center and places.
Describing the form of government in modern Russia, we can assume that for the entire transition period a mixed form of government will remain with a combination of elements of the presidential and parliamentary republics, with a significant advantage in favor of the presidential one. The transitional state is always unstable, therefore deviations towards both one and the other republic are possible. In Russia, the skills of democratic governance, including self-organization and self-government, are not fully developed. But practice shows that under a presidential republic such skills cannot be developed. Therefore, some scientists and politicians believe that Russia should develop in the direction of a parliamentary republic. But so far this is only a forecast.
The state structure of modern Russia is also characterized by a transitional state. The current constitutional consolidation of the federal structure of Russia is a political compromise of various interests and approaches to the state system of the country. The continuation of this compromise was the contractual process - the conclusion of contracts between the Russian Federation and its individual subjects. There is a fair opinion that the conclusion of treaties devalues \u200b\u200bthe role of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in society, since the constitutional regulation of federal relations is supplanted by the treaty, inequality of the legal status of the subjects of the Federation is established, which leads to conflicts within it.
The state of transition and inconsistency is inherent in the state and legal regime prevailing in modern Russia. There is an interweaving of various regulators of public relations: from incontrovertible state regulations to resorting to traditions, customs, business practices; from elements of strict state control to the establishment of publicity, pluralism of opinions and beliefs, self-governance principles, self-organization of the population, etc.
The transitional stage was clearly indicated in the functioning of Russian statehood. This is expressed, in particular, in the fact that the Russian state is gradually beginning to assimilate a new role for it as a "servant of society", and in the content of its functions the proportion of general social, general democratic, humanistic principles is increasing.
In the transition period, the relationship between the state and the institution of ownership is changing. State ownership is increasingly the material basis of state power. However, state property, being in the management and actual possession of the state apparatus, should not be used for the needs of this apparatus, but primarily for social purposes: to smooth out the negative consequences of entering market relations, including the effects of unemployment, the sharp opposite between poverty and wealth , to provide assistance to citizens with reduced ability to work, other socially unprotected layers of society, as well as to support the education system, healthcare, arts , Development of the basic sciences.
By consolidating at the constitutional level equal legal status and equal protection of all forms of ownership, the Russian state does not consider private property law as absolute. Owning private property implies certain social obligations to society. This means that private property can be limited, and the public interest, the common good, and the public good serve as the basis for such a restriction. Moreover, under the public interest refers to the interests of civil society.
Thus, during the transition of Russia to a new social system, the role of the state in establishing the legal regime of various forms of ownership, in resolving conflicts between owners, is modified, the channels of state control over the implementation of the powers of the owner expand.
Given the specifics of Russian society for the entire transition period to the market, the leading role of the state will remain. This trend is due to the following groups of circumstances:
1) only the state as the official representative of the company is able to develop and implement a specific economic policy throughout the country;
2) through legislation, the state can regulate property relations, establish the legal basis for the functioning of the market;
3) the state has a special apparatus for protecting and protecting the rights and freedoms of the individual;
4) accumulates through the state budget means of ensuring the economic and other security of society.
To accomplish these tasks, a strong state is needed, but at the same time, a society must be strong in order to make the complex mechanism of state power act within the framework of the Constitution and control the management system.
It was indicated above that the specificity of national relations has a great influence on the formation of Russian statehood, since Russia is a multi-ethnic state. Hence the need for constant attention of state structures to national problems.
The processes of democratization and renewal in our country have contributed to the growth of national self-awareness of all the peoples living in it. This, in turn, led to national confrontation of peoples in some regions, to interethnic conflicts.
Several levels of the conflict situation in modern Russia can be distinguished: the first level is relations between the federal center and the republics, the desire of the latter for equality not with other subjects, but with the Russian Federation; the second - the movement of entities built on a territorial basis for possessing the status of state entities (republics); the third is personal and household, in the framework of which there is a conflict between the indigenous and non-indigenous population; fourth, the problems of returning the peoples repressed to Stalinist rule to their historical homeland.
Russian interethnic relations are a complex, multi-level system of various factors. The conflict situation is not the only indicator of the unfavorable development of national relations. But it testifies that the existing state-legal structures are not able to fully resolve the situation created by civilized methods.
It would be a mistake to consider the surge in national problems in our country as the costs of the transition period, i.e. as a temporary phenomenon. The experience of foreign countries and world experience as a whole show that the national aspect is a constant companion of the development of statehood in a multinational society. The aggravation of interethnic relations is observed in many multiethnic states (Belgium, India, etc.), they are searching for new methods and ways to mitigate interethnic conflicts. Not a single multinational state is guaranteed against interethnic conflicts, despite developed democratic institutions and economic prosperity.
Ethnicity factor, i.e. the genetic continuity of the peoples inhabiting the country, the uniqueness of their lifestyle, language, national culture, historically established national psychology, which reflects the individual characteristics of the people. Since ethnicity is a constant factor in the life of a multinational society, it is important to learn how to live in these conditions and treat national relations as a kind of management object. This requires, in turn:
1) the state authorities are constantly taking into account the changing situation in the development of national relations;
2) the search for means and methods that proactively imbalance interests;
3) increased attention to the national needs of individual peoples (the ability to use the national language, national symbols, customs, culture, etc.);
4) the development of ideas and goals uniting peoples, ensuring the preservation of the integrity of society. The national idea should lead to social harmony, to unite the peoples in order to achieve common goals. A nationwide idea is a certain type of human solidarity. For modern Russia, such an idea is a means of combining the interests of the state with the interests of various segments of the population and each person.
Recently, much attention has been paid to state-confessional relations, since through them the state of modern Russian statehood is revealed. It is important to note that Russian society perceives religion, various confessional associations of citizens as part of the culture of the people, as carriers of universal human values, historical national traditions and a factor in the spiritual and moral revival of society. And although the regime of a secular state is enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the state has not actually been isolated from faiths, on the contrary, they cooperate in many areas of life. It occurs in the following forms:
a) in solving social issues (mission of mercy);
b) in resolving armed conflicts (peacekeeping mission);
c) in the unification of society to solve spiritual and moral problems;
d) in the formation of a certain worldview, including the attitude to state power, politics, world events;
e) in strengthening ties with co-religionists and followers of the creed abroad.
The cooperation of the state and religious associations, by its nature and essence, bears the features of a special kind of partnership, i.e. they act as equal partners in relations affecting the interests of the whole society.
The fundamental principle of the legal status of denominations in modern Russia is the equality of all denominations among themselves and with the state.
At the same time, state control over the organization and functioning of various religious associations is currently being strengthened. It is aimed at suppressing the appearance on the territory of Russia of false religious groups, total sects, encroaching on the health, psyche and life of people.
The legislation establishes the following forms of state control in relation to confessional associations:
1) preliminary control of the registering authorities over the declared goals and activities of religious organizations, including the conduct of a religious examination of a particular creed;
2) subsequent monitoring of compliance with the law, the statutory goals and objectives of the activities of religious organizations;
3) specialized financial control over the work of enterprises and organizations created by confessional communities, in particular the payment of taxes if such enterprises and organizations make a profit;
4) control over the exercise of ownership of religious property in accordance with its purpose;
5) licensing the activities of educational institutions of religious education.
Modern conditions for the development of Russian statehood dictate the need to build state-confessional relations on fundamentally new foundations. It is about achieving a kind of symphony of relations between the state and religious communities.
The transitional state of Russian statehood is characterized by a revision of a number of positions in the relationship between the individual and the state. There is a gradual rejection of the priority of the interests of the state and the principle of inalienability of natural human rights, their respect, legal protection of the individual from the arbitrariness of state bodies and officials is introduced.
However, one can observe another extreme, when the unlimited priority of the interests of the individual is proclaimed in comparison with the interests of society. This reduces the importance of the responsibilities of the individual to other people and society as a whole. Therefore, there are limits to the realization of individual rights and freedoms, they are determined by general guidelines, constitutional and other legislation, direct prohibitions of specific actions and actions, a system of duties, as well as values \u200b\u200baccepted in society. Hence, the main conditions for restricting human rights and freedoms are:
1) the establishment of restrictions only by law and only to observe and respect the rights and freedoms of others, as well as public interests and moral requirements;
2) the proportionality of restrictions to the essential content of human rights and freedoms, i.e. restrictions should not change the content of these rights and freedoms;
3) legal restrictions on the basis of serious reasons. At the same time, control should be provided for the state power itself so that it cannot abuse the law-restricting means.
The policy of the Russian state in the field of human rights should be based on clear principles and guidelines, which include:
a) freedom of choice of lifestyle;
b) a combination of personal autonomy and self-governing collectivist principles in relations with society and the state;
c) social justice;
d) social responsibility;
e) the absence of discrimination on any grounds;
f) non-violence in the settlement of social conflicts.
5. Prospects for the development of statehood in Russia
Today, Russia is facing a choice of the path of development of its statehood. On the one hand, the country is rapidly overcoming the negative consequences of the 90s. On the other hand, overcoming internal challenges and obstacles, it is actively confronted with external ones, the most severe and difficult of which is the forced globalization of the world. In order to skillfully resist it, a clear and consistent doctrine of development is needed. In other words, the question should be answered who we are, where we are going and what our future goals are. Among these issues, the theme of statehood in its various expositions and ideas will be central and foundation-forming.
Accordingly, the idea of \u200b\u200ba strong state, as never before, is relevant today. In this case, an awareness of the dependence of the rights and freedoms of citizens on concrete historical conditions, the degree of development of legal awareness and ethics, as well as the priorities of the interests of the whole (state, society) over the interests of the part (individual, social stratum, political party) should occur.
The order established in modern Russia thanks to the policies of V. Putin is, by and large, an achievement, since social solidarity in society was lost in the nineties and, for several reasons, the process of social differentiation, but of progressive social decay, began. Under these conditions, the main instrumental socio-political idea of \u200b\u200bthe state is the idea of \u200b\u200bconsolidation of society.
In other words, there should be a realization that in the modern world it can really exist only as a highly centralized national state, as a state characterized by a high degree of institutionalization, as a state headed by a nationally and strategically oriented power elite. The restoration of a strong state will take place in unfavorable international conditions, which may be aggravated by unfavorable factors of internal order.
The challenges of globalization, however, do not mean the inevitable decline of national statehood. The forms of governance have changed, and therefore, the state’s strategy, therefore, the new role of the state in a globalizing economy should not be assessed as decreasing or even disappearing — it just changes. The ability of the state to make a positive contribution to economic development is determined not only by its strength, but by the ability to create and maintain “network structures”, within which it, together with private group interests, develops and implements an effective, coordinated and focused economic management system inside and outside state borders .
Conclusion
So, an analysis of modern Russian statehood allows us to note that its development is in the general channel of the laws inherent in the world community and world civilization. At the same time, this development takes place according to its own laws specific to Russia. This is due to the historical, national, spiritual and cultural identity, as well as the geopolitical position of the country.
We can say that the evolution of Russian statehood will depend on the choice of guidelines and the understanding that there can be no standards of statehood. It will largely depend on the development of a strong central authority capable of protecting the interests of citizens in a multiconfessional country, on the possibility of including a citizen in the system of local self-government, changing the bureaucratic mentality and modernizing constitutional norms with a focus on national interests.
Therefore, it is necessary to achieve a value agreement in society on the basis of moral, social, political and other values \u200b\u200bthat are shared by the bulk of the population. This should not be about a new version of the implementation of the ideas of the “social contract”, but about the state’s concern for the practical implementation of the constitutional rights of citizens to life, work, health, personal safety, welfare, education, freedom, property, justice and personal dignity of everyone .
List of references
1. Theory of state and law / Alekseev S.S. / Textbook. M .: - 2005.
2. The formation of Russian statehood: post-crisis trends // Strategies of Russia in the historical and world spaces / N. Baranov. / M .: Scientific expert, 2009.
3. What is happening with the Russian public administration system / T. Guskova / Vlast magazine No. 6, 2008.
4. Russian statehood in the context of historical traditions / Diners V / Vlast magazine № 2, 2008.
5. The genesis of views on the formation of the state territory and the state border of the Russian state / Palamar N / journal "Power" № 4, 2008.
6. Personality, society, state in the context of the fight against corruption / Tereshchenko I. / Vlast magazine No. 3, 2009.
7. On the problems of Russian statehood.
Access code: http://www.glebfetisov.ru/lib/speeches/index.php - zagl. from the screen
8. Russian statehood / Yakovlev A.M. / journal "Social Sciences and the Present" No. 5, 2002.
Posted on Allbest.ru
Similar documents
Democratic foundations and the stages of their formation in the history of Russian statehood. Democratic transit in Russia 80-90 years. XX century and its features. Analysis of the developing, participatory and pluralistic forms of democracy in modern Russia.
thesis, added 01/10/2014
The historical nature of totalitarian societies. The organizational principle of building democratic statehood. Principles of the rule of law. Signs of a social state. Definition and functions of a political party. Party, electoral system.
lecture added on 11/15/2008
Analysis of the burden of the Russian government by the ongoing internal conflicts. The genesis of Russian statehood as the root cause of fundamental conflicts within the government. Description and solution of the problems of the current Russian government.
abstract, added 07/24/2011
National security as a system of views, ideas, ideas about the security of the individual, society and the state. Global problems of the present, directions and prospects for their resolution in the future. Ensuring the national security of Belarus.
abstract, added 09/22/2013
Society as a system of social social relations. Type of society: the method (type) of production and the institutions of power and the forms of social consciousness resulting from it. The definition of power, its social and technical aspects. Functions and form of state.
abstract, added 05/19/2010
The formation of social group interests as the basis for the emergence of public authority. The main trends in the evolution of social structure in the transition from industrial to post-industrial society. Lobbyism and its goals in the political life of Russia.
abstract, added February 13, 2010
Political system: structure and specifics of functioning. Institutional elements in the functioning of the political system of society and the place of the state in it. Description of the political system of the Russian Federation, problems and development prospects.
term paper, added 12/12/2010
The problems of Russia through the eyes of the famous Russian philosopher and politician Ilyin, a supporter of unresolved monarchists and an opponent of communism and Bolshevism. Problems of the formation of Russian statehood: sovereignty, power, elections and private property.
abstract, added December 20, 2010
The nature of political power. Power as a social phenomenon. The state as an instrument of power. The structure of political power. Features of the functioning of power in the context of the reform of Russia. Power institutions of modern Russia. Problems.
term paper, added 05/17/2005
The vertical organization system of public authority; analysis of federal laws and laws of constituent entities of the Russian Federation; problems of the territorial organization of the local government system. The formation of civil society in Russia: the main functions and forms of activity.
In domestic and foreign historiography, the main factors that determine the uniqueness of Russia's development, such as the climatic, geopolitical, religious (and a number of others) that determined the features of Russian history, are usually distinguished (Fig. 1).
Figure 1 - Factors of the Russian historical process
Various factors play a huge role in the historical development of peoples.
The interaction of a person with the environment in the process of production activity largely affects the nature and mentality. The influence of the geographical environment is diverse. Different geographical areas provide different opportunities for this. Some of them are so well suited for human life that they do not create the prerequisites for changing the environment, and hence the growth of needs and, ultimately, development. Others are so unfavorable that they impede all transformations. The most rapidly developing territories are those located at the crossroads of geographical paths connecting different peoples, near the centers of civilizations. Neighborhood with more developed countries contributes to progress. This causes a steady pursuit of improvement.
The identity of Russia is largely determined by its geographical position between Europe and Asia - the world of modernization and the world of tradition. This factor leaves its mark on the historical development of Russia. In its development, it approaches either Europe, a progressive civilization, or Asia, eastern civilization. Therefore, Russian civilization is often called a drifting society. In Russia itself, starting from the XVIII century. society is divided into two civilizations - European and soil. And the dispute between Westerners and Slavophiles has not yet been completed.
Chief among natural factors was the continental nature of the location of the territory of Russia. The sea until the XVIII century. did not play a significant role in Russian history. Since Russia was far from the main trade routes, trade was poorly developed in the country. She lagged behind European countries in the formation of the market, the development of capitalism.
The constant colonization of land contributed to the establishment of the extensive nature of economic development. The uniformity of natural factors characteristic of the territories developed by the Eastern Slavs led to the uniformity of economic activity in all settlement zones. In Europe, the abundance of mountains favored the specialization of the economy, promoted the development of commodity exchange between the population of mountains and valleys. In Russia, the uniformity of the landscape created weak prerequisites for the specialization of the economy and domestic trade. The peoples of Europe developed on the basis of the Roman and borrowed a lot from ancient culture.
On the way of resettlement of the Slavs there were no peoples with an ancient high culture. Only contacts with Byzantium influenced the culture of Russia. However, the early translation of liturgical books into Slavic by the monks Cyril and Methodius in the 9th century. made optional the study of the Greek language and, therefore, familiarization with the ancient culture.
Russia was constantly in contact with the Steppe, until the XVIII century. experienced the threat of devastating invasions of the steppes. This slowed down its internal development, historical progress.
The features of the natural environment for the resettlement of Russians largely determined their character and prevailing values. The population density of Europe, limited resources contributed to the intensification of the economy, the desire for innovation. In Russia, on the contrary, open spaces, wealth of resources have created a habit of extensive, consumer attitude to natural resources. It is well known that in the entire territory of the territory that made up the historical core of the Russian state, there were infertile soils. This predetermined a stably low productivity. Another reason for the low productivity was the lack of time for thorough cultivation of the land due to the very short cycle of agricultural work - 125-130 working days. There was not enough time for the preparation of feed for livestock. Together with a very long period of livestock herding, this led to low livestock productivity and, as a result, to an acute shortage of fertilizers.
The climatic factor has a great influence on historical development. In Europe, temperature fluctuations are up to 10-20 degrees per year, in Russia they range from 35 to 40. A warmer climate allowed Europeans to engage in agriculture and learn to systematic work for most of the year. There was no need to rush either with sowing or with cleaning. In Russia, due to the short spring turning into a hot summer, the crop depends on the sowing rate - “feeds the day a day”. Summer is a period of extreme stress. And then, for 5-6 months, a long period of leisurely passive work. Being in severe time pressure, the Russian farmer had to really invest in land such a volume of labor that would take 40 days in more favorable conditions in 21-25 working days. In practice, this meant for the peasant the inevitability of work without sleep and rest, work night and day, using all the reserves of the family (labor of children, the elderly and women in men's work).
Thus, the peasant economy of the indigenous territory of Russia had limited opportunities for the production of commodity agricultural products. These restrictions are due to adverse climatic conditions.
The unusually low productivity, the limited size of the peasant plow, and the poor livestock base led to the fact that Russian society was characterized by a relatively low volume of total surplus product. This was of great importance for the formation of a certain type of statehood. The ruling class was forced to create tough levers of the state mechanism aimed at removing the share of the total surplus product that went to the development needs of the state, the ruling class, society as a whole. It is from here that the centuries-old tradition of the despotic power of the Russian autocrat comes from, from here come the origins of serfdom, the severity of which had no analogy in the world. Serf labor also significantly underestimated the desire for high quality labor. The population of the North of Russia, who did not know serfdom, was always much more active. A similar attitude to work has developed another value - patience. Severe natural working conditions required collective work, hence collectivism, as the main feature of the Russian mentality. A serf in Europe fled to the city, which was an island of democracy and law, freedom from the feudal lords. There was nowhere else to run, as there were no empty seats. In Russia, they fled not to the city where the feudal lords were, but to the Cossacks, to undeveloped lands. As a result, urban, bourgeois values \u200b\u200bdeveloped in Europe, and in Russia, community, collectivist values. The European solved his problems by developing bourgeois prudence and self-interest, and the Russian by affirming egalitarian collectivist ideals. The flight of the population to the outskirts hindered the development of cities.
High yields on newly developed lands, the absence of hunger, the free seizure of land, the absence of regular taxation created the pre-state ideal of free life, which entered the popular culture. Colonization contributed to the discrete course of Russian history. Strengthening the centralization of power was several times replaced by its weakening. The adoption of Christianity in the Byzantine version also had a significant impact on the historical development of our country. The Catholic Church, by virtue of its relative independence from secular sovereigns, was a greater opposition force than the Orthodox Church. And more successfully defended the interests of the population before the secular authorities. At the same time, Orthodoxy gave greater freedom to inner life. The Orthodox Church did not know the orders. It is characterized by internal unity - collegiality, understood as involvement in the general absolute.
As a result of all of the above factors, the main values \u200b\u200bin the social organization of Russian society are the community, not private property. The state is not considered as a superstructure, but a backbone. Statehood has a sacred character. The state, society, and personality are not divided, not autonomous, but interpenetrable, integral, conciliar.
Conclusion: the development of Russian civilization was affected by all of the above factors together, in their entirety.
Why is the history of Russia so different from other countries?
Today, there are many works devoted to Russia as a special civilization, the “special way of development” of our country is often mentioned, but the whole complex of factors that influenced the formation of Russia as a different civilization from the West and East is rarely considered.
If earlier the peculiarities of Russia's development were explained by the existing ideology (although they contradicted some basic provisions of Marxism), now there is no explanation at all. And then in our history a lot of things are difficult to explain: why, for example, it was precisely here that the socialist revolution took place (in other countries, similar revolutions took place with our support), why the history of our country is so different from the world development path. In Russian history, much will remain incomprehensible if you do not take into account the totality of natural, geographical, geopolitical, and a number of other factors that have affected our history, culture, and economy. These factors were ignored in judgments in the USSR, explaining the unique path of development of the state by ideological reasons.
The question is what determines the development of the state? What factors affect it?
All people are the same, one head, two arms, two legs, states today with similar political elites, similar socio-economic systems. Why are some of them world leaders, while others are constantly lagging behind in development?What factors influence the development of the state, its welfare?
Why is Russia different from other countries? Why, working hard like the damned, we won’t create a normal life? Perhaps, apart from Russia, there is no other country in the world preoccupied with such issues. Only here we have opinions about our history, people and authorities that are not just different, but often opposite. Only we have debates: are we East or West? We are the North.
The Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky wrote in the “Course of Russian History” that before studying the history of a country, it is necessary to find out where it is located, what natural conditions are, and what climate is in this territory. Before talking about the “special development path” of Russia, it is necessary to answer the question of what were the natural-geographical, historical, socio-economic conditions and how they influenced the development of the country.
The most populated areas of the planet, where 70% of the Earth's inhabitants live, occupy only 7% of the land. But these are the most blessed places! And our Russia, where only 2.5% of the world's population lives, is spread over 12% of the land! But our entire vast country is located around the Pole of cold in the Northern Hemisphere.
What can the climate influence economically?
Labor productivity in agriculture, productivity in comparison with the West (2-3 to 1 in our country, 6-8 in the West). But it was agricultural then that pointed to the development of the country. What could we accumulate with such productivity? The basis of welfare at the initial stage of development of the country was determined by income from agriculture. In Russia, due to the harsh climate, there were very low yields. And any products manufactured in Russia because of this factor were more expensive than in Europe, with which we had to compete in order to maintain independence.
We live in the coldest country in the world, where no one else could survive. Of the two hundred countries of the world, in terms of the severity of the climate, only Mongolia can be compared with us. In Western Europe, cooling to -10-15 degrees causes a complete disorganization of economic life (transport does not go, a complete collapse of the economy, frost and snowfall in Europe). We live in such conditions all the time.
Our people are no worse and no better than any other. Yes, here we were born where it is very difficult to live, and in some places, it’s impossible at all. For half of our territory (north of the line Petersburg - Vyatka - Khanty-Mansiysk - Magadan), we can’t talk about any agriculture other than reindeer husbandry and small gardens. In our middle zone, agricultural work runs from May to October, and, for example, in France - virtually all year round. The Russian harvest was on non-chernozem soil Sam-2 or Sam-3, and in Western Europe as early as the 18th century, Sam-12.
Therefore, the French peasant could afford to be an individual farmer, and lived well, and the Russians have been grouped into communities for centuries, because only mutual assistance in work allowed us to somehow get out, and the old people only survived with the help of “common people”. This is the most important factor for the formation of the culture and character of a nation. It was impossible to live alone in Russia precisely because of the harsh climatic conditions. One family was physically unable to survive (to build a house, not a tent in the summer, to unroot a field in a short summer, to plow a field, to harvest, etc.). This is not Europe with its warm climate (Gulf Stream).
The harsh climate also influenced the formation of a special type of mentality of the population. The community that has adapted to existence in our country is called Russian (it is not by chance that it answers the question - which one?). These are those who have adapted to life in the existing conditions of Russia. It was impossible to live alone in such conditions. Hence, a much stronger community than in the West, collectivism instead of individualism, cooperation and mutual assistance instead of competition and rivalry. All this formed a special type of mentality of the Russian people, the priority of community values, collectivism, the role of the state in ensuring the survival of the population in harsh conditions.
First: Climatic factor (low temperatures affecting yield and cost of production), but also later, with the development of industry it did not become easier. All manufactured products up to 20-30% is the energy spent on its production. Our energy costs are not comparable with the West. Lots of other consequences of the cold climate: high construction costs (more expensive than in any other country) - the depth of the foundation should be below the freezing border (in Iceland, Malaysia, China, it is enough to asphalt the site and install a canopy, walls only from the wind, two-story buildings in Germany, no foundation at all). Here, even on the southwestern border, the depth of freezing is 110 cm, closer to the Volga region it’s already 170, you can not mention the Urals and Siberia. The cost of the foundation, even for an ordinary country house, is 25% of the total cost of its construction. In the West, these costs are not.
Communications in the land, and not as in Europe above.The infrastructure in Russia is exorbitant, in the West there is no thermal power station system, steam heating (except Denmark), due to the fact that such systems were not built at one time (the land is private, therefore, the laying of communications is very expensive).
Due to climate high cost of resources(mining infrastructure, still the remnants of the Soviet, state, private builder is building: expensive, for example, Kovykta). We have oil 25-30 dollars for the production of a barrel and 3-4 from them, you can not talk about other resources at all. In the north, even gold mining is not profitable. Stocks are constantly decreasing. On the Moon, for example, there are also many resources, but we do not extract them. Our resources are like the moon. It is much more profitable to extract oil in the Persian Gulf, and not in Tyumen, diamonds in Angola, and not in Yakutia, bauxites in Tunisia, and not in Karelia, etc.
The harsh climate and vast territory contributed to the fact that our production costs are higher than in other countries. For the functioning of the economy in such adverse conditions, state regulation of the conditions for the application and movement of capital was required. With open borders and uniform world prices, capital sought to go where production costs are lower. To save from the ruin of the domestic uncompetitive economy due to the climate and distances, protectionism was needed, protection of the domestic market from the world. It is no coincidence that the most serious “breakthroughs” in the history of our country, the periods of its accelerated development are associated with the “closure” of Russia from the world market. This tendency is most clearly manifested during the reign of Peter the Great and the years of Stalin's reign, when the country closed its borders from the import of cheap goods produced in Russia, but with a higher cost, by introducing huge import duties under Peter or with the help of the state monopoly foreign trade during the years of Soviet power.
It turns out that the production of any product in our territory is associated with high costs, higher than in any other country in the world (harsh climate, distances, low agricultural productivity, freezing). Production in Russia, even simple living, is too expensive, but where to get resources for development, if everything is more expensive?
The second factor: the geographical location of Russia.Due to the high cost of extracting resources, their constant shortage and constant expansion of the territory in pursuit of resources. The increase in the cost of border protection, the army. Geographical location (expensive transport, long distances, low population density). At our enormous distances, the cost of transporting the goods may turn out to be more expensive than the goods themselves, goods are transported by one of the most expensive modes of transport - piping, auto, rail, air. The cheapest sea and river transport in the West, all developed countries have access to the sea (we have only seasonal river transport in the summer). An example of the low cost of maritime transport is tolling at aluminum smelters, we bring bauxite from Tunisia, and not from the Kola Peninsula.
And on what are fixed assets made? Remember the Star Wars. Even in science fiction, Americans show the main cause of the conflict - trade, trade routes. It is trade that brings the greatest profit. But here Russia is limited in possibilities: one port in the Baltic, on the Black Sea, the Bosphorus and Dardanelles under the control of Turkey. Yes, and what could we trade? Right raw material. But its production in Russia is more expensive than elsewhere. Bauxites are easier to mine in Tunisia, oil in the Persian Gulf, diamonds in Angola, etc.
Another significant factor was that with an abundance of resources in Russia there has always been a shortage of them. Mining was expensive.In pursuit of resources, Russia developed new lands, therefore the economy developed along an extensive path. If now the main export product is energy, then before this function was performed by furs (soft currency). In Europe, with its overpopulation, in the pursuit of profit, they quickly “knocked out” the fur-bearing animal. And beyond the eastern borders of Russia lay huge tracts of undeveloped land, where it was possible to produce furs, which was one of the main goods of Russian export. But it was difficult to export it and sell it, access to the sea was broken only by Peter the Great in the beginning of the 18th century (otherwise how to sell at a normal price?). It is these circumstances, as well as the need for direct access to trade routes, that influenced the formation of the vast territory of our country. But we populated spaces where no one lived, only rare settlements of hunters. It was then that resources were discovered. Then the territory was not needed by anyone.
The size of the territory (border protection, army). The environment, the extent of the borders. Lack of access to trade routes directly.
The third factor. Geopolitical position (the location between Europe and Asia caused the inevitability of constant military attacks from the East and the need to form a state according to the military type, the lack of access to trade routes directly).
Russia appeared between Europe and Asia, on the territory through which waves of "migration of peoples" rolled, one of which led to the collapse of the great Roman Empire, its conquest by the Huns. Therefore, Russia was forced to form in the first place, as a military state. During the next wave of "resettlement of peoples" (the struggle against the Mongols) in the XIII-XV centuries. to preserve Russia, enslavement of the population, unconditional submission to its authorities for liberation from foreigners was required. And the state became the main political agent. In such conditions, strict unity of command and discipline are in demand, and the possibilities for the formation of democracy are limited. All resources were directed to the survival of the country, the maintenance of the army. Unfavorable environmental conditions led to the scarcity of surplus product, but a considerable part of these incomes were also often forced to spend on defense by defense. A special type of power was emerging, to which the principles of democracy were alien. These factors influenced the formation of a special type of governance and political culture of the population.
“It is difficult to get rich on the territory, one half of which is in the permafrost zone, the other in the zone of external invasions from the outside” (Solonevich).
The fourth factor. State, not private economy.
Lack of capital led to the fact that in Russia, the majority of the population was poor, so there was a narrow domestic market(there is no one on a mass scale to buy manufactured goods. Peasants were mostly self-sufficient, the townspeople did not have much, and the population did not have too much money (we didn’t have huge incomes from the colonies that were in the West. It was the colonies that ensured the industrialization of the West).
In order to develop and receive sufficient income, capital was forced to focus on government orders. This is primarily the army (weapons, supplies, etc.). The bourgeoisie, artificially and accelerated by the authorities, could not defend their rights before it, understanding that its well-being depends on its relationship with the state (who will bite the hand that feeds you?). Therefore, in Russia in the full sense of the word, the bourgeoisie has not been formed, all of it was largely dependent on the government (compare with today). Which entrepreneurs are the most successful? Those associated with power. And civil society in the West began precisely with the bourgeoisie, which defended its interests before the state. Subsequently, an ever wider section of the population was involved in this movement until almost all citizens were reached. In Russia, this was impossible.
Significantly influenced the development of Russia and the fact that before the beginning of the twentieth century we did not have a full-fledged private property. In the West, the appearance of wealth was associated with land. Revenues from the sale of agricultural products served as a source of accumulation. In Russia, land was not capital. Low productivity due to the cold climate made the land unprofitable for investment. And the presence of a huge array of undeveloped land made it possible to develop virgin lands, use them until depletion, and then develop new territories. An extensive, not intensive, development took place. There was no need for private ownership of land. Whereas in the West the emergence of serfdom was associated with profit from land ownership and the accumulation of capital, in Russia, first of all, with the maintenance of people serving the state. In the West, any feudal lord could exist separately from the state. Owning property, land and people, he was largely independent of the actions of the authorities. In Russia, right up to the adoption by Peter III in 1762 of the Manifesto “On the Liberty of the Nobility”, every nobleman was obliged to serve the state, regardless of how rich he was. Their well-being depended entirely on the disposition of power. Isn’t it very much like today?
Most of the economy in Russia was owned by the state or created with its help. Why? Private traders did not have the means to create industry, only light, where quick returns. Defeating significant money in heavy industry was considered impractical (they would simply go broke). And the algorithm for the formation of industry was “inverted”, the opposite of the Western one. At first, the state created heavy industry, then pulled light. Moreover, it was primarily military industry that was created, which dragged everything else along with it. All this happened not because of our desire for dictatorship or some personality traits, but because of objective circumstances. In the same West, huge revenues from the colonies made it possible to go this route with much less loss. But even in this case, tens of millions perished during the formation of capitalism (which was even not comparable with Russia in the 20th century, when we went the same way).
The fifth factor. The adoption by Russia of a branch of Christianity different from Europe (Orthodoxy), which helped the formation of a practically separate civilization.
What is the main thing in the West? This is the existence of a civilization based on profit and calculation. Strange as it may seem, religion showed an example. It was thanks to Catholicism and Protestantism that a special ideology arose. The dogma of being chosen by God instilled a special ethic, thanks to which, in order to succeed, a person used all possible means in order to break through to the top. And moral values \u200b\u200bin this case were understood as secondary. After all, if a person was successful, then this was a sign of his chosenness by God. Chosenness, distrust and contempt for the weak, indulgences, Protestant ethics. All this helped to quickly develop a personal desire for wealth and success. In Russia, wealth is a gift of God, it must be shared, it is a gift of God to help your neighbor, in the West, wealth is a sign of being chosen.
Theory of "roller coaster".
As we have seen, in the course of natural development, Russia is doomed to a ever-increasing lagging behind the West, due to the more difficult conditions (geographical, climatic, social, economic) of its existence. But why, then, Russia not only did not completely lag behind completely and irrevocably, but sometimes manages to be ahead (space, military-industrial complex, science, etc.).
Under such conditions, Russia managed to keep up with the West, and sometimes even keep up with it (in the technical, scientific, industrial sphere), although with a lower standard of living. For example, who wins a military confrontation? As a rule, the state where the economy is stronger.
Russia beats Sweden in the 17-18 centuries, before which the whole of Europe trembles, Turkey is invaded by the same West, in the 19th century - Napoleon, who conquered Europe, in the 20th century - fascist Germany, which crushed the same highly developed Europe for itself. Why is this happening?
The answer to this path of development of Russia in its history.
Our climate has been as it is for millennia. Due to geographic factors, the profitability of our production is lower than in the West, which means that very little remains for development, and until the 20th century there was almost nothing left, because everything was consumed or wasted for the sake of simple survival. The resource that we could accumulate over these millennia is significantly less than that of Western countries. For objective reasons, we have long had to irrevocably lag behind them in all respects.
When Russia develops quietly, it naturally lags behind other countries. There are pretenders to its territory, wealth, and Russia are being squeezed. The answer to this is a mobilization breakthrough, with a tremendous exertion of strength, a complete rejection of even the necessary, at the expense of numerous casualties. Russia is pulling up the army, equipment, and military production, which is pulling the civilian economy (metal for technology, wood for the navy, cloth for uniforms, etc.). Three such breakthroughs can be distinguished in the history of Russia, they are named after the rulers, but actually the orientation was set by their predecessors: Ivan the Terrible, Peter 1, Stalin. Many smaller ones can be counted, but the largest are three (small: after the Mongol-Tatars in the 15th century, Napoleon, at the beginning of the 19th century, the Crimean War - in the middle of the 19th century, etc.).
The chronic shortage of resources affected the development of the economy, science, education and culture (funds are needed for development, but there are very few of them), dooming the country to lag behind Europe. But it was with European countries that we were forced to compete in order not to become their victim. The combination of unfavorable demographic and climatic conditions, a constant external threat with a deficit of development resources (time, finances) caused a contradiction between the tasks of the state (survival conditions) and the population’s ability to solve them. A way to resolve this contradiction was the mobilization scheme of the use of resources, which became the basis for the formation of the mobilization type of development. It was the type of development that was the key factor that determined the specifics of the organization of power and the political organization of society as a whole.
The “socialist path of development” was also associated with these features, which so far a significant number of historians have associated with Marxist ideology and the activities of the Bolsheviks. But ideology in the “Soviet project” was only an instrument for building a model of the economy that corresponded to the factors described above. If in the beginning the Bolshevik leaders used Marxism to justify their coming to power, then then little remains of it. Instead of public property - state ownership, instead of world revolution - building socialism in one country, instead of internationalism - national interests, etc. From the second half of the 1920s. Stalin no longer proceeded from ideology, but from the practical expediency of his actions to strengthen statehood, building a self-sufficient economy. The reason for this is the incompatibility of the open global economy of the national market with the condition of maintaining the integrity and development of Russia. For the rapid development of the country, a state monopoly on foreign trade, restrictions on private property, nationalization, etc. were required. Initially, these were forced actions (world economic blockade), but then they consciously “closed” the country from the world market.
Moreover, in the history of Russia in the XIX-early XX centuries. there was a practice of “openness” of the country, which caused huge losses (Witte’s introduction of the “golden ruble”). With “free trade” capital “fled” from Russia. His farm turned out to be destroyed, but investment in the country did not come (is it not right today?). With costs in Russia higher than outside, its investors did not invest in the development of our production. That is why at the beginning of the 20th century, 3 crises passed in Russia, which led to three revolutions and ended in a civil war. Therefore, the “Soviet project” implemented by Stalin proceeded from the need to preserve the state monopoly of foreign trade introduced by the Bolsheviks, to “close” the country for the export of capital and thereby ensure economic development.
By the mid 30s. the foundations of a society unknown to the world were created. A number of researchers (A. Zinoviev, S. Kara-Murza, Panarin, etc.) indicate that not only ordinary citizens, but also senior management, were not aware of the deep essence created in the USSR of the economic and political system.
If in Western countries production developed for maximum profit, then in Russia, where the surplus product was scarce, the foreground was the task of survival. In addition, the USSR has long been in a position of foreign policy isolation. The need for rapid industrialization and rearmament caused the emergence of a mobilization economy in our country. The economy in such conditions could not be built on the basis of the desire to make a profit. The Soviet economic system was conceived as a single national economic organism. Ownership of the means of production was public. Each Soviet citizen received certain benefits (penny rent, free education, health care, etc.) for his share of public property. Since the price systems in the USSR and Western countries were fundamentally different, the Soviet economy could function normally only in conditions of isolation from the external market (otherwise everything that was cheaper here would simply be taken out).
But production in the USSR was efficient, if efficiency is not profitability, but the ratio of costs and results. Even in agriculture, which was considered the most backward in the Soviet economy, with the number of tractors per 1 thousand hectares of arable land 10 times less than that of Western farmers, the cost of a ton of grain was 3-4 times lower. In a different way than in the West, not only efficiency was understood, but also the profitability of production. In the conditions of a mobilization economy, they did not strive for narrow economic efficiency, but for survival (the auto industry is tanks, mass production). Within the framework of such a model, they quickly industrialized, ensured victory in the war, restored the destroyed economy, liquidated the US atomic monopoly, and were the first to enter space. But for a peaceful life, for existence in the conditions of scientific and technological revolution, such a model was not effective enough, modernization was required, but there were neither worthy leaders, nor forces interested in it.
During the years of Soviet power, an infrastructure was created to ensure the survival of the population in harsh climatic conditions. It was created by the state and its main goal is to provide the population with products without which it is impossible to survive (heat, electricity). This system was designed and built in the Soviet era, in relation to the harsh conditions of Russia and the cultural norms that have developed in it over millennia, as a system of general (even community) use. In the USSR, the maintenance of housing and communal services was a matter of the state - the same as the maintenance of the army, police, etc. The state financed housing and communal services as a whole, as a large technical system that determines the viability of the country. After the 1990s a significant part of it was transferred to private hands. But it was intended to ensure the survival of the population, and not to profit. To save and maintain the infrastructure, the state invested huge amounts of money. But the private trader, not interested in maintaining unprofitable structures, began to raise prices for services and collect fees from the population, and in order to ensure profit, he did not invest anything in maintaining the system in good condition. The state also reduced funding and the system began to collapse, as evidenced by the frequent accidents of life support systems. Not realizing the essence of the existence of such a system, the authorities tried to reform it according to the Western type. But in the West, in connection with other conditions, such systems simply did not exist. As a result, the old was destroyed, but the new is not created.
The same conclusions are also true for the whole complex of factors that influenced the formation of Russia as a special civilization, with a specific economy, politics, infrastructure, and mentality of the population. And now it is precisely historical studies of the influence of the complex of the above factors on the formation of Russian civilization that are necessary. Only by understanding and appreciating their significance for the existence and development of the state can transformations be carried out. Their ignorance has already led the country to the loss of its identity, to the destruction of fundamental principles that have long maintained a unified and strong state (the Russian Empire and the USSR). Instead of the Soviet principles of life management, new ideological, cultural, economic foundations that would help the formation of new Russian statehood were not comprehended and formulated, would explain the features of our history, which affect the formation of the national economy and ensure the development of Russia.
The following factors influence the development of statehood in Russia:
- a) the peasant question, i.e. the question of how best to combine the peasant with the land and secure the most profitable way of managing for the peasant and society;
- b) the national question, which has always been important for the development of Russian statehood, since the population of Russia is multinational;
- c) the geopolitical question, i.e. realization of the territorial interests of Russia and the influence of the country's geographical position on the state organization of society. The geopolitical position of Russia affects the ethnocultural strata of the population, their way of life, traditions, consciousness, etc. And this, in turn, directly affects the organization of public life in the country. The conquests that Russia waged in the past, joining new territories, also influenced the organization of political power: the state should always be ready to protect the peoples of the outskirts from possible revenge.
Geopolitical interests are present in almost all peoples, including in the modern period;
d) production and consumption of alcohol
Prohibition under V.I. Lenin; vodka monopoly under I.V. Stalin, introduced in 1924; attempts N.S. Khrushchev limit the production and consumption of alcohol and, conversely, increase its sales by three times under L.I. Brezhnev; attempts to solve the problem by cutting down vineyards under M.S. Gorbachev; the introduction again of the state monopoly on the production and sale of alcohol - all these were ways to solve the alcohol issue in Russia.
The problem of the influence of this factor on the development of statehood is controversial, although it has a general social significance;
d) modernization, i.e. change in quality of life. Currently, modernization is understood as pulling up Russian society in certain areas to the level of world standards, including the protection of human rights.
Scientists who study the problems of Russian statehood unanimously note its specificity in comparison with Western states, emphasize its special state-legal spirit. For example, in philosophical and sociological literature they name four main features inherent in Russian statehood:
- 1) Orthodoxy as a form of collective consciousness;
- 2) autocracy, i.e. strong state and centralization of state power;
- 3) community. In Russia, longer than in other countries, the community remained as a convenient form of life for peasants. And this everyday side of the life of the Russian peasantry, which made up the bulk of the country's population, left its mark on the state organization;
- 4) colonization, i.e. transfer of traditional forms of organization to new territories.
All scholars, emphasizing the Russian specifics, call the special mentality of the peoples of Russia, manifested in the uniqueness of the economic structure, political and legal life, spirituality and psychological characteristics of the perception of the world.