The Science Work
History
Site is for sale: mail@thesciencework.com
Category: History

Russian modernist style: philosophical discourse



petr SIMUSh

RUSSIAN MODERNIST STYLE: PHILOSOPHICAL DISCOURSE

In article the Russian political practicians during the different periods are analyzed: from a serfdom and up to now.

The author offers the answer to an eternal question of a ratio of freedom of the individual and the state interest,

The article presents the evaluation of the Russian political practices of different times: starting from the period of serfage and till our days. The author proposes an answer for the eternal question about the balance between the individual freedom and public (state) interest.

power, state, society, freedom, revolution; power, state, society, freedom, revolution.

The Russian modernist style (present) is not learned though researchers offered the thinking public it is a lot of interesting developments. Not smaller value in comprehension of the modern era endured by distressful Russia is represented by political practicians. For the expired one and a half centuries our country changed the shape three times. It was exempted from a serfdom, from a tsarism and from communism. But it appeared in captivity of a world financial system. Russia gained experience of overcoming militant reaction, extremes of atheism and collectivism, but so far gives in to extremes of market egoism and plutocratic clannishness. The Russian society is faced by an eternal question: how to coordinate freedom of the individual with the state interests, with the statement of Christian humanity. It is difficult to find the answer as Russia is on joints of three cultures: European, Muslim and Asian. The unity and variety of cultural life is an unsolved secret which is comprehended by our era. One more attempt, speaking to Goethe's words, to learn conceivable and to read inscrutable it is stated below.

Knowledge conceivable and honoring inscrutable

The twentieth century confirmed N.V. Gogol's thought of an opportunity to find each event of the Russian history in the Bible, "in what it broke before God". In the Old Testament wars, fight good luck, the made Supreme court are represented; all this took place in the 20th century. Terrible punishment for participation of Russia in world war comprehended the last tsar and his family. "Broke before God" and the communistic state which governors acted in the spirit of cruel militant atheism and anti-humanity. Punishment for these acts burst the Soviet Union which gained a great victory in World War II at the end of 1991 broke up as a house of cards.

The saying of the emperor Alexander II said by it on March 30, 1856 demonstrates transition to a present era too: "It is better to release peasants from above, than to wait when they are released from below". Agrarian reform was preparing in a deep secret, gradually and carefully because the power saw in the serf peasantry of SIMUSh "a powder mine". She did not explode in the 60th of the 19th century, but waited

Peter terrible explosions during the country revolts 1902 — 1907 and

Iosifovich- 1917 — 1920. Peasant reform of 1861 managed to cancel kre-

f. the N, professor the fast right and to give "green light" to capitalism in Russia. In the lane -

IF RAS howling decade of the 20th century the Russian Empire gradually prevrashcha-

iph@iph.ras.ru it etsyatsya in bourgeois constitutional monarchy. Therefore with full

the basis country release in "the rustic kingdom" can be considered the beginning of an era of the Russian modernist style.

In the 20th century the sense of the Russian word Pravda which is not translated into foreign languages was more stoutly revealed. In its knowledge sides of the right, correctness, justice and the truth in information appeared more accurately. Search of the truth was conducted by political parties of cadets, Social Revolutionaries, Bolsheviks, Octobrists, etc. the Prime minister P.A. Stolypin expressed on December 5, 1908 in the State Duma the need to support by laws of reasonable, strong and strong owners, but not to stake "on poor and drunk". In peak to revolutionaries Stolypin carried out the program of transformation of Russia into the great, great power till 1911.

Paradoxically, but the secretary general of the All-Union Communist Party (bolsheviks) I.V. Stalin practically undertook to carry out the Stolypin idea of "Great Russia". He set the task of the accelerated industrialization as a matter of life and death: "We lagged behind the advanced countries for 50 — 100 years. We have to run this distance in 10 years. Or we will make it, or we will be crumpled". For the sake of this task drove peasants in collective farms, selected property of diligent owners, took away abroad grain in exchange for cars, beyond all bounds redistributed funds for needs of the industry. As a result the country from the fifth place in world industrial development "ran" to the second after the USA. In it there was less state activity more fruitful actions which were made by citizens of the USSR. Present Russia demands reconstruction of enormous public independence, energy of the whole people.

Reasonable public opinion

If to approach impartially, it is necessary to recognize that the state power of the USSR in the 1940-70th was provided with Marxism-Leninism ideology. It excited reasonable opinion, responsibility and the citizen's debt in society. People understood requirements of the state and public order, knew what should wish and what can be reached. From the middle of the 50th of the 20th century the harmonious dialect which wakened thoughts became heard thaw of the 60th followed, but original "publicity" came only to the period of Gorbachev reorganization. It led to full anarchy of minds and to extreme opinions in hope to find for

Russia strong point of support. However at that moment in the country there were no reasonable public forces which would put to themselves a task development of original civic consciousness and an order at an exit from administrative communism. And adequately it was possible to leave it only persistent work of a search thought, abstention from vigorous aspirations the liberal radical and quite reasonable view of the Western world. From it there was a hint that communism in such form what it took in the USSR was political religion; it was not democratic and did not tolerate variety of creative thoughts. However the market liberalism which succeeded communism clothed in dictatorship of small minority which became ruling class of oligarchy, plutocracy and bureaucracy. The ruling class lives fear to lose the power therefore supports existence in Russia of "feudal society".

Commanding are afraid above all of a fresh thought, are afraid of courageous offers more, than ruins. The Russian legislators so were frightened of a thought of the Russian revolution that threw out a mention of it from red dates of the calendar. Unlike them, in Great Britain, the USA, France reveres the memory of the great revolutions. By their example we can impartially investigate the great Russian revolutions from Peter I and Lenin to Putin and Medvedev.

The ruling bureaucracy is afraid of a thought because reason — accusatory and revolutionary force, it is pernicious and majestic. The thought is ruthless to injustice and privileges, to ruling institutes and political illusions. Only reasonable public opinion can advance the Russian modernist style. But "reasonable" not for identically modern "conservatism". We need, at least, "the liberal conservatism" in a political thought which was presented by A.S. Pushkin and B.N. Chicherin, to R.B. Struva and S.L. Frank.

Overcoming charm by the power

Throughout centuries there live opinions on the mysteries of the power and on the secret power. Conspiracies of the powers that be and financial groups of influence carefully disappear from public. But came it is time to disassemble intellectually the imperious mechanism,

put in action by a kleptocracy (general theft), corruption (greed of bureaucracy), criminals (hidden network of crimes). This mechanism functions as an element of the global financial world. The motivation of actions in it is defined by egoism and greed.

Our society tests charms of the power: love of power, suggestion sorcery, egoism, envy, mysteriousness, etc. These types of a charm are necessary for the power as it is aloof from the people. Why it occurred?

The power naturally is afraid of the moral basis acting through the people; it hesitates to tell the truth that the state is forced to be the compulsory, punishing force, to protect not only freedom, but also unfreedom. It always because is the good and evil that people want to make it for themselves paradise, do not wish to see in it areas of hell. The state — the rigid form investing the life of people. At the same time in the Russian people there is an understanding: to be the first person — means, to be involved in miraculousness of the state and to become the bogoizbranny personality. Doubts in this truth it is fraught with adverse effects.

I dare to suggest that the deficiency in power the truths and mercies is the main reason of the Russian cataclysms. The emperor Alexander III rejected council of the great philosopher V.S. Solovyov to show mercy in relation to the terrorist; "the leader of the people" executed the ideological Marxist Leninist M.N. Ryutin who in the fatal hour said in 1934: "Stalin, I before you will not kneel!" The deficiency of the truth and mercies was present at recognitions and actions of the president of the USSR M.S. Gorbachev and the Russian President B.N. Yeltsin.

The strong power is combined not with "charms", and with justice, freedom of citizens and with reasonable goal-setting. At their coexistence another acts as prevailing one: "the real policy" has to reckon with needs and weaknesses of human nature.

Studying fatal events

We established that the Russian modernist style has the clear beginning, but has no clear termination. Time is a form of both linear, and pendular life which

expresses duration of existence of a subject, the sequence of change of its states. For one and a half centuries there was a number of the important events reminding the pendulum: wars, revolutions, reforms, counterreforms. The present was reasonably called "an era of wars and revolutions". In the 20th century Russia stopped being the royal empire; it existed in the form of the federal republic, but by an exit from a management system was transformed to the Russian Federation. Just as the communistic nomenclature was ruling force in the USSR, ruling force in the Russian Federation is the bureaucracy, oligarchy and plutocracy.

Historians opened a root Russian triad: family (sort), people and Homeland. Their survivability is learned especially at the time of disasters. After defeat in the Crimean war the people apprehended changes of the 60-70th of the 19th century with the updated force, were accepted to treatment of the internal ulcers. It made, according to B.N. Chicherin, one of the greatest pages in the history of Russia. It was followed by a number of transformations (zemstvo, justice) which created a civil order because of freedom. However murder of the tsar put an end to the liberal undertakings.

A fatal event of the present is great democratic revolution of 1917. It was incorrectly called Great October socialist revolution and created even its mythology. Actually revolution of the seventeenth year continued ten months. It took place three revolutionary stages in the rise: in February — March, October (on old style) and in November — December when elections to the Constituent assembly took place. These are steps up: overthrow of the monarchy which cast Russia into world slaughter, arrest of Provisional government which supported war continuation, and national vote for the world, the earth and freedom. The reason only prejudiced builds the first two in separate great revolutions. The October estimated scientifically and philosophically did not stand alone and in itself had no greatness. The greatest event was represented by all revolutionary period from March to December, 1917

If something was estimated not scientifically once, it should not remain in it

interpretation. There is a way back — from unscientific to a scientific view in relation to the considered phenomenon. Told treats not only the Russian revolution of 1917, but also revolution of 1989 which took place in Eastern Europe. For several months almost totalitarian modes of six countries failed, like the Berlin wall. The East European revolution — we will call it so — changed the world and brought closer revolution in the Soviet Union. It showed that there are no familiar roads, the road is created by going.

A collision between "my" and "our"

It is known that in Russian "my" and "our" — possessive pronouns of the first person; something to me or us belonging. Between "my" and both consent, and a lawsuit is "our" ("for yours, for mine the fuss lit up"). A pronoun "ours" is used with a pronoun "we": family, relatives, society and state. (Elective people told Rurik: "Our earth is rich, and to an order in it is not present"; on the Russian land our power governs: in it our force; about a victory in the Great Patriotic War — "our victory", "our force took".) The power in Russia has to belong to all our people and all his members equally. From here the requirement of democracy — responsibility of the power to the people.

My personal beginning is equivalent to our state beginning. That and another, according to the philosopher S.L. Frank, serves as expression of two great and eternal beginnings of morality — the beginnings of public benefit and the beginning of free personal development. The collision of these two beginnings — the state interest and the rights of the personality is inherent in any society.

The present began with freedom of the owner and the defender of our earth. My grandfather Ivan, as well as twenty two million grandfathers, great-grandfathers and great-great-grandfathers, became free citizens of Russia. In one and a half centuries 3 — 4 generations of Russians — contemporaries of our big era which included many small eras called differently were replaced. Civil society which becomes a reality of the Russian modernist style is based on the personality and family.

Peasant reform of 1861 was a bourgeois innovation. In fact also privatization public is bourgeois

property which lasts more than two decades. Capitalist reform is the fact, true or false, but she gives rise to a thought that the people of Russia from the purpose of social development are smartly turned into means for enrichment of minority. Looking retrospectively, we see that the tsarist government within the first five decades collected the redemption sum which was huge from peasants. Only as a result of revolution of 1905 — 1907 the redemption payments were cancelled. An opportunity to mentally look for the actual prerequisites of flagrant property inequality in postcommunist Russia is presented to us. Probably, this difference in possession of property and income at the beginning of the 21st century repeatedly surpasses situation at the beginning of the 20th century. Therefore the low level of free personal development taking place till 1920 whereas the largest possible level has to be the goal for which the social system strives, and therefore — and the Russian modernist style is again recreated. In order that a modern era achieved the specified objective, she has to achieve a compromise between freedom and justice. In 150 years our country because of tragic circumstances did not create areas of justice (these are external conditions of safe life), areas of freedom (it is search of personal happiness for required wellbeing).

Science which does not give the actual idea of the main areas of life, in a debt to the people. National understanding about real and due, about the truth and a lie represents a sad legal picture: "force the law aches", "justice was not and is not present"... The Russian modernist style chose the path of construction of the national truth overcoming elements of egoistical passions.

Not clear fate of Councils

In Russian-Japanese and in World War I wars Russia responded to defeats with the birth and revival of the new state form of government — Councils. This amazing creation of the Russian workers, soldiers and peasants is connected integrally with the veche republics of the Middle Ages in Russia and with territorial cathedrals. But historical links it is much more difficult. For the Russian people exclude -

three values have telny value: — Homeland, Truth and Cathedral. The conciliarity — the term not only orthodox divinity, but also the Russian obshchinnost, under this concept acts also experience of people's assemblies. They existed in Russia in the ò—XIV centuries, and in the Novgorod and Pskov and Vyatka lands remained prior to the beginning of the 16th century. Five centuries later, during an era of the Russian modernist style, the phenomenon of Councils, the Soviet power which is going back to centuries-old practice revived (state, church, communal, household) — to hold collective council, to discuss and develop the common decisions.

Democracy in Post-Soviet Russia made a step not forward, and back — to the European experience of the 19th century. This backsliding movement is not fatal inevitability. Communism which left a historical scene in the 20th century, and sovietism as the life-giving principle is the absolutely different things connected on irony of history. The Yeltsin team managed to intimidate so the population by a communistic revenge that it did not reject either start of landslide privatization, or shooting at the Soviet parliament.

But Soviet democratism, but not communism gained a victory in the Great Patriotic War; the general fidelity the Soviet Homeland does credit to will and courage of the people. As if contrary to progress of democracy from below up, in Russia the power vertical from top to down is erected. Experience of sovietism could not resist, but is capable to rise on a crest of the waves which are given rise in the depths of centuries-old democratic elements again. Over ninety years ago revolutionary Russia grew in experience of elections of the Constituent assembly, memory of which cannot but be,

sacred. Because the Councils sprouting from territorial roots are Russia as a sort, the people and the homeland. The word "Council" is applicable to a number of elements of power structures, including the Federation Council also today.

So, essential lines of a modern era are: tension of social release of the people of Russia which become the political nation; change of a dekhristianization of society by a rekhristianization; the recreated combination of philosophy, art and science to religion; the growing variety of culture. These features appear as prerequisites of big cultural synthesis in the coming postmodern era.

It is possible that the triune reason — religious, philosophical and scientific — will become in Russia quite active and creative, capable to satisfy requirement of spirit with knowledge of the truth. Speaking to Hegel's words, our spirit calms down in the truth as a wild animal in the den. People need the Principal reason as However, Lyubov and Mer. The Russian modernist style gained these values. Their power — not obvious, but hidden, it gives to a modern era quality of mystery. It is possible to call a modernist style as the big chronological period an era of national consolidation of Russia. But what is the All-Russian nation? The required answer — my desire.

The happy opportunity for me again to address readers of Vlast is given not only by the editor-in-chief A.O. Lapshin, but also scientists of the Russian oncological center of N.N. Blochin of the Russian Academy of Medical Science: academician I.S. Stilidi, M.D. Budurova's scientists, A.B. Ryabov and century Yu. Bokhyan. Big thanks to them!

Hendrickx Sebastiaan
Other scientific works: