# author:s-Gavrov Russia between past and future

Сергей Гавров

Article published in the third issue of the Neva in 2009.

Sergey Gavrov


Russia between past and future


(Article published in the third issue of the Neva in 2009)

Dialogues with Alexander Melikhov


The journal Neva in the last year published a number of insightful and informative articles by Alexander Melikhov. Subjects of these publications overlapped with the theme of this article, a separate provision, promoted by the author, is the desire to agree or argue, but, more importantly, do not leave indifferent, forced to think.

Let's start with the national tolerance and intolerance. It is a topic for a multinational, multi-mnogotsivilizatsionnoy and even Russia to explain, perhaps, not worth it. So, tolerance lies in the world winners who want to quietly enjoy the fruits of their victories. The losers next round of the historic confrontation, accumulating hatred teshat a etnoutverzhdayuschimi illusions about his own election and exclusion.

One can not but agree with the author that the increase ethnic tolerance, tolerance to a different general, one can achieve a permanent reduction in the number of those who feel defeated, those who translate their social victories and defeats in ethnic plane. Cure for this ethnic self-serve perhaps more significant vertical and horizontal mobility, the opportunity to achieve, to play by the rules of society that bring in all the brackets, go to Transcendence, the scope of the inherent. Excretive including religion, as it is the basis of socio-cultural traditions of the ethnic group, the most important marker, separating it from strangers and prevent their own people.

The original winners, in which control how to safely coexist on the many ethnic groups, was the world's aristocracy empire. We know from history that has emerged as an ethnic aristocracy, the imperial aristocracy, over time the greatest complement most active from aristocratic families of the peoples of the empire. We may recall the story far away by the scale of historical time the Roman Empire, and quite close to Russian and Soviet empires. They organized power, and consequently a system of vertical mobility in the ancient principle remained in Europe until the late Middle Ages - does not matter what you blood, it does not matter what language you speak, it is important only to whom you serve. Relative multinational world occurs when the supreme power is provided, so to speak, equidistant between the ethnic groups are subject to it ....

That was before, but times change, the Western world today live in an era of liberal-democratic, imperial principle of geographically large and diverse socio-cultural spaces of today, and if used, such as shamefaced, default. Here, the crucial question, how to maintain tolerance in the house where the owners were all?

Let's try to search an answer to this question. Almost all the multinational state as having or not having a particular historical experience of imperial co-existence, seek to mitigate mezheticheskih differences and, consequently, discord, making as an essential unifying principle of the principle of a nation in civil, rather than ethnicity. You can refer to the mentioned A. Melikhov experience of France and the United States. And in the civil nation neither Hellenes, nor Jew, all regardless of ethnic origin, mother tongue and religion, Americans or Frenchmen. But this is an old, slightly pereinachenny imperial nationality principle.

The difference today from latent imperial imperial past, do not hesitate to itself is likely in today's political, social and cultural practices, particularly in the level of the applicable state violence. Empire, and the State in general, is always kept at a certain level of violence. In multiethnic societies, this level is usually higher than in mono-ethnic.

Imperial socialization subjects was based on vertical mobility of ethnic elites, spread of imperial culture and violence, set a framework of legal and illegal, setting the rules of the game here and now. If you violate these principles of imperial and kvaziimperskih spaces, growing internal tension, until the resistance of direct imperial power. I think that is not historical, and passing, and methods of poly-invariant spaces. Remove component of this triad and the building-ethnic state, it does not matter, in imperial or national hypostasis starts tumble.

A. Melikhov rightly observes that today inokulturnyh, inoetnicheskih immigrants as well, and minorities traditionally living in the ethnic territories has almost nothing to make and almost nothing to lure - and the newcomers have so possessed civil equality. But today, the French state, through its police force continues to apply necessary to preserve ethnic secular state level of violence, such as banning religious symbols, in particular hindzhaby in public schools, suppressing the streets of Arab-African youth.

In other words, the principles of control have changed rather formal, declarative than content, with the exception of a significant reduction in levels of violence. In place of physical violence came soft social technology, the manipulation of consciousness on the part of mass culture, advertising and media. The man, regardless of their ethnic origin, acquires general rules of society. It must, above all, be strongly in the faith, Muslim, Christian, Jew, a successful consumer.

And there does not need the police, do not need a previous level of violence. Manipulated people feel imposed on him as their own desires. At the consumer people really hypostasis forget about their ethno-cultural identity, she moves from public to private sphere. And in this our common salvation.

A. Melikhov believes that the multinational state will never be able to reconcile their national teams, if not force them to believe in any new common tale, which would not have rejected their earlier dreams, but they challenge some venerable place within the new. On a note that a new tale, a new ideology - an ideology that eskeypistkaya consumer society, nothing great, a complete triumph over the inherent transcendent, all the achievements in the sphere of material life, all the achievements here and now. This is not great, not a heroic dream-ideology. Man as a successful consumer, forgotten, sending the scope is not very meaningful, a private, their ethnic traditions.

Now a few words about the article A. Melikhov aristocracy and a national idea. I agree with the author in almost everything. On a more just add that a society in which no idea of service, where everyone, including the situational elite, comes only in terms of economic advantages or disadvantages of this action is doomed to destruction.

And if you dive into the material interests of mass human-ethnic societies contributes to the sustainability of the state, at least in terms of preservation of the latent nature of ethnic conflict, the elites are accurate to the contrary. Need house keepers, keepers of the state, the people, for which economic values are secondary. This has historically been the custodian of aristocracy. It is largely thanks to the preservation of aristocratic traditions maintain continuity of power and control, such as the country old Europe and Japan. Is useful to remember that this aristocratic hereditary captures and businesses. Descendants of famous noble names managed many large European companies, and the descendants of samurai - the Japanese. They are guided in their economic non-economic objectives, such as serving the state and society. And such a ministry keeps the state, society, national business.

In Russia, the ministry with the case badly. From the old aristocracy of pre-Soviet, the Soviet authorities for decades, almost nothing was left but to a large extent assimilated descendants first wave in Western countries. It spawned its aristocracy, and the Soviet period of development of society. The absence of the aristocracy, the minimum necessary for the sustainable development of the state and society layer of people, the most dramatic impact on the post-reform period. Without these people we have got what they got.


Dialogues with Alexander Akhiezer, Igor Klyamkin, Igor Yakovenko


Consider the macro reproduction and gradual izzhivaniya of authoritarianism (or so-called Russian systems).

Since it is especially Russian Systems directly determine the content of our history, and indirectly, and the present, we point to its main features. First of all, Russian system - a system in which the Russian Authorities block subjectivity of elite groups, with the passive or active support to deprived people subjectivity. In other words, the policy is the subject of power, personalized to specific historical images of the great prince, king, emperor, general secretary of the CPSU Central Committee - and they alone possess the fullness of subjectivity. The people of this subjectivity does not have, except for times of severe crises of statehood (vague time major Cossack and peasant revolt, revolution).

But the peculiarity of this system in that the subjectivity of elite groups in society is also undergoing the largest possible in the given historical circumstances, the restriction. Specific historically caused, methods of blocking subjectivity Russian elite are in a wide range: from massive physical repression to a relatively mild extrusion of some members of the elite teams in the Russian political and economic fields in the European and North American emigration. As a historical example of such repression can recall antiboyarskuyu oprichnina I. Grozny and the destruction of the party elite I. Stalin, but there are also intermediate methods, for example, now may be the fate of former heads of Yukos.

The basis of our authoritarian system is the so-called father - paternalistic - the matrix based on the provisions and powers Bol'shakov in the patriarchal peasant family. For a typical military / paramilitary matrix organizes society and the state, which is especially evident in times of internal crises and turmoil, when the system itself grassroots people's movement, and in the foreign policy of the state, it manifests itself in an effort to voennoderzhaviyu, military / paramilitary matrix organizes and Russian power.

For its existence and reproduction of this authoritarian system has to seek and find external or internal enemy, divide the world into we and them. According to his mental grounds she mobilization and isolationist-defense, but its adherents are inclined to look for the causes of injuries are not flaws in the system, but explain them in a spirit of konspirologii and the criminal neglect and errors of individual performers. Sama Russian system infallibly, she only suffered from the machinations of internal and external enemies, as well as errors and neradeniya artists from which you can always choose the perpetrators in all. So, intimidate enemies and about punishing the perpetrators, you can continue to pursue similar policies, commit an error and nelepitsy, which, incidentally, from the viewpoint of the system itself, are not.

Would alert the reader to another source of the formation and reproduction of Russian systems. This feature of our adoption and interiorizatsii Christianity. We know that European Christianity emerged as a popular movement in the geographical boundaries of the Roman Empire, with all the excesses of a period, while maintaining continuity with the late antique culture. Later Christianisation captured and marginal European nations where the spread of Christianity was no longer the bottom, but on top of power, not having this any serious conditions. By the time the spread of Christianity in the Kievan Rus local paganism was still very viable, for a century thereafter, while the foundation on which overbuild Institutes of Christian churches. The result was the postponement of their pagan genealogy presentations on the evolving institutions, including institutions of power. In a phenomenon popularly dvoeveriya when spontaneous rural pagan accepts external (ritual) Christian piety, without changing its internal quality. In government there are similar processes, when the orthodox direct successor to the king and the embodiment of the pagan totem, of course, in the frame of Christian phraseology. Thus, during the centuries of Christianity there is only a form separated from content, the weak and partially penetrating into guschu people's lives.

In summary, one could argue that the Russian system is expressed in the synthesis' paternal 'cultural matrix, a pagan interpretation of Christianity and the army of life.

With sustained volatility, this system is, paradoxically, of its archaic dogosudarstvennogo beginning of the relationship and the state contributes to the reproduction of deep socio-cultural division, drawn up in the spirit of the time situational shape. And the main reason for replacement of old and new lines (cracks), the social and cultural divisions in national history was that the cultural foundation design has remained divided. Divided, it was because of the large, state-organized societies have been transferred model of the fabric of life of local-tribal, worlds dogosudarstvennyh .

It is important to remember that in itself a social and cultural division is not unique and isolated, passed through him, all peoples in the process of becoming a state. We are different from other people, only a special resistance to the flow split of historical time, its reproduction when the nations of Western Europe, he was not only broken, but has become a distant past. Naturally, the exterior design and informative content of specific forms of social and cultural divisions in each historical epoch with its unique conditions, and that they are expressed by its main contradictions.

With regard to the intensity of division, it differs in different periods of Russian history. Not going into empiricist its many historical manifestations, such a thorough review of the book The history of Russia: the end or new beginning?, Related to the social and cultural transformations in the division of Russia in XX century. In pre-Soviet Russia the situation is the social and cultural schism was evident - but the various social groups and subcultures gravitated to one of the two poles of stably reproducing the binary opposition. We believe that by the end of XIX - beginning of XX century with the well-known shares can be formed to talk about extreme social and cultural dynamics, which is grouped around the educated and economically successful social groups - consumers and creators of the technical achievements of civilization and high (elite) culture, in a sense, modernists striving for the future. The second pole, conventionally referred to us as a pole of sociocultural statics, led to the archaic, often dopismennoy popular culture around it focused the bulk of the peasantry and Philistinism small Russian towns.

Once in power, the Bolsheviks gradually weakened both poles, depriving them of their former strength and certainty. We understand that as a socio-cultural reality, and its poles can not be played back in time without the living, human action, and contemporary events accomplice. The Bolsheviks gradually destroyed physically, out of the country, ousted in the marginal area of the vast majority of educated and economically successful people, often removing the very name of their social groups. But the social and cultural dynamics of the pole can not be completely eliminated, because it means the disintegration of society and the loss of the state. The Bolsheviks filled modernist socio-cultural dynamics of a pole, but it was already a high-quality content, particularly after large-scale purges of Stalin's Party cadres second half of the 30-ies of the XX century.

With respect to the poles of sociocultural statics, the archaic and the mass of the peasantry Philistinism been fragmented and grind Moloch collectivization, industrialization, state repression. Here, the Bolsheviks have not able to make full or preferential elimination of members of these groups, because they collectively accounted for more than 90% of the population. Therefore, although their physical destruction was partial - it is millions and millions of our compatriots - the exact figure of deliberately killing people we do not know today. As a result of the Soviet period of our history, the second expressing the Archaic, pole of a binary opposition, lost the certainty of its quality system, has weakened and partially dismantled. As a result, has become a very dilute binary opposition sociocultural poles, markedly decreased, and the symbolic distance between them.

For a number of historical and cultural factors have both in the realm of Moscow, Russia and the USSR was formed comparatively slowly cultural meaning complex mediating breeding these cosmological poles. Torn country lacked mediation, dialogue between the poles as the conversation of people and ideas, which reduces the interests of the existing median area of culture and social life.

However, the formation of such a mediating cultural-semantic complex dramatically accelerated in Russia / Soviet Union during the last century. Mediation, dialogue with all occurred during most of the XX century in the camp barracks, on the fronts of the world wars and local conflicts in communal apartments, stuffy eseninskih beer, on trains, in geological expeditions in the development of Siberia and commodity stocks rise Kazakh ground. Thus, at the expense of physical and social isolation useknoveniya ordinary people that were previously the basis of social and cultural dynamics of the poles, on the one hand, and the introduction of universal secondary education - on the other hand, podtyanuvshego to middle-level people from the social and cultural sectors of the Archaic, the society by the end of the Soviet period became much more homogeneously. Despite the wealth stratification of post-Soviet period, it remains much more homogeneous than at the beginning of the twentieth century. today.

Today, Russian society is in front of another historic choice, but the clear answer to the question of what Russia we want to build, and think whether - there is not a political elite, nor the society. It is clear that the main options for this building are grouped around two fundamentally different alternative projects. Either we build a democratic, rational, successful and high-tech post-Russia, or the desire to reproduce the spiritual, and even the institutional elements of Russian systems.

In society there are both heterogeneous and multidirectional trends. But the desire to simultaneously translate the leads not only to a maximum of inefficiency, but to knowingly infeasibility project to build a new Russia, incidentally contributing to a split of mass consciousness and introduce into society a well-known element of schizophrenia.

We believe that the strategic building of development can not be simultaneously transmitted in opposite directions, sooner or later will have to make a historic choice. Russia - this is Europe, the political will needed to identify the strategic vector of development.

Our uniqueness in the amount of occupied territory, geographical deepening in Asia. But we have more Europe than, for example, included in the EU Orthodox Bulgaria and Romania, where the influence of eastern culture where more visible than in Russia. Civilization we represent Europe in Asia, Europe, expanding geographically and culturally to the borders of North America and Japan. Thanks to Russia, it potentially becomes a small tip of Asia, in Heartland - land, have a strong impact on world events.

Our European identity was natural since the inception of the Russian statehood. Major features of our historical past is not a special, than, for example, in Spain. But based on the relatively long-standing Arab conquest and the relatively close frankistskogo government of Spain, one of European civilization does not exclude.

Adhering to a rigid belief that the strategic vector of historical development can and should be aimed at the integration of Russia into the Euro-Atlantic civilization to modernize its genealogy, we note that this type of integration can not be edinomomentnoy, a complex and lengthy macro. Recall, for example, that Turkey is seeking to Europe since the time of Mustafa (Kemal) Ataturk. Yes, it is long, but now Europeans are seriously discussing the institutional integration of Turkey into the European Community. But Russia is far more reason to include Europe, not only a clear political choice, and patience, and whereas a tactical failure on the scale of several years - not decades - forced political elites sharahatsya from side to side, eskeypistski to turn away from the present and future in the name of a distant past.

Russia is part of Europe, even irrespective of whether with the Europeans themselves. They are today's willingness or unwillingness to include our country into European structures does not change the situation dramatically - included in the historic tomorrow. There is no need to demand from the European Union and the history of the immediate integration steps, all the time. For half a century of history and even a century is not that for people. Home - to choose the way of approaching, and not delay this development.

It should be noted that the main problem of Russia is the need to transition to organic intensive self, can not be solved within the framework of Russian systems, as it always used the extensive model of development. With regard to the use of extensive modernization, the process of transition to a postindustrial economy, inefficient methods of the period of accelerated industrialization. Today nekonkurentosposoben slave labor, can not return to the status quo, in which non-free scientist and engineer to achieve the military-technical parity with the most developed countries of Europe and North America. Of the witnesses recollections of events, historical documents and artistic works, we know that pay-for scientific discoveries and technological inventions have served on the acceptability compared with the rest of the living conditions of the Gulag system - beds with linen and plenty of bread with a little oil.

The success of modernization in the post-Soviet Russia determine the availability of free and open to the world, the formation of productive innovation sociocultural space. Need modernization is not for the sake of permanent strengthening of the military and political power of the empire, but for the sake of development of society and man. Need an air of freedom, which is so little space in the socio rife efflux Russian systems.

Today in Russia extensive type of development maloeffektiven to maintain its resource base is not old. But we now live mostly in the extensive paradigm, using the last resource of extensive development - an abundance of oil, gas and other natural resources. The availability of abundant natural resources in prolonged opportunity for extensive development, in making the transition to an unknown far-intensive innovative development on the basis of revolutionary technologies. Living through the use of the natural rent, you can skip the next technological revolution, smooth and stepwise increasing the catching of the regions, using the paradigm of intensive development.

With regard to the resource constraints of extensive development, but today is almost impossible territorial expansion of the Russian state, is difficult to establish political and economic control over the neighboring territories. Although there is not all lost, remember at least a project to establish a liberal empire. For a relatively new restrictions that prevent extensive development is the reduction of manpower and dissemination of the European model of demographic reproduction of population. Note that this is not only the most important domestic constraints to extensive development, but also for the institutional reproduction of Russian systems, including in its державно / imperial hypostasis.

But in today's post-Soviet period, we relaxed and played a reduced systemic weaknesses and flaws formed in the realm of the Moscow, the Russian Empire, Soviet sociocultural traditions Russian systems. And it is inheriting these ills and shortcomings, despite the marked decrease in the depth we have and reducing the intensity of the traditional socio-cultural division, suggests the possible opening of this disastrous series of national history.

What is, in fact, we see a possible future socio-cultural prerequisites stall, where the trend indicates the potential volatility of the next stage of development of the country? Unfortunately, these trends are already evident today, when historical time is accelerating, and the result of errors does not make itself wait too long.


Dialogues c reader.


I. Again, in the empire?


Postimpersky status of our nation troubled. Russia today is not yet full-fledged nation state, but pokalechennoe, lost in time and space postimperskoe education, then, that the empire remained. In the public mind there is no consensus about the legitimacy of state borders - it is very difficult to clearly answer the question of why the state is composed of some regions, and why others are not included. The country still has a imperial body, care we inherited from the imperial phase of territorial expansion.

Until now, most of society and political elites perceive imperial territorial heritage as an almost sacred value, what can not be set aside under any circumstances, regardless of socio-cultural proximity or alien controversial territories.

But the most unpleasant for his contemporaries and collaborators of events is that Russia has not yet become a nation state, organized on the principles of civic nation and the threat of the third stage of the disintegration of Russia, as public education, the remainder of the empire, remains.

The legacy of the empire, we won and ethnic and sociocultural blossoming complexity (KN Leont'ev) regions belonging to the three civilizations, the three world religions, in different stages of economic development: pre-industrial, industrial and postindustrial. In addition, Russia has not formed any nation in its ethnic or postetnicheskom, civic sense.

Traditional has a question - when nesformirovannoy nations to agree on such a diverse regional interests, moreover, that in some cases these differences are cultural, civilizational, religious foundation. But it is not only in the cultural and civilizational differences. Because of its geo-economic situation and the difference stadialnogo development have different interests and property of the Russian regions, where the ethnic Russian, in stark differences in living standards, income and social security.

Marginal regions of Russia today tend rather than to Moscow, but to the world's centers of economic power. In western countries, in Königsberg / Kaliningrad, the economic attraction for the more developed EU stadialno stratify on the historical and cultural attraction. On the east of the strong economic attraction of becoming the Asia-Pacific countries, especially China. In this case, it still is not a proper cultural and civilizational reorientation of Siberia and the Far East, but rather on the absolute economic integration in the economy of this part of Asia. But, as we know from the history of economic integration often should the political integration. This is largely just a matter of time.

We once again draw attention to those things known to stress the difference between the interests of Russian regions, once again turn to the question of how to possibly negotiate a variety of regions of interest within the past, but not yet gone before the end of Empire, the Russian state?

World historical experience provides two main solutions, individually designed for different historical and sociocultural contexts.

The first option involves networking etnofederativnyh relations, procedures, harmonization of regional interests, a clear distinction between the delegation of authority. This will be a long, often painful process for the Russian authorities. Too great a temptation to revert to the traditional, albeit historically izzhivshim a form of governance, simplify the harmonization of interests, to abandon them, to manage the order, a de facto authoritarian governance and the unitary state. This is the second path.

In the framework of the interests of the regions agreed to a minimum, the major decisions taken at the center, the process of agree takes place in the tradition of a unitary imperial state, which actually was the Soviet Union and the Romanov empire. Although the Tsarist empire and was known exception to the autonomy of Finland, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Poland ... The construction involves the use of violence against dissenters, not a harmonization of regional interests, but the imposition of solutions federal. This is a legacy that today's native Russian government with the imperial state. I close the definition of the key properties of the empire, the E. Yasin: Empire impossible without violence, no matter how soft or its form. This is the main identifier empire .

And today over the country, the authorities and society still dominates the goods Geography and History, limitations, they asked, actions and decisions in many ways continues to define the old gauge imperial life. To change the vector of development and escape from it, you'll need to make great efforts to build a genuine federalism, working on the formation of civic nation, to build democratic institutions and traditions.

To continue to move in a historically familiar, lived-and nakatannoy lines of imperial life, so much effort is required. You can almost observe the removal of self mechanism authoritarian unitary state. But if earlier, until about the Crimean War, during the reign of Nicholas I that track has been in the mountain, that is, the benefits of the imperial state and the authoritarian rule exceed the costs, the post-war costs exceeded the benefits gradually, becoming today the most significant constraint to development country. I refer to the close position E. Yassin: declining empire began long ago. Developing countries, the empire - there are increasingly becoming a brake on the development of the country .

And here we do not save history, because her experience is to be realized otrefleksirovan society. As a matter of historical work on the bugs had not been in the public consciousness has become a popular false impression that the Soviet empire has become a victim of short-term external circumstances and treachery of the political and intellectual elite - Democrat. But if all that easy, then you can try to change external circumstances, enhance geopolitical position of the Russian state, to make the border farther to the west. That's is organized neoimpersky project - glove would perceive it as a bad joke pervoaprelskuyu, but hampered by an increasingly clear sense that this project not only real, but is already in progress. It is evident that its implementation can not lead to the most serious foreign policy costs, put Russia on the brink of war between the cold - latent and hot - open.

Naturally, however, that the most serious losses from this military-political confrontation will be very Russian society, so apathetic dealer Today the democratic gains of the Yeltsin-Gorbachev period. But democracy - this is the only way to protect yourself from society foreign policy adventure, because it is kept to a decorative, purely external, are devoid of references to the refusal of most foreign-policy Insurance. We know what a huge price to pay the people of Germany for the rejection of democracy and the unleashing of the Second World War. Just as the price paid for this choice of the German political elite and the peoples of Europe. But this is someone else's historical experience, too distant for Russian society, the analogy, we even own historical experience teaches nothing.

Building in Russia of controlled democracy minimized public participation in decision-making, both domestic and foreign policy. Decisions of this takes part of the political elite, which is known to share can be defined as nostalgiruyuschih of the Soviet empire statesmen. The key question, to which they are responsible, is as follows: Russia - is part of Europe, the potential of the West, or an independent power center - as the EU, USA and China? From the answer to this question depends our present and future.

If Russian society and political elite respond that Russia part of Europe and the potential of the West, along the lines of Germany, which is just after the Second World War joined the Euro-Atlantic civilization, then the expansion of the EU and NATO to the East and South, on Ukraine and the Georgia not only dangerous, but also desirable. Then this movement, along with Russia - they are in NATO and the EU before, we again later. Naturally, the integration of these international structures in the small Georgia and Russia can be a big different.

There is another option - Russia is an independent power center, an independent Eastern Christian civilization, embodied in the earlier Russian and Soviet empires, and which should translate into a new empire. This response suggests that NATO is a military and political rival, whose promotion to the borders of Russia poses a serious threat - a threat to the very possibility of imperial restoration.

How serious that threat is perceived and how far can go the Russian military-political elite in order to neutralize this threat? In the case of Ukraine the most serious threat is perceived. Because only together with Ukraine, Russia may in some way to go back to the imperial ways of development based on Orthodox-Slavic identity. Without the Ukrainian Center of the Russian empire will inevitably shift to the East, the two heads of double-headed eagle will be rotated from the Euro-Byzantine heritage to the legacy of the East, Mongolia, China. And if you do not have long to Byzantium, the growing economic and geopolitical power of China is today. Without Ukraine, a new Russian neoimpersky project could be just the project return to Ordu, ideological and military-political distancing from the West, the departure from Europe.

Today the Russian statesmen sympathetic to the traditional imperial project - Russia, headed the Slavic state of education - at the head of Ukraine and Belarus. This kernel is the dissolved Soviet Union, the traditional core of the Russian state - so, let the language of geopolitics, the majority of the Heartland. For some, not very historic time, it may be enough resources to deal with the European Union and NATO, will be followed by another geo-political and social disaster - is also a repetition distance. It is important for the Russian political elite is that when neoimperskom uniting Slavs label on reign will be issued in Moscow, in the case of the East, to China, the distribution of labels can go to Beijing.

It is clear that under this set of alternatives neoimperskaya part of the political elite of Russia is desperate to fight for Ukraine, for its imperial integration, or at least the pro-Russian course. Indeed, the integration of Ukraine into EU and NATO removes even the theoretical possibility of the traditional imperial restoration.

The stakes for Ukraine zashkalivayusche high, it is here possible powerful geopolitical scrapping with Russian participation, in contrast to developments in the Caucasus, in Georgia, which, with all its severity and the possible tragic could not go beyond a local conflict. Not the Caucasus, but the Ukraine sent the geopolitical edge of imperial restoration. Do this geopolitical scrapped, the division and the division of the country to its west and its east by the Ukrainians? I think not - irrespective of political and party loyalties, even regardless of the language - Ukrainian or Russian. And it is not already, it is important to support the Ukrainian voters' Party of Regions, Yulia Tymoshenko, Our Ukraine - all of them do not need. This is just outside the Ukraine neoimperskim forces.

No imperial restoration and the peoples of Russia - prekrasnodushnye neoimperskie dreams over a cup of tea costly when you try their practical implementation.


II. The future of the country in the context of ethno-religious revival


We believe that finding recipes for solving new problems and challenges in the era of authoritarian socio-cultural tradition, updating the experience forced the Moscow kingdom dopetrovskogo period in our history - leads to a repetition of the same historical mistakes. Now pull the company back in the Middle Ages, not only claiming orthodoxy as the dominant state religion, but considering it almost as a state ideology - there is a danger of confusion. This action can not consolidate, but to undermine the socio-cultural foundation of the post-Soviet states, thereby calling into question its territorial integrity.

Despite such serious implications of such policies today are more distinctly heard voices of modern pochvennikov, denying the universal essence of Christianity, which has no Hellenes, nor Jew, voting, in which all semantic emphasis shifted to underline bogoizbrannosti, nothing on like the identity of Russia and Russian human self. In doing so, Christianity itself is considered merely as a convenient tool for the consolidation and mobilization of the ethnic Russian people, a marker that can clearly divide humanity on the we and them, our, and not ours, righteous and sinful.

The idea of such a privatization of Christianity and use it for these specific needs is not new, but in pre-Soviet period of our history such plans, to some extent overlap with the sociocultural reality in which the country lived.

But the erosion of traditional values that have taken place in recent decades as the late Soviet Union, both in post-Soviet Russia (in the most explicit form), today led to a sharp activation of protective traditionalism. Today hear the statement, according to which a person can consider themselves Russian only in the case of belonging to orthodox religion: Orthodoxy for us, the Russians - our matrix and the base of our historical existence. Yes, for many centuries of Russian history that was so, but after more than seventy violent repression of various faiths such generalizations questionable. The Russian empire was predominantly Orthodox country. But by the atheistic Soviet period and the post-agnostic, during which maintained the secular nature of education and mass culture - the Russian society has become far less religious.

It needs no further explanation of why, today, after the Soviet period of our history, we live in a fundamentally different reality. Specify only the results of sociological surveys conducted in 2004, the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion, where only just over half (51.7%) of respondents belonging to a variety of ethnic groups in Russia, said that they believe in God. More than half of them (57.5%) in parallel, like just in case, believe in such supernatural forces and phenomena such as witchcraft and magic, the resettlement of souls, destiny, horoscope, signs, UFOs and aliens.

In addition, the majority (48.8%) positive attitude of Russians to the proliferation of festivals in Russia, came to us from abroad, such as the Catholic Christmas, Valentine's Day, etc., are not revealing any desire to defend traditional country religious values. These statistics also show that of any anti allegedly inherently peculiar Russian man who does not have to say.

But all the same that the data of opinion polls indicate prevailing in Russian society, indifference with respect to matters of faith. Today votserkovlennyh Orthodox people about 3-4% relative to the total number of those who in one way or another, identifies with the Orthodox faith. In other words, all attempts to build on Orthodoxy as state ideology have little instrumental capacity, as 3-4% percent of Russian citizens are a minority of its population.

In addition, to Orthodoxy as the dominant state religion and the only true ideology is not only government but also the actual ecclesiastical dimension. We know how to Marxism in the USSR became responsible for the horrors of Leninist-Stalinist period in our history, although the inherent prerequisites for that at the very Marxism was not so much. The Orthodox Church, putting the burden of state ideology, thus assumes responsibility for the goods and secular, by definition, public policy decisions that are not always popular. As an example, a recall has caused so much public interest law on monetization of social benefits. And if the My Kingdom is not of this world, and human hands to build the kingdom of God on earth is impossible, then is it worth for the sake of psevdopatriotam and lzhepravoslavnym worldly temptation to yield to another? And here we think it appropriate to recall the admonition Russian philosopher Ε.Η. Trubetskoy, noting the dangerous tendencies of his time, quite clearly, and reproduce in the bottom of this: Gromily, lzhepravoslavnye, lzhepatrioty, and with them new and false prophets will prepare a new and more horrible than now, the explosion of Bolshevism - in our current reality can pave the way for a new, fifth on the account, the Russian catastrophe.

In fact, there is the choice of our present and future life - secular or clerical nature of the Russian political system, the desirability or undesirability of church-state partnership. In my opinion, our державные circles making an attempt, albeit still very cautious, to implement a plan to introduce in practice lubochnyh symbol of Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality. As long as a reference point is selected, with a known percentage of convention, in 1913. Great was the temptation to return to the last relatively quiet time of imperial history, as if there was no follow-up the horrors of the twentieth century. Yet these horrors was prepared and a persistent desire of the Russian authorities did not change as far as possible, keep otzhivshuyu monarchical form of government, to resist the coming of modernism and the search for peace a moral ideal in Russia dopetrovskoy.

Going forward, looking back, it was difficult. Can not see the path under my feet, there is a big risk stumbled, losing the direction of fall history. And in 1913 came a decade is quite apocalyptic.

Today we seem to be moving to a new era of high style - similar to the last great style of 30's of last century. Vaguely mereschatsya front of a black and yellow imperial banners, tasty crunchy snow under yunkerskim boots, life with the sound of the king's anthem God save the king fizkulturnikov with parades, sirech Olympians, on Red Square.

Message to the imperial retro, including the close church-state partnerships, may not be the last opportunity to show the power used by the city and the world of new and old at the same time, pre-Soviet, державность powerful Russia. To what extent the aesthetics of the new / old will be able to combine great style with democracy, the question is, of course, interesting. Style substantially affects the political process, a great style of pushing the country if not autocracy, then the orthodox version of the monarchy, framed the constitutional attributes. Monarchy in modern Russia? This madness has its own system. Prosperity pozavcherashnih ideologies have the right sign of the beginning of the agony yesterday's ideas - Fyodor Stepun argued in his The idea of Russia . - This explains their delusional, delirious nature ... Revive obsolescent ideology can not be nothing in life is not invading a fateful moment in the development of ideas, but as a creature of the same subject to revive a dead ideology. Because attempts Galvanization ideologies always only convicts of their final mertvost .

Yes and no return in history, neither in life do not. Traditionalism, including its religious performance, away material. Artificial renaissance traditionalism is not only absurd and inevitably comical, but also destructive.

Perhaps part of the church hierarchy and the public seek to merge to the State, to make the church the first among equals. However, they must understand the implications and implementation of such Project, including the ROC. If the church will play an equally important role in public life, which during the Soviet period of our history has played the CPSU, the Kremlin will be taken for the management structures of the church seriously. And there is no doubt that such a course would be damaging to the credibility of the same church. Russia is not mono-Poland, where the clerical policy is supported by an ethnically homogenous mass traditionalists. In Russia, too, there are traditionalists, but they historically belong to different ethnic groups and religions. The most terrible things that can be done in a historical cultural and religious diversity, it is a child draw the line between human beings on the basis of religion. Such a mental boundary to divide society into a - a stranger, and then at the glass ceiling has all chances to become visible in new government otverdet shape.

Poland, like other countries in Eastern Europe and Russia, save more than in Western Europe, commitment to religious and cultural traditionalism through the clear, and often hidden anticommunist movement. Such struggled with this, the idea of struggling with ideas. As a result, we, together with our neighbors on the block missed a significant part of the fundamental processes of the twentieth century: building a society of consumption, the shift of mass from the maximalist civil and religious ideologies in the world of material dostizhitelnoy life. The fact, however, that in today's France and in modern Russia votserkovlennyh number of people, especially among young people, is only a few percent.

This indifference to religion of the general population, preoccupation with earthly concerns of real people, as well as the pervasive influence of mass culture objectively stores, Conserve Russia in its present borders. Strengthening the influence of religious ideologies on the lives of individual regions and the country as a whole threatens our common future. That is why the desire to impose on students the lessons of Orthodoxy is not particularly a manifestation of the wrong ideas about the development of society and its prospects as a society. Such strategic errors stem from a misunderstanding of the place Russia in a changing world, fear of institutional integration in European structures. They are the result of unproductive search third ways and unwillingness of the Russian political elites to part with the mental part of the imperial heritage.

Today, it is understood that the construction of ethno-national rather - the Russian, and not the world - ideokraticheskoy empire. Suppose that in varying degrees, but the Russian empire and Soviet Union were the world aspire to ideokraticheskimi empires.

With a purely mythological thinking, radical supporters of the revival empire, out to the borders of 1991 and then in 1913 not perceive the historical patterns, each time discovering the history again, seeing it as a random coincidences pile. And traditional, respectable type of the English empire, I think they are too weak and liberal. Rather, aesthetic charm and geopolitical request the Third Reich. His story to them, of course, the decree, but twelve years of its existence are perceived as a historical accident, rather than as inevitable. Then why not try to carry out close to the spirit of the project in Russia, of course, strictly orthodox and autocratic setting. That they were only twelve years, and our Empire led by the emperor would be exactly millennium, it would be like outside of physical time in the space-time mythical.

We believe that in a multinational and multi-state rate for ethnic nationalism can only lead to a radical increase in nationalism small peoples, to strengthen the country is not centripetal, but the centrifugal force. In ethnic and polikonfessionalnom Russian society is extremely dangerous to play on ethnic sentiments - the emphasis on ethnic and religious identity of large and small nations to anything except increase the likelihood of the collapse of the state, can not lead.

If long-term and relatively stable coexistence of different joint regions, people living in them, may, in principle, this possibility is based on two main principles: real federalism and confederation with the elements of civil-ethnic nation. And here we are keeping with our historical tradition, as a civil, not an ethnic nation is generic link to the nationality of the empire. Our blossoming complexity imperial legacy here may be useful, for this reason we can not build an ethnic nation, but we can polyethnic and civil. In terms of respect for civil and political freedoms, human rights in general, this option obviously preferable.

What can help and hinder the implementation of these principles, and hence the further joint life in the territory of the Russian state?

Civil nations living together in a federal / confederal state could build on the principles of social dostizhitelnoy human activity. In pursuit of Russian dream in Moscow, Yakutsk, Daghestanian design, it can at least do not remember, who is he, where is and where, or, at least, went before - forget about its cultural civilizational identity. While it it forgotten, as it is on the periphery of his consciousness, until it determines its social activity - postimperskoe The Russian state will exist in its present borders.

Even today, despite all popyatnye, retrograde movements, traditional religious identity of various ethnic communities present in the public consciousness largely in the latent, dormant form. It is blurred and the Europeanization of the unification of different degrees of intensity and duration, in the case of Central Russia - from the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich Peter and I, and the total secularization of politics pursued by the Soviet regime.

Today's inaudibility ethnic and religious identity of Russians are united country, mitigate inter-ethnic and interfaith tensions. As soon as the process of ethno-religious revival will be a truly massive, these contradictions seriously worse, calling into question the territorial integrity of the country. The more events, updated civilization, the early religious life of Russia's regions, the less stable structure of Russian statehood. The degree of latency determines the degree of the strength of traditional Russia.

Today, Georgia imperial heritage influences the choice between a de facto unitary and a federal / confederal state determine the choice between democracy and various forms of authoritarianism. Many of those who now will of fate was in cohort of people, policy-makers, conducted internally neoimperskuyu policy of unification of the social and cultural space, minimizing the harmonization of regional interests. It seems that the choice between two options is made. De facto, you choose the re-establishment of a unitary state.

Many of neoimperskogo state of the state and the refusal stems from democracy in favor of controlled, but something even decorative option. But ethno-religious differences and stadialnye regions make a unitary form of organization of the state (de jure or de facto) and Democracy malosovmestimymi. The choice of unitarity greatly influences the actions of authorities on the case of building formal and informal vertical in politics, business, media. It may be that this way is effective today, but this effect is temporary, purely tactical.

Yes, the democratic way of development of the country as a nation-state declared the existing constitution, but because of Soviet history, we know also that the declaration of democratic principles does not mean their actual compliance. Here is enough to remember Stalin-buharinskuyu the constitution in 1936, and negotiations with the 1965 presentation of human rights under the slogan - Follow your constitution. Today we are witnessing the restoration of the model simulation and legal state, and yet protogosudarstvenna culture, and society atomizirovano - can not a priori exclude the possibility of negative scenarios of our future.

Russian Europeans can not samouspokaivatsya and blagodushestvovat: playing great rhetoric, the political elite is able to tune up, under the influence of their own propaganda to go beyond the boundary of common sense, against his will be dragged into a situational logic neoimperskogo process. Follow neoimperskoy practical politics catastrophic, inevitably fraught with human suffering and the territorial disintegration of the Russian state, the destruction of its geographical integrity.

Today we are all contemporaries and involuntary witnesses / participants of events occurring in the country. We know that in the post-Soviet Russia, said the word little effect on changing the social and cultural reality, but can lead to scientific and public interest. We also know that the role of personality in history, opened today, yet we remain contemporary events, we have at least a theoretical chance to change something, try to avoid the most negative scenarios of Russia's future. Tomorrow, when the ordinary historical events already occur, it will be is impossible, so we are trying to catch today.


III. Civil society and power: from confrontation to dialogue


Recently, in a paradoxical situation. On the one hand, there is significant economic growth, Russian companies are becoming major players of the international market, increasing the capitalization of Russia, rising incomes of Russians. On the other - trimmed public information space, especially the federal TV channels, the system is organized managed democracy. Power and society is less talk and stop to hear each other. Their communication more confined to the mix Marches dissenting and the OMON. That's bad for everyone, and for the democratic prospects of Russia in the first place. It is necessary to stop the confrontation.

Today, power in Russia is guided rather than ideals, but interests. When it comes to managing hundreds of billions and trillions of dollars in the long run, none of the persons concerned in this pragmatic process would not infringe. Common sense can expect that the most important for the political elite, including people from the uniformed services, not so much planting in the country of ideals, Orthodoxy, autocracy and the people, but rather build their own economic capacity and the largest Russian goskompany.

In 90 years Russia, unlike other countries in Eastern Europe managed to retain national control over the resource, the most important sectors of the economy. It is worth noting just the price of Russian society has paid for maintaining national control over the economy.

We know that during this period of our socio-economic history of the subjects of management all by hook or by crook tried to minimize the tax deductions to budgets of all levels, resulting in social support for pensioners, the disabled, mothers and children, medicine and education to a minimum. The price of preservation of property in the hands of local capitalists and the state the people the children who died before the old people, millions of homeless and others in the same spirit. We have kept in the national hands of the economy, but once again undermined the population. We retain control over the economy and territory, but it will work on the conservation of living people, different language, religion and culture. This is a price issue, and the price already paid.

And there, in the Eastern European countries, new foreign owners pay taxes, and such a failure in the financing of social programs was not, was not so obvious, and the processes of depopulation, a sharp deterioration in the quality of society.

But what is done is done. Today, not to help the Russian authorities to drive themselves in an increasingly shrinking corridor opportunities from bad to worse. There such a configuration of power and property, which exists.

The possession of power and property of the power does pragmatic enough. It must deliver to the West and East oil and gas, it needs to earn real money. This is what limits it to the self, it can allow yourself a lot, but not all. It may, for example, sterilize public information space and point trimmed of his political opponents, but can not go on a serious, binding of solidarity, alliance with Iran or China.

The reason for these restrictions in the ratio of profits and losses in the largest possible cost. And now restrict democracy, build it managed, simulation option in many ways to maximize profits, maximize the capitalization of Russian goskompany. Today, on the low startup society and economy, with all reservations and costs, including the moral order, it turns out.

Tomorrow, when the structure of property ownership changes, and in her capacity as strategic investors include large western companies, and GDP per capita pereshagnet magical figure of five thousand dollars, the situation will change. Then in the same order to maximize profits can not be claimed operetochnaya, and real democracy as an instrument at a certain stage of development of economy and society contribute to further economic growth, the capitalization of Russia, and the population will not be pressing economic incentives to change the power on the left or right extremists.

Is this policy the authorities with democracy? From an Islamic democracy and Soviet might and compatible, but not with classical Western-style democracy. Nevertheless, today we live in a historic transition between the authoritarian Soviet regime and the modern Western-type society. Authorities can speed up or slow down the process, but it did not stop him in power. Taking into account the peculiarities of our history, the ongoing transition option today is not very optimistic, but not the most terrible.

Limitations of democracy affects not only liberals, but left, the heirs of the Soviet Union. Efforts of the current government there has been a consistent process of de-communization Russia. And of course, and shall be shut off artificially electoral base of the Communist Party (Fair Russia), removed the communist symbols in the army. Left all stripes extruded into marginal plane. The danger of Communist revenge eliminated completely, even though in 1996, Zyuganov was very close to victory in the presidential elections in Russia.

I think that comes from the Left is a serious danger for the present and the future of the country, and allow them to power is not desirable, at least at the federal level. This unwillingness to share political and economic power to those who are on the left and right flank, and is due to the use of administrative resources and manipulative political strategists. Naturally, the most significant part of this reluctance to share power is the desire to preserve the integrity of administrative rent control over cash flows in the Russian economy. That is the interest of power conservation has a private component.

There apparently paradoxical and ambivalent situation internally. Of the particular interests of political stability grows, exhibited severe defensive units in relation to potential rivals, including the left and right radicals. The latter fact makes this meaningful policies, designed to prevent the accession to power in the transition from Soviet authoritarianism to democracy, left and right radicals, to prevent a new Russian revolution.

Only when the Russian company will become part of golden billion, when the country will build a society of consumption, when the average Russian will be rich, then vnesistemnye, leftist and ultranationalist forces cease to be dangerous for the country.

But ironically, today, left again in favor of the part of the Russian intelligentsia. Limonov is involved in marches disagree, as well, and fellow Udaltsov, leader Avangard Red Youth. I wonder how you can fight for democracy together with the heirs of Lenin, Stalin, why not fight against the terrible power and the democracy, together with the heirs of Hitler, Maluta Skuratov and other well-known in the history of the defenders of democracy.

Maybe someone from the Russian politicians liberal camp likes to associate with the avant-garde red youth and limonovtsami, even combined, it is their choice. Destroy - not to build in street riots, and even more so in the revolution has a fair share of romance and adrenaline. But the romance of the revolution have to pay too much, not only the direct participants, but contemporaries of events. Revolution devastating in its results, and Russia is fully exhausted its revolutionary limit.

This does not mean that people on the extreme wing of Russian politics is not necessary to speak. But the death uchuvstvovat with them in a broad political coalition, with the ultimate goal is to obtain state power. God forbid all of us and the history of the success of such a revolution of the company. There are too many marginal, yet earn too few able-bodied citizens of Russia - workers, peasants and intellectuals. So what political forces select power in such developments - who knows. One can only assume that these people will be neither democracy nor the more liberal. At best for the country if they are liberal Democrats. All other options are worse.

At present, with a predominance of free elections in the country economically insolvent people have a risk of coming to power, destructive - populists and radicals. You can hold free elections with equal access various, including radical political forces, the federal TV channels today, but then you might think and the introduction of a legislative anti insurance, remembering, for example, elections in the third and the fourth State Duma. As we know from history, in the early twentieth century Russia antiekstrimistskoy such insurance was a serious property qualification.

I am not concerned about free choice, let us say, the people Rublevka, which, as a rule, a major asset and a good education. They could hear the extent of any television treatment and rebuke Udaltsova Limonov and without risk to their political choices, mainly determined by their economic interests. They are, by definition, can make a lot of wisdom and sorrow, ie knowledge of the political and economic life. This knowledge of the vast array of negative information about living in a country not particularly affect their choices as voters make up more to diversify their investments and life plans.

But I am concerned about the manner in which the right of force, namely, with all possible reservations, right-wing forces are now in power, could win the election, to get a parliamentary majority, if their policies are not consistent with the current economic interests of the majority of the population of Russia. United Russia is not only a party of power, but also the right party, slightly more diluted populism ATP. Making people vote against their visceral, left on the political and economic interests is very difficult, and the victory of right-wing, sirech party in power, under such conditions may be largely a victory of administrative resources in the coupe with modern political strategists.

What then is the situation in Russia is similar to the situation in the Islamic world, where attempts to hold relatively free elections led to the threat of Islamist victory. And with the threat of the secular elites of Muslim countries such as Turkey, dealt in different ways, both who can. How to solve the problem of its Islamist Turkish army, we are well aware not only of history. Turkish military had to use more traditional, more stringent methods of social control, because too much power of religious traditions, too, by the standards of Western countries, poor Turkish peasants.

The Russian authorities have the situation somewhat similar to something different. The situation in Russia is easier, but still too poor by the standards of developed economies and democracies Russian peasants, workers, and Public Employment, they still may not be full players consumer society. They still need information and anesthetic protection from the horrors surrounding his real life, look at the world through the pink glasses first and second federal channels.

The real world in which these people lived, not very friendly to them, economic growth in the country yet geographically located in major cities, especially in mega-cities of Moscow and St. Petersburg. A lot of Russians must be given not only the physical possibility to reach a better future, but also help break down psychologically, to wait for the spread of economic growth in breadth and depth of.

From the history of Russia and other countries, we know that the inability to realize their potential in the field of the Earth, pushes the material life of man to the care of the validity of the scope of deviant practices, and the scope sverhmaterialnogo, acculturation to the world of ideas, less secular, more religious. And he and a solution destructive for the individual and society. Destructive practices as deviant behavior, such as such as alcoholism and drug addiction, and treatment of spiritual Opium secular and religious ideologies.

In this context, it becomes clear federal policy of broadcasting channels, which, according to expert estimates, soothes, entertains and besot mass audience. We see a conscious attempt to replace undesirable forms of socially deviant behavior failed the citizens of Russia virtual world of mass culture. This is a form of drug anesthesia unsuccessful social strata of society, minimizing their protest potential, obstacles to the realization of the real social conditions of its own existence. Every evening, the federal TV channels make them vaccinated against regular participation in the Russian revolution, minimizing the possibility of such a revolution.

The mission was to prevent a potential revolution in strategic perspective, does not very good authority, if not more pleasant, then at least more understandable. In the revolutionary context can be understood and enhanced television anesthesia part of Russian society. Let the best man in the street will be near the customer than the fiery revolutionary. If the man in the street wake up, slezet with needles television virtual reality, a few do not seem to anybody. Strasheny Russian revolt, senseless and merciless. Man in the street, which is at once revolutionary, remember everything. He remember the authorities and the social good fellow, the disintegration of the great powers - the USSR, the value of the property separation in society, their own unenviable economic situation, the absence of the great national idea, the destruction of traditional relations in society.

Because we all need to be more careful in speeches and actions, no longer throw stones glass house called Russia. In their political actions and the public and the authorities should take into account the fundamental volatility of the current design of the Russian statehood.

The fundamental cause of the instability of a minimal political participation of citizens in political life, even those who supported and defended the new power for most of the post-Soviet period. As at first sight paradoxically, the internal fragility of modern Russian statehood due to the almost exclusive reliance on the power chinovnye, including the power structures are not saving in a critical situation. In this regard, at least remember the experience of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

It is so hard for Russia to repeat traditional errors. Power is the most weakened structure of Russian statehood, localized and demoralize virtually all segments of civil society that could support her in a difficult minute. Now she hopes only for the officials and people in uniform. The Russian state has become too fragile, this wine and the sin of government and society.

This situation requires the company not to make sudden movements, attempting to break what might be broken. From history we know that the destruction of statehood adversely affect the individual and society.

Therefore, it is necessary not to break, but to build. Not included in the clinch tight and destructive confrontation, but to support the possible forms of cooperation, to use all possible platforms for dialogue, including the Public Chamber. In this way you can influence not only in words but also in the affairs of government. We need to try to stop the confrontation of liberal society and the authorities, learn to listen not only to themselves but also other, to move from monologue to dialogue with each other, to depart from the position of white garments and moral excellence of the power, not to pursue a clear victory, but compromise.

We recall that in our history has been, and rejection of power, the refusal of dialogue, were populist, esery, as in Soviet times trying to live is not to lie dissidents ... There were people opposing power in word and deed, but that it was for power, and who is a party to the latest possible closure of the dialogue?

We know that this neadaptivnaya the power of inertia, shape, lack of decisions and the will to respond adequately to the challenges of the time, until the end was way samoischerpaniya. In Empire, the Romanovs, it has exhausted itself not moving towards a desirable society, the republican form of government, ending its existence revolution of 1905-1907 years and the participation in the First World War on the side of a republican France. Surprising ease revolution in February 1917 the first revolution was the result of the desire, which is shared by several generations of Russian educated society. It can not be so prolong the inevitable, a revolution can not let door policy of internal, it break in the window of foreign policy, it will still come if it was a historic time and historical time neadaptivnoy power - gone.

On the stump rotted and the USSR, rotted before being bloodless, free, I wish the participants of the events samoraspada. It is a separate big topic, I note only that the past and its historical time. And the dialogue and the power of society in the era of Gorbachev had already saved could not - too many have been in the history of the USSR and blood was too inefficient Soviet economy.

Today there is no need to repeat the same political mistakes. Back from the confrontation and dialogue - deliriously difficult task, impossible in the absence of a party, but the dialogue between them is the only way to remove the still largely latent civil resistance, to become an effective mechanism to strengthen both civil society and the Russian state.


Gavrov Sergey Nazipovich (Russian: Гавров Сергей Назипович, 1964, Gorky, USSR) - Russian philosopher, social anthropologist, a political scientist. Doctor of Philosophy. Professor of Sociology and Social Anthropology MGUDT. Senior Research Fellow sector social processes and systems of the Russian Institute for Cultural Research. Author of several books on the problems of modernization, intercultural, imperial and colonial studies, and over one hundred scientific articles included in the collection of the Library of Congress, the world's leading libraries and universities (Harvard, Turabian, Chicago, APA, MLA, University of Wisconsin-Madison [[1]], Freie Universität Berlin)[[2]]. A member of the editorial board of the journals "Personality. Culture. Community" (Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences) and the "Psychology elite", as well as the Commission "To study the complex problems of human culture and society", acting under the Board of the Russian Academy of Sciences "The history of world culture". In the area of scientific interest - the problem of modernization of transformations in different hypostasis, including political, demographic, educational, social and cultural as well as the philosophy of education. Professor Gavrov included in the summary recommendation list of Russian scientists and politicians, best reflected in their political life in Russia in 1994-2003 years. Worldcat. Russian Politics [[3]]. A member of the Writers' Union in Moscow