The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

The Soviet history in G.P. Fedotov's image: to statement of question

lo, but the serious aspiration to find in their views that it was capable to become a basis for the movement of domestic science forward was not observed. These bases were looked for on the way of reconsideration and improvement of new Western European trends: at first boklevsky positivism, then tenovsky psychologism, Marxist economism, neokantian criticism, etc. At the beginning of the 20th century thanks to these to "improvements and reconsiderations" the Russian philosophy Real

riya acting through her such outstanding representatives as N.I. Kareev, A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky, RUE. Vipper, L.P. Karsavin gained the increasing authority on the European scientific community, and became less clear to the ordinary Russian historian-konkretniku and the ordinary Russian historian-teacher who received once a boost for the spiritual development from that historiography with which the new methodology did not want to keep ideological relationship.


1. Iggers G.G. Historiography in the Twentieth Century: from scientific objectivity to the postmodern challenge. - Hannover and London: Wesleyan University Press, 1997. - 487 S.
2. Geschtsschreibung im 20. Jahrhundert. - Berlin: Fides Verlag, 1998.

>- 484 S.

3. A.N. Sakharov. About new approaches in the Russian historical science. the 1990th years//History and historians, 2002: The historiographic messenger / Under the editorship of A.N. Sakharov. - M.: Science. 2002.

>- Page 3-28.

4. G.I. Zvereva. Civilization specifics of Russia: diskursny analysis of new "historiosophy"//Social sciences and present. - 2003. - No. 4. - Page 98-112.
5. I.G. Yakovenko Russian State: national interests, borders, prospects. - Novosibirsk: Science, 1999. - 216 pages
6. V.I. Guerrier. Essay of development of historical science. - M, 1865.-113 pages
7. P.N. Ardashev. History as science//Russian wealth. - 1896.

>- No. 4. - Page 1-25.

8. P.N. Ardashev. Psychology in the history//Questions of philosophy and psychology. - 1895. - No. 3. - Page 294-313.

UDC 930.1


L.A. Gaman

Seversk state Institute of Technology of E-mail:

Some aspects of the concept of the Soviet history of the Russian religious thinker of G.P. Fedotov (1886-1951), in the main lines which developed during the late period of creativity are analyzed.

Many representatives of the Russian religious thought, having appeared outside Russia, did not cease to study attentively the processes happening on the homeland. A keen interest in life of the country ate not only sincere love to it. It was based also on deep belief in future demand of the religious philosophical thought kept and enriched in exile as parts of the Russian culture [1]. Among the bright representatives of the Russian abroad realizing themselves successors of domestic spiritual tradition the religious thinker, the historian G.P. Fedotov is high (1886-1951). Its intellectual and spiritual heritage, versatile and surprisingly rich according to the contents, still remains in consonance to modern Russia. It is possible to distinguish the whole complex connected with the Soviet stage of the Russian history from a set of the subjects drawing attention of the scientist. Special depth and the scientific importance his reflections about the Soviet Russia are given intellectual honesty of the scientist, it is invariable podchyor-

kivayemy researchers [2-4] equally as its active civic stand in days of life in Russia and in emigration. Undoubted relevance of this part of creative heritage of GP. Fedotov it is partly caused by persistent attempts of a modern domestic historiography, to develop the weighed approaches to the recent past of the country, to overcome many mythologized ideas of it [5]. In the light of told it is obviously possible to designate systematic illumination of some aspects of historico-philosophical views of GP as a key task of article. Fedotov about the Soviet history. And, in this work as the author the emphasis is consciously placed on illumination of a number of the positive phenomena of the Soviet history noted by the scientist. It, however, does not mean ignoring of its reasonable criticism of the negative processes taking place in the Soviet Russia.

The objective research of difficult, contradictory nature of the Soviet history is intended to promote formation of healthy historical consciousness, the major construct koto-

horns the idea of historical continuity is [6]. Reflecting over this problem, Fedotov wrote: "Any creation of culture has the general background which consists of traditions, of the connected efforts of the people, of "common cause". Taken from a big distance, culture finds unity - at least, unity of orientation..." Fedotov [7, 8]. Historical continuity assumes a genetic linkage of all temporary modalities that, in particular promotes maintaining unique identity of the separate people in the general outline of world history.

It is essential that Fedotov never doubted accessory of the Soviet period of a common line of development of the Russian history, despite the deep cultural break of the country which resulted from the Russian revolution. The idea of historical continuity can be referred to the category fundamental in historico-philosophical creation of the scientist. And, its presence is traced not only in the analysis of macro-historical processes, but also in the phenomena of less large-scale order. So, investigating a social portrait of the "anti-liberal" Soviet person, leaning at the same time on the method of "individualization of cultural and historical types", [3] scientist, in particular, pointed to its deep typological proximity on social and psychological indicators to the "Moscow" person, the builder and the defender of the pre-Pertine Russian state. The first "is closer to the Muscovite the proud national consciousness, its country only orthodox, only socialist - first-ever: the third Rome... Can seem strange to speak about the Moscow type in application to dynamism of the Soviet Russia... However this movement goes through external construction, mainly technical... Behind external rough... the movement - internal unperturbable rest", - Fedotov emphasized [9].

The idea of "imposing of historical eras" which is originally interpreted in the light of a continuity problem allowed to approach deep understanding of many painful problems of national history of the 20th century, including the nature of "stalinokratiya", in particular. The last it connected this not only with practice of the Bolshevism, but also with the Russian tradition of the despotic power conducting the beginning from Ivan Kalita and his descendants. "Unless the despotism of successors of Kalita which destroyed and self-government of destinies, and the free cities, suppressed independence of nobility and Church - was not led to a sclerosis of a social body of the empire, to powerlessness of middle school and to "chernosotenny" style of national "Bolshevist" revolution?", [10] - Fedotov noticed. The role was played, certainly, also by extremely low cultural level of Stalin that was objectively emphasized with the scientist [11]. Thus, addressing a research of the Soviet Russia, Fedotov was guided by a fundamental theoretical parcel, in sootvet-

a stviya with which the Soviet period could be objectively interpreted only in the context of the Russian historical process.

The important methodological principle of Fedotov as religious thinker, recognition of the uniform Christian nature of European civilization which major component was its Russian branch was. Top trends of world history, first of all, of modern and latest times, were fairly believed by him, were caused by community of sources of two externally so unlike worlds. It did not mean ignoring of specifics of separate cultures. As it was stated above, recognition of welfare features of the separate people was considered by the scientist as the most important condition of knowledge of historical process. In this regard, Fedotov, in particular, emphasized: "... it is necessary to be accustomed to see Russia in the Russian light, and Europe in European, without confusing hopelessly our double experience". [12]

Recognition of variety of the world at its radical unity pushed the thinker to search of criteria which would allow to understand more deeply specific features of the western and Russian cultures, is equal as the nature of concrete historical events and the phenomena. One of such major criteria by which it was guided in the course of knowledge of history received the following formulation: "... truth of dignity of the human person and religious point of cathedral business of culture" [12]. In relation to studying the Soviet history such criterion had to promote objective identification of merits and demerits of communism and capitalism as ideological and economic systems. In the general meaning it organically was entered in the main historiosophical scheme of the Russian religious philosophical thought, a key to which dialectics as other Russian thinker, V.V. Zenkovsky convincingly showed, the problem of "secularism" was [13]. Idea of deep interdependence of the processes proceeding in the world which only amplified in process of increase in rates of globalization became one of the central methodological principles of Fedotov. As an example we will point to his reflections of rather key factors which caused a revolution victory in Russia. The scientist emphasized that those became "revolution vsenarodnost", released "huge energy..., which were intercepted by communistic factory", and the "social impoverishment of Europe" which excluded any external obstacles for Bolshevist experience [10]. Sources of social futility of Europe contacted the scientist not only direct practice of the western governments, but also evasion of Christian Church from the social function. (However, it concerned, according to Fedotov, not only the western Christianity, but also Orthodoxy). As the thinker believed, pushing off of a social perspective on the periphery religious sozna-

a niya became one of the most important prerequisites of laicisation of culture and development of processes of modernization during modern times [14].

Thus, the revolution victory in Russia was considered as result of a difficult interlacing of internal and external factors. Not accidentally "the moral elite of Europe" was kind to the Soviet construction in the first decade of existence of the Soviet Russia. The scientist emphasized except that Europe was forced to react to the social perspective which is sharply put by the Russian revolution including further improvement of own social policy [12]. The leading tonality to these ideas was given by recognition of difficult nature of communication of Europe and the Soviet Russia including a set of cultural, economic and political oposredovaniye. The positivity of similar approach in line with which additional opportunities for identification of features of the Russian option of sociocultural modernization appear is obvious.

A specific place in Fedotov's concept was held by a problem of the nature and social consequences of industrialization. Fedotov's theory is substantially close to the modern theory of modernization in line with which industrialization is considered as a necessary condition of overcoming industrial backwardness. The thinker did not doubt its need for Russia. He emphasized, besides, the "defensive" nature of the Soviet industrialization. "Now the civilization - the lowest, technical - has karitativny, Christian value in Russia. The question of weapon is more difficult... In any case, not it threatens, and it is threatened by her enemies, powerful, ruthless. So far as the military trend of its industrialism is justified, partly,", - Fedotov emphasized [15].

the Scientist did not leave to

without the attention a complex problem of resources of modernization of Russia, is equal as motivations of its direct participants. Seeking for its unbiased interpretation, he pointed to a tragic combination in practice of the Soviet building of unprecedented violence over the Russian people and the enthusiasm fed, in particular, by appeal of a technical ideal of the capitalism embodied in a dream Russia-America [10]. The first part of a problem did not contact the scientist only activity of a repressive system in the Soviet Russia. Its component in Fedotov's concept was the problem of assumption by the Russian people of similar violence over itself, painful, for the Russian national consciousness and today. It became possible, he believed, as a result of difficult interaction of the whole complex socially - psychological factors, beginning from "a century habit to obedience" [7], and finishing with a number of features of the Russian religious consciousness which central component is recognition of suffering as "the highest temper -

stvenny criterion, as almost absolute moral top" [16].

Fedotov recognized high effectiveness of technical achievements in the Soviet Russia. Moreover, believing that the technical direction is chosen correctly, he predicted dynamic transformation of the country towards the American civilization in shpenglerovsky sense [15]. Another thing is that rates of technical development were gradually lost. Were the reasons for that infringement of freedom in Russia, on the one hand, and "organic bungling of the mode (partly coinciding with the spirit of the Bolshevism)", the blocking many reasonable undertakings, with another [15, 17]. Concern of the thinker was rather caused by the excessive growth of appeal of a technical ideal to the Soviet person that threatened as he believed, final loss of ideas of the highest calling of the Russian people. In this regard he wrote: "... how to recreate that cultural layer destroyed by revolution which was capable to raise quality of cultural work in Russia and to move the center of interests from equipment questions in questions of spirit?" [15].

Analyzing the global changes happening in the Soviet society, Fedotov concerned a narrow-mindedness problem as social and spiritual phenomenon. This problem traditional for the Russian religious thought since the time of N. Gogol, A. Herzen, K. Leontyev was not considered by him exclusively negatively: "Socialist society did not manage to avoid the narrow-mindedness. It carries out even a positive moral and sanitary role...", - the scientist noticed [18]. Analyzing one of forms of "socialist narrow-mindedness" shown in partial restoration of pre-revolutionary life, including its social and psychological components, he came to a conclusion about formation in the Soviet Russia of some kind of middle class without which "society - any society - would break up into the conflicting classes" [19]. The apolitical mood of this category of the population served as the guarantor of social stability in the country, the scientist believed [18]. Russia, endured deep social shocks did not manage to avoid also the new inequality shown in formation of new elite. The sociological shade of this part of reflections allowed the scientist is reasoned to show universality of such processes, is equal as activization of political, social and cultural mobility during critical eras that was characteristic and for the Soviet Russia. This subject gains special stability in Fedotov's creativity from the second half of the 1930th

Fedotov had ability to understand semantic complexity of the Soviet society. So, the existence of socialist narrow-mindedness stated by it was considered in parallel with a humanity problem as potentially possible phenomenon in the Soviet Russia [11]. The scientist do not wipe -

tsat the valid turn to the person in the country, however interpreted it in the light of exclusively economic requirements of the Soviet economy. "Production demands the cultural person: this new opening involved derogation not only from self-sufficing technicism, but also Marxism in its totalitarian claims" [11]. Original humanity arises only in case of statement in the society of problems of freedom and spiritual life in "their relationship", components "the subject of humanity" [18]. Meanwhile, the repressive relation to any similar manifestations in the Soviet Russia were an absolute obstacle for humanity. However, despite this, the scientist believed, some symptoms demonstrated deep processes in society.

In the light of told it is represented appropriate to stop for interpretations by Fedotov a phenomenon of national interest in A.S. Pushkin's creativity in the Soviet Union who really had sign character. The moral value of this factor for Russia was especially high for two reasons. First, in the light of the repressive policy in relation to religious belief pursued by the Soviet authorities. Secondly, in connection with the deep immoralizm of the last which infinitely extended during the Stalin period when the lie ceased to be perceived as something inadmissible, on the contrary, having become the "general duty" corrupting not only the power, but also the people [19]. National interest in Pushkin demonstrated maintaining moral susceptibility in the environment noted by deformation of the religious and ethical beginnings. In this case one of important conclusions of Fedotov - a ruling system in the Soviet Union, despite its big communication with the people was distinctly shown, it cannot be identified with it [19]. In the personality and A.S. Pushkin's creativity, from it "a hidden ethical background" [21] Fedotov was imposed also by the aspiration expressed in a poetic form to synthesize in the Russian life of the beginning of statehood and freedom. Their mismatch in practice of the Russian state, Fedotov believed, was one of the fatal causes of catastrophic events of the 20th century [22]. The ideal traced by the Russian poet - "synthesis of the Empire and freedom" - was considered by Fedotov as a historical task for the Russian people.

It is remarkable that the scientist saw symptoms of overcoming a gap between the state and culture in the Soviet Russia of the first decades [20]. In general, return of separate elements of pre-revolutionary culture, including the Russian literature, to the Soviet life was considered by Fedotov as a positive factor which value was not limited to emergence of additional opportunities for neutralization and overcoming negative consequences of a cultural break of the country. Dynamics of growth of interest in the cultural values which are saved up in the past along with wide circulation elementary pros-

the veshcheniya, demonstrated the deep processes proceeding in the depths of mass consciousness of the Russian people. One of important results of their development was overcoming elite nature of domestic culture [15]. Its democratization which is carried out by high rates despite decrease in qualitative level in Russia, demonstrated approach of Russia to the European standards of the education of the population which is the most important component of sociocultural modernization of society. The main cultural content of the Russian revolution consisted in it, on Fedotov's belief. Let's notice in passing that not less important in the conditions of a life totalitarization in Europe and the Soviet Russia Fedotov considered origin of new cultural trends. Among them - emergence of the "oblastnichesky, regional literature" considered by the author a peculiar indicator of decrease in level of presence of the state at life of the certain person. Fedotov wrote: "In what oblastnichesky literature differs from the national epos...? Mainly lack of the state. Here the person peasant lives face to face good luck and the earth...". Among writers who "save invaluable and eternal" in Russia Fedotov mentioned Prishvin [23].

In the works the scientist concerned one more important problem, namely the "Soviet patriotism" which is closely connected with the system of values of the Soviet person. Its attention to it is explained by two reasons. First, great value of patriotism for creative historical creativity of the people. Partly for this reason Fedotov emphasized the high value of historical mythology in life of the people as component of national consciousness [24]. Secondly, one of the reasons of falling of the Russian autocracy he considered unwillingness of the Russian soldier to protect the country. In this regard he emphasized: "Behind the rotten power, behind the poor equipment we saw the people which refused to protect the homeland" [25]. Statement of the fact of "aeration of the Russian patriotism" in the people in prerevolutionary years in a special way shaded the new birth of patriotism in Soviet period.

The scientist believed that initial sources of the Soviet patriotism was the need of the Stalin mode to activate enthusiasm of the Soviet people, to stimulate with its help of effort on protection of "gaining revolution from external and internal enemies" [18]. Gradually initial revolutionary motive, Fedotov emphasized, it was pushed aside by original value - love for Russia that was especially brightly shown in difficult years of the II World war. Fedotov noted: "... war woke keys of the dozing tenderness - to the scolded homeland, to the woman, the wife and mother of the soldier" [9]. In structure of the Soviet patriotism the national component considered by it as break of "rough national elements" [26] did not force out finally political. However according to him, that is

kova nature of any patriotism: "... political ingredient is included into any national consciousness" [18]. Placing emphasis on revival of national consciousness as a condition of national and religious self-identification of the people the scientist summarized: "The new Soviet patriotism is the fact which is senseless for denying. It is the only chance of life of Russia" [25].

All designated and many other problems of the historico-philosophical concept of the Soviet history of Fedotov are aligned on a problem of freedom which history in Russia always differed in complexity and even tragedy. The Soviet period, it insisted, became one of its episodes. Freedom which arose on the Christian soil of medieval Europe the scientist emphasized, it was alien on the spirit of the "Byzantine and Moscow tradition" which prevailed in Russia. The possibility of its distribution to the imperial period of the Russian history contacted Fedotov the memories of the freedom-loving Kiev period of national history which remained in depths of collective memory [27, 16]. However in imperial Russia, the thinker believed, ideas of personal freedom did not become widespread, having remained alien to the bulk of the population which did not accept it in the system of values. It also made so easy eradication of freedom during the revolutionary period. "All process of historical development in Russia became the return Western European: it was development from freedom to slavery", - the thinker noted [9]. In Russia Soviet the situation was aggravated also with the fact that among declared by the won revolution of values freedom it was not taken out as independent. "Freedom was never the main subject of the Russian revolution", - the scientist emphasized [15]. Fedotov did not exclude existence of some manifestations of freedom in the country, however, of not having "any relation to freedom of thought, a word, culture" [15]. In 1945 he wrote: "The Russian revolution in 28 years of its victorious, though heavy life, endured huge evolution, did much zig-


1. Whether G.P. Fedotov Budet to exist Russia?//About Russia and the Russian philosophical culture. Philosophers of the Russian postoctober abroad. - M.: Science, 1990. - Page 450-462.
2. O.D. Volkogonova. Intellectual biography//http:// of /berd.html
3. O.I. Ivonina. Freedom time. A problem of orientation of history in a Christian historical thought of Russia XIX - the middle of the 20th centuries - Novosibirsk: NGPU publishing house, 2000. - 442 pages
4. Men A. Georgy Fedotov//
5. V.V. wolves. Soviet civilization as daily practice: opportunities and limits of transformation//Where there is Russia?. Transformation of the social sphere and social policy / Under the general editorship of TI. Zaslavskoy. - M.: Business, 1998. - Page 323-333.

zag, replaced many leaders. But one in it remained invariable: constant, from year to year, derogation and suffocation of freedom..." [9].

In the context of the reflections he critically estimated tendencies of Russia to manifestations of policy of isolationism in relation to the European countries, the main source of freedom for it, as in a historical retrospective, and in the long term its further development [27]. However, and for Europe the destruction of contacts with Russia was represented to Fedotov pernicious. He insisted: "... both the European federation is inconceivable without Russia, and cultural life of Russia is inconceivable without Europe" [27]. Fedotov was always distinguished by the universalist mood caused by his theoretical installations, which especially amplified upon termination of the II World war, found the reflection in its ideas of the prospects of development of the international community. It is similar to some other Russian thinkers, for example Berdyaev, the scientist was a supporter of reforming of the former principles of world cooperation, being convinced of their insolvency: "The second war can be understood only in the closest communication with the first as its second act" [24]. Without doubting a possibility of a unification of the world, it offered the project of the world federation founded on the principle of a combination of the political power of the uniform center and cultural autonomy of all people. This the project utopian in character provided refusal of Russia of "imperial claims" and its integration into the world federation that had to be followed by its release and disclosure of creative potential of the Russian people [24].

Thus, the concept of the Soviet history of Fedotov reflected a contradictory image of the Soviet Russia. It combines objective criticism of its negative sides with positive estimates of a number of the phenomena that can help formation of more weighed approaches to one of the most difficult and mythologized periods of the Russian history which exception of the complete history of Russia as is scientifically inadmissible, and ethically it is incorrect.

6. B.G. Mogilnitsky. Historical knowledge and historical consciousness//Historical science and historical consciousness / B.G. Mogilnitsky, I.Yu. Nikolaeva, S.G. Kim, V.M. Muchnik, N.V. Karnachuk. - Tomsk: Publishing house Tom. un-that, 2000. - Page 34-67.
7. G.P. Fedotov Pisma about the Russian culture//Fedotov GP. Destiny and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2.

>- Page 163-187.

8. N.A. Berdyaev. Spiritual bases of the Russian revolution. Experiments of 1917-1918. - SPb.: RHGI publishing house, 1998. - 432 pages
9. G. Fedotov the Item Russia and freedom//Fedotov G.P. Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - 276-303.
10. Fedotov GP. The truth defeated//Fedotov G.P. Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 15-40.
11. Fedotov G.P. Stalinokratiya//G.P. Fedotov Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 83-97.
12. G. Fedotov the Item Russia, Europe and we//Fedotov G.P. Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 3-14.
13. V.V. Zenkovsky. History of the Russian philosophy. - L.: EGO, 1991. - T. 2. - Part 2. - 269 pages
14. G.P. Fedotov. Social value of Christianity//G.P. Fedotov. About sanctity, the intellectuals and the Bolshevism. - SPb.: Publishing house St. Petersburg un-that, 1994. - Page 50-78.
15. G.P. Fedotov. Tomorrow (Letters on the Russian culture)//Fedotov G.P. Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 188-205.
16. G.P. Fedotov. Russian religiousness of Part 1. Christianity of Kievan Rus'//G.P. Fedotov. Collected works in 12 t. - M, 2001. - T. 10. - 382 pages
17. M. Castells. Information era: economy, society and culture: Transl. from English under nauch. edition of O.I. Shkaratan. - M.: GU HSE, 2001. - 608 pages
18. G.P. Fedotov. Cultural shifts//the Chosen articles on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 98-102.
19. G.P. Fedotov Tyazhba about Russia//the Chosen articles on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 103-121.
20. Fedotov G.P. Pushkin and liberation of Russia//Fedotov G.P. Sudba and sins of Russia//Fedotov G.P. Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 129-132.
21. G.P. Fedotov. About humanity Pushkina//G.P. Fedotov Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 328-332.
22. G.P. Fedotov Pevets the empire and freedom//Fedotov G.P. Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2.

>- Page 141-162.

23. G.P. Fedotov. The new fatherland//Fedotov of G.P. Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 233-252.
24. G.P. Fedotov Sudba empires//Fedotov G.P. Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 304-326.
25. G.P. Fedotov. Protection of Russia//Fedotov G.P. Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 122-125.
26. G.P. Fedotov. A new idol//Fedotov of G.P. Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 50-65.
27. G.P. Fedotov. Federation and Russia//Fedotov G.P. Sudba and sins the Russia / Elite of article on philosophy of the Russian history and culture: In 2 volumes. - SPb.: Sofia, 1991. - T. 2. - Page 228-232.

UDC 9(S)17-03


A.V. Lutsenko

Seversk state Institute of Technology of E-mail:

Evolution of the Russian liberal ideology of the end of the XX century is considered, the historical link of reforms of the 1990th to a vesternizatsionny paradigm of the Russian liberation movement of the second half of the 19th century is estimated, Marxist "roots" of process of a westernisation of the Russian Empire are traced, K. Marx's position on questions of modernization of the Russian economy and about a role of community in development of the country is stated.

The condition of the Russian society at the end of the XX century can be characterized as extremely contradictory. The originality of a situation was defined by two moments:

1. On the one hand, the refusal of ideological ensuring the undertaken reforms was persistently declared, and it was explained by an old idiosyncrasy of the population to everything that was associated with a totalitarian political regime and authoritative intervention of the state in all spheres of public life. The whole country recognized apologists of liberalization of social institutes by sight and could list by name, and their position was met on mass meetings by general triumph which was treated as "ecstasy by freedom", "a holiday of freedom of thought and

words, freedom of choice and actions". Scientists, writers, engineers, economists, journalists, lawyers, actors were at the head of this holiday, - a word, all intellectual elite which hotly and with deep arguments branded the Soviet system and Marxism as the misanthropic phenomena. Any ideology was perceived as means of pressure upon public consciousness as angrily with which did not want to be reconciled any more.

2. On the other hand, against the background of it "ecstasies freedom" and the stated refusal of an ideological zadannost chronically found out themselves in real life objectively fixed signs of the fact that it is considered to be ideology with all its conceptual parameters. The Doctor of Philosophy Akop Nazaretyan noted curious being -
Howard Powell
Other scientific works: