Между Сциллой культуртрегерского академизма и Харибдой чрезмерной политизированности (original) (raw)

Подборка архивных публикаций по годам

Между Сциллой культуртрегерского академизма и Харибдой чрезмерной политизированности

Чтение Мамардашвили и спор с ним – сложная задача. В каком-то смысле это новый тест на имперскую цивилизованность, или цивилизованный патриотизм...

Р I: Статья Николая Короткова «Уроки русскости с Мерабом Мамардашвили» на нашем ресурсе вызвала многочисленные отклики, чаще всего сводившиеся к отчаянным проклятиям покойному философу и нам, опубликовавшим статью о нем. Между тем, мы отнюдь не ставим никаких точек над i в вопросах о наследии Мамардашвили, о советской философии в целом и о советском же западничестве, ярким представителем которого и был герой статьи. В этом смысле возвращение к этой теме – для нас повод продемонстрировать нашу открытость к диалогу со всеми теми пишущими людьми в патриотическом лагере, кто не боится сложных и острых вопросов. Одним из таких людей является наш постоянный автор, философ Юрий Пущаев, которому мы и передаем слово.

Философ Мераб Мамардашвили принадлежит к тем фигурам позднесоветской культуры, которые до сих пор продолжают вызывать сильные эмоции и споры.

Как я уже однажды писал в свое время, популярность Мамардашвили, то, что его имя до сих пор «на слуху», во многом объясняется тем, что он «умел резко и отчетливо говорить на социально-политические и историософские темы. Причём далеко не случайно, что его творчество ценят многие наши убежденные западники и либералы, но зато его, как правило, терпеть не могут представители патриотического лагеря. По отношению к Мамардашвили у читающей публики существует довольно отчётливое деление в социально-политическом плане: патриоты часто считают его чуть ли не русофобом, и поэтому относятся к нему довольно негативно, зато для многих сторонников сугубо “европейского вектора развития России”, не чуждых интереса к философии, он является весьма уважаемой фигурой».

Дополнительным фактором раздражения, будем говорить откровенно, тут является то, что критиком России в лице Мамардашвили выступает «кавказец», грузин, который часто подчеркивал разницу между грузинским и русским менталитетом не в пользу последнего.

Однако как первое, так и второе обстоятельство должно нам послужить не столько поводом для упражнений на темы национального самопревознесения или самоуничижения, сколько в качестве нового материала для осмысления старого раскола на славянофилов и западников, осложненного сравнительно новой проблематикой национальное/великоросское как равное в советское время. Если в XIX веке западниками в русской культуре были, условно говоря, свои, русские, то наследие советской эпохи внесло в этот лагерь и уроженцев «национальных окраин» империи, словно дополнительно тестируя нас на терпимость и широту мышления. То, что простили бы и прощают русскому по национальности Чаадаеву, в наше время менее склонны прощать то ли своему, то ли не своему «грузинскому Сократу».

Хотя, конечно, Мамардашвили в романтическом очаровании «идеальной Европой» и своем социально-политическом манихействе, которое вдруг так резко сказалось в нем в годы перестройки, был по-своему произведением прежней русской почвы, нес в себе ее признаки утопизма и радикализма.

В случае с Мамардашвили мы должны пройти между двумя крайностями. Поскольку он был не только академическим ученым или подчеркнуто внеполитизированным мыслителем, но и своего рода «трибуном мысли» и «шпионом неизвестной Родины» (а шпионы все-таки всегда на кого-то «работают», не так ли?) крайне важно соблюсти верный баланс. С одной стороны, в ходе во многом оправданного предъявления счетов к его тогдашней общественно-политической позиции не стоит зачеркивать его оригинальный дар и талант философа. Он был настоящий философ сознания, захваченный тем, что он называл «событием мысли», феноменологическим анализом условий, на которых она как значимое и судьбоносное явление может случиться с человеком, и, шире, вообще в культуре.

Для сомневающихся в его даре и чуткости к этому событию, которое можно еще называть «чудом мысли», мы можем посоветовать прочитать хотя бы первые страницы его «Лекций о Прусте», или «Картезианских размышлений» или хотя бы это интервью с примечательным заголовком «Сознание – это парадоксальность, к которой невозможно привыкнуть».

С другой стороны, в силу того влияния, которые его социально-философские и историософские идеи оказывают до сих пор на заметную часть нашего общества, его образ нельзя сводить к фигуре просто «учителя мышления», парящего лишь в гносеологических и этических эмпиреях. Более того, тут необходим принципиальный и категорический спор, касающийся понимания исторических путей России и понимания роли в ней Православия, но спор компетентный, не сводящийся к убогому по интеллектуальному содержанию «_философ Маймуношвили русских не любил, поэтому философа такого вообще нет_». Да, дополнительное раздражение в русском обществе вызывает то, что претензии русской истории высказывает кавказец, грузин, который и образование получил в России, и состоялся как мыслитель в ареале русской культуры, и в этом смысле он, увы, с увлечением пилил сук, на котором сам вырос и сидел.

Однако если кавказское происхождение вынести за скобки, то нельзя не видеть, что Мамардашвили во многом выписывается в радикальную западническую традицию, идущую от Чаадаева. Это большой сегмент истории русской и советской культуры, хочется нам того или нет. С ним «работать» надо? Его аргументы знать надо? Или будем лишь тупо хихикать над «Маймуношвили с сациви»? Тогда спор заранее проигран, хотя бы потому, что по-настоящему мы в него и не вступали.

Помню, как меня еще лет 25 назад удивили своей непоследовательностью следующие слова Мамардашвили, сказанные в 1989 году в связи с проектом Конституции СССР от Андрея Сахарова (цитирую очень большой кусок текста, делая при этом из него большие изъятия): «Что касается позиции Сахарова, то она в национальном вопросе, кажется мне, была безупречно демократической. Есть только один момент, с которым я бы не мог согласиться <…> Речь идет о его отношении к Грузии. Аналитически сомнительным является принцип, который я назвал бы принципом “русской матрешки”. Принцип простой. Существует ситуация, когда можно решить проблему прав человека и прав нации, наделяя малое, окруженное большим, символами или признаками большого. Например, превращая область в республику и распространяя символику большого на малое. Это может быть решением, скажем, в условиях Российской Федерации <…> Но этот принцип “матрешки”, я считаю, не годится в условиях Грузии. Кавказ – это Вселенная, живущая на давно выработанных основаниях <…> Принцип “матрешки” в условиях Кавказа может оказаться лишь миной замедленного действия <…> Скажем, когда мы обращаемся сегодня к проблеме автономии Абхазской республики, беря сам термин “автономия” в отрыве от его химерического, псевдоморфного содержания и предполагая за ним реальное содержание, мы неизбежно попадаем в неразрешимое противоречие. Неразрешимое в силу хотя бы того, что здесь задействована, во-первых, чувствительность народа Грузии, помнящего свою историю. И задействована очень просто — я сейчас отвлекаюсь от вопроса о территориальных правах и т.д., — я беру то, что в действительности работает в истории, то есть уровень страстей. А уровень страстей — это уровень исторических символов. Так вот, на этом уровне слово «Абхазия» является синонимом слова «Грузия» <…> Поэтому сказать грузину, что Абхазия может выйти из Грузии (я объясняю структуру страсти, а не реальность), — значит сказать примерно то же самое, что Грузия может выйти из самой себя. Или скажу еще резче: это то же самое, что быку показывать красную тряпку, а потом удивляться, что бык такой недемократический»[1].

То, что Мамардашвили делал исключение и допускал отступление от демократических принципов именно в связи с грузино-абхазской проблемой, симптоматично. Хотя он, конечно, был бы против силового решения вопроса и вообще практически в одиночку выступил тогда против грузинского национализма и Звиада Гамсахурдия, сказав прямо в лицо националистическому большинству на съезде Народного фронта Грузии в 1989 году: «Истина выше родины». Он тогда четко сформулировал для себя наперекор правящим настроениям: «_Если мой народ проголосует за Звиада Гамсахурдиа и его национал-большевизм, я выступлю против своего народа_». Или вот что еще он говорил в этой связи, когда его стали упрекать в антигрузинскости и национал-предательстве: «_Защищая достоинство абхаза, армянина, осетина – защищаешь свое достоинство, иначе для меня не существует высокое понятие грузина. Я с ними жил и живу. И никому не позволительно измерять градус моей грузинственности_»[2].

Но в его антинационализме была, мягко говоря, слабая брешь: говоря об армянах и абхазах в Грузии, о защите их прав, он почему-то ничего не говорил о защите прав русских в Грузии.

И это было неслучайно.

Русские как народ были для философа носителями имперского начала, которое не давало Грузии пути в Европу. Он стал в годы перестройки и «национального пробуждения» сторонником так называемого европейского выбора, согласно которому Грузия должна вырваться из орбиты влияния России и строить свое будущее строго отдельно от нее. Вот почему неуместно предлагать брать у него уроки русскости, как предлагает в своей статье Николай Коротков.

Русский человек, конечно, широк, но не до самоотрицания же.

Надо отдать должное. Статья Николая Короткова написана профессионально, она хороша по тону, а отчасти и замыслу: автор стремится спокойно и без истеричной политизированности разобраться в наследии Мамардашвили, в том числе в его политической составляющей. Однако в своем академическом благодушии она затеняет тот крайне важный момент, что по историософским основаниям Мамардашвили был для Грузии сторонником антироссийского цивилизационного выбора. Поэтому как можно, как предлагает Коротков, сделать «его, возможно, главным “толмачом” между нашими культурами»?

Он, скорее, адвокат для процесса о разводе.

Мамардашвили критиковал Россию по принципиальным историософским основаниям, которые в свою очередь вырастали из его философских идей относительно природы человека, и того, что он понимал под истиной. К русской культуре и истории он предъявлял упреки за то, что в ней подавлялось личное начало, считая, что отсутствие должных общественных механизмов и «агоры» как пространства для свободной игры сил не дают в полную меру сбыться человеческой личности.

В «Лекциях о Прусте» философ говорил, что русской культуре присущи совершенно антипрустовские, антиличностные начала, в отличие от той же французской культуры. Он радикально не понимал, что в смирении есть глубокая религиозная и вообще человеческая правда, что Россия во многом построена и до сих пор стоит на смирении как на гражданско-политической добродетели.

В конечном итоге все упирается в спор, что понимать под личностью, истиной, под правдой человеческого бытия. Но, с другой стороны, я почти уверен, что, увидь Мамардашвили то, до чего дошла сегодня обожаемая им Европа, он бы снова умер от разрыва сердца. Потому что он все-таки видел Европу христианской, верной своим корням (хотя и понимал христианство больше на околопротестантский лад).

Николай Коротков в дискуссии на Фейсбуке правильно возражает своему оппоненту: «В контексте Вашего утверждения Подорога, Мотрошилова, Пятигорский, Калиниченко, Зинченко, Швырев, Э. Соловьев, А. Мень, В. Васильев, Альтюссер, Сартр и мн. мн. др., соавторы/оппоненты/исследователи МК – оказывается, дискутировали, исследовали и занимались сотворчеством с “полным нолём”?? Это каким же выдающимся гипнотизёром надо было быть МК, чтобы так их всех обмишурить, наивных)). Вот выдержка из статьи Н.В. Мотрошиловой: “Сартр был удивлен и впечатлен, ибо скорее всего не ожидал встретить в СССР таких знатоков западной литературы, в частности, литературы экзистенциалистской, и таких сильных, оригинальных мыслителей-оппонентов, как Мамардашвили. В споре, как считали очевидцы, сила и тонкость аргументов были скорее на стороне Мераба Константиновича. Во всяком случае, диалог велся, что называется, на равных. Дело было не только в Сартре. Ю. А. Замошкин рассказывал мне о своей беседе с Л. Альтюссером в Париже в 1968 г. Этот видный французский философ признавался: встречи, беседы, диалог с Мамардашвили столь глубоко впечатлили, даже потрясли его, что некоторое время после них он мысленно как бы продолжал говорить, полемизировать с Мерабом”».

Тем не менее в этой культуртрегерской академичности теряется, выхолащивается остро политизированное содержание мыслей Мамардшвили, то, что он по-настоящему хотел сказать.

Я это покажу на одном примере из разбираемой статьи. Николай, желая «спасти» Мамардашвили, говорит: «Вместо того чтобы обкрадывать самих себя, отказываясь от освоения методологических, онтолого-гносеологических и прочих наработок Мамардашвили, нужно использовать их для диагностики псевдофилософствования, софистики, разоблачение которой никогда не может быть во вред подлинному патриотизму». И затем неожиданно и как бы на пользу подлинного патриотизма Н. Коротков привлекает Мамардашвили в союзники против софизмов Дмитрия Быкова, который заявлял, что победы Советской России (Великая Отечественная война, первый человек в космосе и т.д.) относятся лишь к внешней, а не внутренней, метафизической истории России. Наш автор тут возражает, опираясь на Мамардашвили: «Но в том-то и дело, что инновационная техника (та же советская космонавтика) не может быть выражением, “овнешнением” рабского сознания, как в свое время хорошо показал Мамардашвили, по сути, превентивно ответив на выпад Быкова: “Изобретение, развитие новой техники одновременно предполагает фантастическую духовную активность. Поэтому представления об удушаемом технократической средой [в том числе социальной машинерией. _– Н.К._] человеке не вполне соответствуют истине: они несколько “сбиты”, вне фокуса. Такой человек не смог бы создавать то, что его душит».

Однако если проанализировать полный контекст данного высказывания, то можно увидеть, что Мамардашвили как раз выставляет его как аргумент против советской системы как «системы с тавром хозяина». Последняя, по его мысли, неизбежно проигрывает системам с «прогрессивными социальными формами»: В фундаментальном смысле техника, все же, продукт духовной деятельности и, например, чтобы социально-экономическая система была конкурентоспособной, оказывается, нужно иметь в обществе достаточное число людей, не сидящих в задумчивости, а ведущих себя активно, самостоятельно; людей, на которых нельзя было бы поставить хозяйское клеймо продукта коллективного труда, тавро хозяина, без которого ты – не человек.

Так вот, “системы с тавром” проигрывают – и в чем? «В создании той самой высокой технологии и техники, которая кажется такой страшной и опасной. В своем экстремуме техника несет и спасение, потому что она сама как среда, орган культуры составлена из изобретений, которые требуют, однако, прогрессивных социальных форм, максимально освобождающих человека от его капризов, страхов и т.д. <…> Техника “питается” живым очагом человеческого творчества, свободой. Ты не можешь быть в гражданской жизни рабом и при этом быть свободным в изобретательстве. Изобретательство требует интеллектуального мужества, определенной раскрепощенности. А сознание едино. И нельзя иметь раскрепощенность в одной точке и не иметь ее в другой. Тот, кто раб перед начальством, раб и перед техническими проблемами. Он не может проявить чудес изобретательности или ответственности. А если и проявил, то это постепенно нивелируется, исчезает, как сегодня уже почти выдохся запал технического творчества, унаследованный нами на волне революции от предшествующей эпохи».

То есть, ту мысль, которую Н. Коротков выдает в качестве защиты советской системы, у Мамардашвили была на самом деле еще одним проявлением его антисоветизма (причем в самой гуще позднесоветской культуры и жизни). Получается, что, желая уйти от чрезмерной политизированности, стремясь глубоко и всесторонне подойти к наследию философа, автор на самом деле выхолащивает его идеи, и сам подходит к ним односторонне, неверно. Это происходит потому, что, на мой взгляд, он впадает в другую крайность – несколько благодушный культуртрегерский академизм.

В заключение скажем, что чтение Мамардашвили и спор с ним – сложная задача. В каком-то смысле это новый тест на имперскую цивилизованность, или цивилизованный патриотизм, где крайне важно не потерять все эти составляющие – как цивилизованность, так равным образом имперскость и патриотизм.

[1] Мамардашвили М.К. Европейская ответственность // Мамардашвили М.К. Как я понимаю философию. М.: Прогресс, 1992. С. 317–318.

[2] Мамардашвили М. К. Грузия вблизи и на расстоянии// Гаудава Т. М. Мамардашвили. Грузия вблизи и на расстоянии. Новое русское слово. 25-26 ноября 1995 года.

_______________________

Наш проект можно поддержать.

Кандидат философских наук, старший научный сотрудник философского факультета МГУ им. М. В. Ломоносова, старший научный сотрудник ИНИОН РАН, научный редактор православного журнала «Ортодоксия».

Комментарии к архивным материалам закрыты. Однако Вы можете высказывать свое мнение в нашем Телеграм-канале, а также в сообществе Русская Истина в ВК. Добро пожаловать!

Также Вы можете присылать нам свое развернутое мнение в виде статьи или поста в блоге.

Чувствуете в себе силы, мысль бьет ключом? Становитесь нашим автором!

а также…

Свежие записи:

Поделитесь нашими материалами в своих соцсетях!

сайт консервативной политической мысли
открытая дискуссионная площадка

Page load link

Manuscript submission criteria

Manuscripts and articles will be reviewed by the Editorial Board only if all the requirements listed below are met.

The Editorial Board will consider articles that occupy 0.5 to 1.5 pages [a page is 40,000 typographical units]. They must present the results of an independent and original research, which is in line with the profile of the almanac and demonstrates the author’s ability to be fully conversant with the modern literature addressing the problems in question and to adequately apply the commonly used methodology for defining and solving scientific matters.
Besides, the Site for Russian Verity also publishes analytical synopsis of modern works (size – about 1 sheet), as well as reviews of recent scientific works (size – 0.25 sheet).
All texts must contain only literary language and must be duly edited following the scientific style standards.
If the manuscript is accepted for consideration, it does not imply that it will be published. All manuscripts are sent anonymously for expert review. The names of the reviewers (usually at least two) are not disclosed. If the submitted manuscript is rejected, the editors send a reply to the author clarifying the reasons.
The only relevant criterion for publishing the manuscript is the quality of the text and consistence with the scope of the almanac.
Please avoid automatic bulleted and numbered lists and word breaks. rtf is the preferable format. Only «» can be used as quotation marks. If a quote includes citations, use quotation marks in quotation marks, «“one”, two, three, “four”». Hyphens should not be used as dashes. The Russian letter ё is used only in cases when the replacement for e distorts the meaning of the word. The shortened forms mln and bln are used without the full stop. Abbreviations like “т.к.”, “т.н.” are not allowed. The figure in the footnotes is used in the end of a sentence before the full stop and in a sentence before any punctuation mark (comma, period, and semicolon). Illustrations are sent separately in jpg-files. Graphs and charts are made in separate Microsoft Excel files. The text should contain the indication of the location of this illustration, graphics, charts, and / or its image.
The editors can edit and cut materials.
Those who submit manuscripts are kindly asked to understand the fact that the editors do not enter into any correspondence, particularly they do not engage in a meaningful debate via e-mail or mail, and do not have any obligation concerning the publication of the submitted materials.
The cover must contain the name, first name and patronymic of the author, the academic degree and academic rank, the position and place of work, the address and zip code and the email address of the author and must be stored in a separate file.
The information is to be written both in Russian and in English. The main file of the article must contain the name, the text itself, footnotes and endnotes bibliography. This is done to meet the requirement of an anonymous review of manuscripts sent to the editorial board.
The author must provide a list of keywords, a summary of the work (abstract) in English and in Russian (size – 100-200 words). The abstract is a separate analytical text, which allows to fully grasp the essence of the study, without the need for the reader to refer to the article. The summary (abstract) must be written in correct academic English. It must not be a word-for-word translation and cannot contain unintelligible structures and idioms which sound Russian.
Links and references:

Links to scientific and philosophical literature, analytical reports and articles in scientific journals should be presented in the form of intrabibliographic references containing the number of publications in the bibliography and pages.
For example:
[26, p. 237].
Links to archived documents must be included in the footnotes indicating (describing) the nature of the document.
For example:
For biographies of K.N. Leontiev [From a letter from K.N. Leontiev to Vs.S. Solovyov, January 15, 1877, Moscow] // Russian State Historical Archives. F. 1120. Op. 1. D. 98. L. 54 ob.-55.
Links to information, official and other sources, including Internet resources that are not scientific or analytical materials, must be given in footnotes.
For example:
The National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation until 2020. The Security Council of the Russian Federation. URL: http //www.scrf.gov.ru /documents/99.html
Solovyov O. The central bank is preparing a new devaluation // Nezavisimaya Gazeta. January 13, 2015.
The footnotes can contain any additional ideas; footnotes can contain links, presented in the same way as in the main text. When referring to Internet publications, there is no need to indicate the access date.
The bibliography in endnotes is compiled in the alphabetical principle (first list the authors and the works in Russian, then in Latin). The last name and initials of the author must be in italics. The references to monographs must indicate the total number of pages, and references to articles must indicate the page numbers in a journal or a collection where the article is printed.
For example:
Berdyaev N.A. Philosophy of Inequality / Compiled, foreword and notes L.V. Polyakov. M: IMA-Press, 1990. 285 p.
Gajda F. Bloody Sunday as a very ambitious provocation of the opposition // Website on conservative political thought “Russian idea”. January 5, 2015. URL: http://politconservatism.ru/forecasts/krovavoe-voskresene-kak-grandioznaya-provokatsiya-oppozitsii/
Shirinyants A.A .The Intellectuals in the Political History of the XIX Century // Bulletin of Moscow University. Edition 12. Political sciences. 2012. № 4. pp. 39-55.
Nye J. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs, 2004. 208 p.
The endnotes reference list must specify the official place of publication and publisher (sometimes the search may require extra efforts, but the names must be presented).
The translation of Russian names in English or their Latin transliteration are not required, nor is it necessary to translate foreign titles into Russian (except publications in Oriental languages).

Reviewing rules for submitted manuscripts

The Site for Russian Verity guarantees the transparency of the publication policy and criteria for manuscripts. Editors select reviewers in such a way to minimize the likelihood of a clash of interest and avert prejudice to the manuscripts submitted. The reviews of the manuscript are taken into account to decide whether to publish it or suggest further work on it. The final decision is taken by the Editorial Board.
The cover must contain the name, first name and patronymic of the author, the academic degree and academic rank, the position and place of work, the address and zip code and the email address of the author and must be stored in a separate file. The information must be provided both in Russian and in English.
Manuscripts, submitted to the journal, are assessed in accordance with the double-blind peer-review procedure. For this purpose the manuscripts are sent to the external experts without any identification of authorship, neither the name nor the place of work. Similarly, the journal does not disclose the names or positions of reviewers to the authors or third parties in accordance with international standards of peer-reviewing in academic journals.
The journal invites recognized experts in the relevant field, who have had their works on the relevant issues published over 3 years. The manuscript is reviewed by the Editorial Board, as well the experts. The Editorial Board Chairman and Editor-in-Chief select external experts and invite them to review the manuscript. The reviews are kept by the editors for 5 years.
A submitted manuscript is initially assessed by the editors in order to confirm that it corresponds to the scope and standards of the journal. Then, the editors delete any references to the author and code the manuscript. The coded manuscript is submitted to the reviewer.
The coded manuscript is sent to the external experts along with the standardized questionnaire via e-mail. In the covering letter the editors set the deadline for the review (each case is considered separately, but the time allotted cannot exceed 1 month).
On receiving the results of the external assessment, the editors examine the review to see if it meets the existing criteria. If the review does not give an adequate evaluation of the manuscript, the editors could seek additional review by other experts.
If the review contains suggestions for improving the manuscript, it is forwarded to the author. Before sending it, the editors delete comments which are meant for the editors exclusively as well as any offensive or insulting comments.
The deadline for resubmitting the manuscript is set each time individually. If the manuscript is rewritten significantly before resubmission (no less than 15% of the text), it could be sent for additional reviewing. While choosing experts for the additional reviewing, preference will be given to the same experts who did the initial review (given that they agree).
The editors send copies of the reviews or a refusal with the reasons to the authors of the submitted articles. They also commit themselves to sending copies of the reviews to the Russian Ministry of Education and Science should the following request be made.
Reviewing is conducted on the basis of the standardized questionnaire:
The importance of the issues to the academic tasks set of RV:
1 = minimal contribution
2 = minor contribution
3 = moderate contribution
4 = significant contribution
5 = substantial contribution to the discipline
The relevance of the research for philosophy, political science and historical science nowadays:
1 = almost irrelevant
2 = minor relevance
3 = moderate relevance
4 = significant relevance
5 = substantial contribution to the discipline
Author’s originality (autonomy) in addressing the issue:
1 = low (trivial, unoriginal, “common place”);
2 = below average (there are some original thoughts);
3 = moderate;
4 = sufficient;
5 = original research, containing a new approach to issue;
The credibility of the hypothesis, coherence and logical reasoning:
1 = not convincing;
2 = not very convincing (many contradictions);
3 = average level of credibility (standard, traditional proofs);
4 = quite convincing arguments (in general, sound persuasive, with few exceptions);
5 = very persuasive arguments
The reliability of data:
1 = unreliable;
2 = limited reliability (accuracy of the information causes significant doubt)
3 = partly reliable (not differentiated);
4 = quite reliable (sufficient data without sufficient critical thinking);
5 = fully reliable (complete, adequate and critically processed data)
Appropriate style, accuracy and precision, brevity:
1. Low (grammatical and stylistic errors, lacking terminological precision, multiple repetitions);
2. Below average (repetitions, no precision)
3. Average
4. Above average (some minor flaws);
5. High.

Kirill Benediktov
Russia–France: Possible Conservative Alliance? (№ 3, 2015)

The article studies the possible Russian-French alliance retrospectively and analyses its fundamental features. The main assumption is that France is one of the two Western European countries that could build a strategic alliance with Russia, with Germany being the other one. Starting from it, the author shows that only shared values could provide a solid foundation for an effective alliance. Otherwise the alliance between Russia and the leading European country would be at best tactical, rather than strategic. While there are few, if any, shared values with Germany following the forced transformation of the German cultural code in the wake of the WWII, relations with France have evolved differently. With conservative values shared by most Russians and Frenchmen, the ideological proximity brings the two countries closer. Nowadays some French politicians regard Russia as a guardian and a stronghold of traditional European values that have fallen prey to globalization and are ousted by the aggressive Anglo-Saxon civilization and its model. The sympathizers include intellectuals that form the political agenda and shape public opinion. Others are political activists, mobilizing the electorate. Marine Le Pen, the president of the French National Front, is the most favorably disposed towards Russia among European politicians. The examples of the National Front and its leader reveal the attitude of French conservatives towards Russia. As seen from France, Russia is returning to its roots, so French conservatives regard the resurgence of the Russian Orthodox Church, the formal LGBT propaganda ban and other events as the signs of a titanic battle between the living European Christian tradition endorsed by both France and Russia and the post-Christian and anti-Christian world based on the Anglo-Saxon globalization concept. They also interpret them as signals for possible ideological rapprochement.
Keywords: France, Russia, Alliance, Values, Conservatism, National Front, Marine Le Pen.

Paul Grenier
Russian Conservatism and its Reception the West through the Prism of Ideological Liberalism (№ 3, 2015)

The author focuses attention, first, on the poor reception in the West of Russia’s current attempt to define its national idea by reference to its own pre-communist philosophical tradition. He demonstrates that this negative reception, however, is conditioned by what may, optimistically, be temporary political-ideological exigencies, at a period when very little that is associated with the Russian leadership is able to get a fair or warm reception in mainstream U.S. publications. The author points out that the Russian religious philosophical tradition was widely considered admirable and constructive in the West prior to 2014. At present, however, the typical approach in the U.S. and European press is to contrast Russian realpolitik policies with abstract Western ideals rather than Western realpolitik policies. Meanwhile, the very existence of legitimate Russian ideals is dismissed. The author then turns his attention to Russia’s present efforts to define its own ideals in a conservative vein. He suggests that this effort demands a careful definition of categories and to this end distinguishes between ideological and non-ideological brands of both conservatism and liberalism. He urges Russia’s intellectual leadership to embrace the whole of its tradition (i.e. the best of its tradition) rather than only a part. He notes a tendency by Russian conservatism to privilege what in Plato’s Republic were the virtues of the Guardians (as opposed to the Traders). But the Russian heritage incorporates, according to the author, both liberal and conservative elements, even as it is ultimately grounded in а realm that lies beyond liberalism and conservatism.
Keywords: International Relations, Realism, Barack Obama, Demagogy, Liberalism, Conservatism, Ideology, Russian national idea, N. Berdyaev, G. Fedotov, V. Solovyov, I. Ilyin, Pierre Manent, Jane Jacobs, Plato’s Republic.

Mikhail Ilyin
A Diaologue about Islands and Straits, Intermarums and Intermunds (№ 1, 2015)

Mikhail Ilyin reviews main subjects of scholarly debate between himself and Vadim Tzimburski since early 90s when they both were promoting geopolitical and chronopolitical studies in new Russia. The debate focused on five major issues: character of geopolitics, links between geopolitics and chronopolitics, geopolitics of Russia (Eurasia), limitrophe areas around Russia and particularly Balto-Pontida. Very clear and coherent differences between both analysts would not undermine their essential agreement on basis issues and would not prevent their co-authorship. Furthermore, disagreements were complementary. Even now they continue to inspire further investigations.
Keywords: geopolitics, chronopolitics, Russia-Eurasia, Island of Russia, Heartland, limitrophe areas, Balto-Pontida, Balto-Pontic system.

Leonid Ionin
Projects of Total Democracy: Power of Referendums, E-Democracy, “One Man – One Vote” (№ 3, 2015)

This work regards total democracy as a commitment to solving problems and dealing with contradictions in modern representative democracies through maximizing equality and granting the public with direct access to the mechanisms of social control. The paper considers the proposals to create a “community” run by referendums, to establish online democracy, and to improve the egalitarian principle of “one man – one vote”. It also analyses the sociological and epistemological basis of these models. It draws a conclusion that the conservative approach is more promising, that is the use of the mechanisms elaborated at the earlier, relatively distant stages of political development, the use of mechanisms which take into account diverse particular features of the political process.
Keywords: Public Opinion, Referendum, Scientific Knowledge, Common Knowledge, Qualifications, Classes, Universalism, Particularism.

Andrey Ivanov
The Slogan “Russia for Russians” in Conservative Thought in the Second Half of the XIX Century (№ 4, 2015)

The article studies the origin of the slogan “Russia for Russians” and its conservative interpretations in the second half of the XIX century. The study is based on numerous works, most of which have never been previously used. The author analyzes the attitude to the slogan “Russia for Russians” of well-known conservatives, such as Emperor Alexander III, V. Skaryatin, I. Aksakov, M. Katkov, M. Skobelev, S. Syromyatnikov, V. Rozanov, A. Suvorin and others.
Keywords: “Russia for Russians”, Russian Conservatism, Russian Nationalism, Pan-Slavism, Emperor Alexander III.

Alexei Kharin
The First Book about the Great Geopolitician (№ 1, 2015)

The article is devoted to the intellectual biography V.L. Tsymbursky, written by a political scientist B.V. Mezhuev. In the monograph, Mezhuev succeeded to show basic landmarks of work and the main ideas of the thinker, as well as to determine the value of Tsymbursky’s works. Separate positions cause a discussion, but on the whole the book turned out well.
Keywords: B.V. Mezhuev, V.L. Tsymbursky, “the Island of Russia”, Great Limitrophe, geopolitics, chronopolitics, civilization.

Stanislav Khatuntsev
Vadim Tsymbursky, a Russian Geopolitician (№ 1, 2015)

The article covers geopolitical conceptualization of a prominent Russian philologist, cultural philosopher, thinker, and political writer V.L. Tsymbursky, in particular, his “Island Russia” model, the concepts of “Euronapping” and of the Great Limitroph; as well as their criticism, the author’s opinion of some problems brought up by Tsymbursky. The category of limitrophic spaces is supplemented with the category of limbic territories.
Keywords: V.L. Tsymbursky, “Island Russia”, geopolitics, civilization approach, civilization geopolitics, internal geopolitics of Russia, “Euronapping”, Great Limitrophe, limb, transfer of the capital city.

Stanislav Khatuntsev
“Preserving the Future”: Konstantin Leontiev’s Seven Geopolitical Pillars (№ 4, 2015)

This article analyses the issues related to the “seven pillars” approach, K. Leontiev’s set of ideas about the new «Eastern Slavic culture», and his geopolitical ideas.
Keywords: Heptastylism (Seven Pillars), Anatolism, K. Leontiev, Geopolitics, “Eastern Question”, Constantinople, “Eastern Union”, Russian History, Russian Post-Reform Political Thinking, Historiosophy.

Aleksey Kozhevnikov
Russia’s Present and Future in A. Solzhenitsyn’s and I. Shafarevich’s Works: “From Under the Rubble” Collection (1974) (№ 4, 2015)

The article analyzes A. Solzhenitsyn’s and I. Shafarevich’s political essays. Solzhenitsyn’s and Shafarevich’s articles, published in the “From Under the Rubble” collection, dwelt on the historical problems and development of the Russian nation.
Keywords: A. Solzhenitsyn, I. Shafarevich, “From Under the Rubble” Collection, Russian National Values, Historical Problems of the Russian Nation, Development of the Russian Nation.

Yegor Kholmogorov
Searching for Lost Tsargrad: Tsymbursky and Danilevsky (№ 1, 2015)

The article analyzes how Nikolay Danilevsky’s geopolitical ideas influenced Vadim Tsymbursky, and reveals the similarities and differences in the approaches of both thinkers to Russia’s internal and external geopolitics. Their ideas critically underline vulnerable points of each other’s concepts. Разбираются Danilevsky’s nationalism, pan-Slavism and the programme of the struggle for Constantinople are observed, as well as Tsymbursky’s ideas of «Island Russia», limitrophe zone, internal colonization, and his attention to the region of Novorossia. The author comes to a conclusion that the key problems stated by Danilevsky and Tsymbursky don’t have a solely geopolitical solution and demand the transition to chronopolitics, the consideration of civilizations not only as geographical, but also as historical and cultural integrals.
Keywords: Danilevsky; Tsymbursky; geopolitics; Constantinople; pan-Slavism; nationalism; “Island Russia”; civilization; limitrophe; Siberia; internal colonization; Novorossia; Konstantin Leontiev; chronopolitics; Byzantium.

Olga Malinova
The Conservatives and Collective Memory: Cultivating a Repertoire of Politically Usable Past (№ 3, 2014)

The paper analyses a development of “infrastructure” of a usable past in post-Soviet Russia. It argues that the latter is both a resource and a matter of symbolic investments for the ruling elite. It concludes that after more than 20 years after the collapse of the USSR the repertoire of the usable past remains rather scarce, and “memory policy” is still far from being consistent. The paper supposes that more systematic development of the repertoire of the usable past could be a matter of efforts of the conservatives as well as the other political forces who must be interested in development of this resource that might be considered as fundamental common good.
Keywords: political uses of the past, collective memory, symbolic politics, B. Yeltsin, V. Putin.

Boris Makarenko
Never the Twain Shall Meet? Conservatism in Russia and in the West (№ 3, 2015)

The article compares and contrasts the main values and political principles of contemporary Western and Russian conservatism. The key assumption is that in the West conservatism relies on the uninterrupted tradition of political participation, while Russian conservatism is reinventing its values and political practices, relying on the philosophical and political heritage of the past ages. In the West, conservatism exists in democracies and market economies, while in Russia, conservatism develops in a society in transition, undergoing rapid and uneven modernization. The “strong state” for the West lies in democratic sovereignty, a competitive and efficient economy, and an optimized “welfare state”. Russian conservatism lacks a comprehensive economic doctrine; the value of sovereignty is believed to lie in the defense of internal and external security, and the “welfare state” is largely paternalistic. In the West, conservatism fosters moral and cultural values of the post-industrial age; in Russia these values retain their traditional character, but modernization necessitates their adaptation to the changing society. While, amid the emergence of new conservative ideas, Western conservatism faces the major challenge of developing a “new synthesis”; Russian conservatism needs to respond to the challenge of developing a comprehensive system of values in conformity with the contemporary stage of Russia’s political development.
Keywords: Conservatism, Values, Comparative Politics, Political Development, Political Parties.

Mikhail Maslin
Classic Eurasianism and Its Modern Transformations (№ 4, 2015)

The article reveals the essence of classical Eurasianism in the 1920-1930s. The author makes a general critical evaluation of A. Dugin’s neoeurasianism. Neoeurasianism distorts classical Eurasianism, presenting the image full of xenophobia, racism and aggression. Meanwhile, the author demonstrates the intellectual potential of undistorted classical Eurasianism taking the example of A. Panarin’s heritage.
Keywords: Eurasianism, Neourasianism, Orientalism, Geopolitics, Russian Emigration, Atlantism, Russophobia, Mysticism, Conspirology.

Oleg Matveychev
“The Philosophy of Inequality” by N. Berdyaev – the Manifesto of Liberal Conservatism (№ 3, 2015)

The report describes the concept of the ideological mix. Analyzing “The Philosophy of Inequality”, the author illustrates that N. Berdyaev voices purely liberal-conservative ideas in it. This fact accounts for valid interpretation and popularity of the book in Western Europe in the 1920s and 1930s.
Keywords: “The Philosophy of Inequality” by N. Berdyaev, Ideological Mixes, Liberal Conservatism.

Boris Mezhuyev
Mapping of Russian Europeanism (№ 1, 2015)

This article deals with the evolution of geopolitical views of Vadim Tsymburski in the context of his conceptualization of the problem of “buffer”, or “limitroрhe” territories between Russia and Europe which were called by the author of “The Island of Russia” as “straitterritories”. It is known that Vadim Tsymburski thought that the loss of control by Russia over these territories has strengthened the security of our country that was damaged throughout the history by Russia’s own urge to eliminate these «buffer» territories for the geopolitical confluence of Russia and Europe. The question arises, how could Vadim Tsymbursky treat the elimination of “strait territories” by Europe in terms of his system, could it be seen by him as a threat to Russian security? The article proves that in the end of his life just this point motivated the scholar to reconsider his geopolitical conception but this reconsideration was prevented by his death.
Keywords: geopolitics, strait-territories, buffer territories, Russian Europeanism.

Andrei Nikiforov
The Crimean Contribution to the Revolutionary Restoration of Geopolitical Justice and the New Mission of Russia (№ 3, 2015)

The “Crimean Spring” was a manifestation of the expanding regionalization, that the world has been witnessing in recent years. An integral region becomes the actor of world politics. The region relies on the collective political will of the regional community rather than on separate nation-states with their borders established by treaties of by force. The Crimean issue has provoked sharp divisions in European society, virtually splitting it in two parts: a group of regionalists, advocates of traditional values and a group of neo-liberals and all those who scrounge off globalization. The “Crimean Spring” marked the beginning of the revolutionary restoration of geopolitical justice.
Keywords: “Crimean Spring”, Regionalism, Traditional Values.

Tatyana Plyashchenko
Conservative Liberalism in Russia the Post-reform Period: The History of a Failure (№ 4, 2015)

The article dwells on the peculiarities of Russian conservative liberalism in the second half of the 19th century and its proponents, including A. Gradovsky, K. Kavelin, and B. Chicherin. The article gives special prominence to the policies of the Russian conservative liberals at both theoretical and operative level.
Keywords: Conservative Liberalism, Liberal Nationalism, Nation-State.

Leonid Polyakov
The Eternal and Momentary in Russian Conservatism (№ 4, 2015)

The article pinpoints the plurality of meanings of the terms “conservatism” and “conservatives” which were in use in the Russian philosophical and political thought in second half of the XIX – early XX centuries, and gives a critical evaluation. The study starts with Nikolai Berdyaev’s definition of “conservatism” which poses the key dilemma: either to mercilessly criticize the momentary from the point of view of “eternity”, or to ascribe to the existing momentary a rank of “Eternal”. Through this dilemma it is possible to demonstrate how authentic conservative principles and meanings could have been presented in different and alternative ideological paradigms. The everlasting character of this dilemma in the pre-revolutionary Russian conservative thought for a long time deprived of a possibility for political representation, brought about a fatal gap between conservatism “from above” and radical-left mood “from below”. The ultimate outcome was the collapse of the Empire. The contemporary situation in Russia allows to escape such a scenario through assuming conservative principles as “spiritual bonds” tying authorities and the people.
Keywords: Conservatism, Liberalism, Progressivism, Reactionary, Revolution.

Alexei Rutkevich
Peculiarities of Russian Conservatism. Map and Territory (№ 4, 2015)

Russian conservatism makes part of European political thought, as well as Russian party practices in Russia in the XIX century. The article consistently analyzes the stages of development of conservative ideology in Western Europe and in Russia.
Keywords: Ideology, Baroque, Romanticism, Conservatism, Reaction, Liberal Conservatism, Political Philosophy, Map, Territory.

Aleksey Shchavelev
The Islander or Thinking about “Conjunctures of Land and Time…” (№ 1, 2015)

The paper is a survey commentary on the last book by V.L. Tsymburskiy “Conjunctures of Land and Time”.
Keywords: V.L. Tsymburskiy, review, philosophy of history, historiography.

Alexander Shchipkov
Russian Identity and Russian Tradition at the End of the Globalization Era (№ 3, 2015)

The report dwells on a new demand for tradition and identity, which emerges as globalization exhausts itself. The keynote of Russian identity is claimed to be religious and ethical, rather than ethnic. Irredentism – the reunification of the largest divided nation (Russian) – should be viewed as a key element of Russian identity. It should be distinguished from russification of other ethnic groups by force. To cite Weber’s famous formula, the core of Russian identity is formed by “Orthodox ethics and solidarity spirit, that is equity, partnership and mutual assistance. This is a particular Russian ethos. In practice, justice plays the role of the categorical imperative in the Russian tradition. The author believes that meaningful socio-cultural ideas can be centred round Christian ethics. This factor, along with the Russian language, allows to make the “Russian World” concept more precise from the semantic point of view, as this notion still needs to be fully defined.
Keywords: Identity, Orthodox Ethics, Globalization Limits, Russian World, Solidarity, Justice, Tradition, Ethos

Aleksandr Shiriniants
Conservatism and the Party System in Modern Russia (№ 3, 2014)

The programs of Russian modern political parties, proclaiming conservative aims are analysed in the article through the patterns of phenomenology and axiology of Russian conservatism. The problem of the role of conservatism in contemporary ideological quest in Russia is discussed; original definitions of conservatism and its basis are proposed; links between conservatism and tradition and theoretical reflection are described; specific features of Russian political conservatism and the sources of its heterogeneity are revealed; accent is put on the role played by Russian intelligentsia in formation of conservative ideology; “oppositional” and “progressive” character of conservatism is marked down; comparison of conservative declarations with conservative values is developed.
Keywords: conservative ideology, conservative values, political parties, party-building in modern Russia.

Konstantin Simonov
Conservatism Facing Uncertainty (№ 3, 2015)

European values and the centuries-old picture of the world are exposed to erosion and are undergoing transformation. This is manifested, in particular, in neglecting the obvious benefits of trade and economic relations with Russia, in undermining free competition through affirmative activities, which involve, among other things, the policy of gender and juvenile equality. Such changes make the prediction of the future impossible.
Keywords: Values, Europe, Future Forecasts.

Alexander Tsipko
Soviet Intellectual Community Converting to Russian Conservatism (On Spontaneous Anti-Communism Untying USSR Ideological Bonds) (№ 4, 2015)

The article identifies the interdependence of conservatism, including its Russian version, and anti-communism. It focuses on the ideology of the “Russian Party”, a departure in Soviet political thinking in the 1960s-1970s. The article contains its comparative analysis with the ideology and policies of “Polish Party”, the Polish intellectual community of the 1970s-1980s leading the “Solidarity” movement. It also highlights the differences between the “Russian party” and the Sixtiers.
Keywords: Soviet Political Thinking, “Russian Party”, Conservatism, Anti-Communism, The Sixtiers, “Polish Party”.

Andrei P. Tsygankov
«Island» Geopolitics of Vadim Tsymbursky (№ 1, 2015)

The article analyzes the role of V. Tsymbursky in rethinking geopolitics. In particular, his theory of Russia as a geopolitical “island” is discussed. Other discussed issues include the geopolitics of values, intellectual influences, and Tsymbursky’s position in Russian foreign policy debates. The article formulates two lessons of the thinker for Russia – the need in mastering Russian cultural space and a long period of flexible foreign policy under the conditions of uni-multipolar world.
Keywords: geopolitical “island”, the geopolitics of values, the uni-multipolar world.

Andrei Tsygankov
«Island» Geopolitics of Vadim Tsymbursky (№ 1, 2015)

Vadim Tsymbursky (1957 – 2009)
Morphology of Russian Geopolitcs. An excerpt from the book. Chapter Five. First Eurasian Epoch of Russia: from Sebastopol to Port-Arthur (№ 1, 2015)

Vadim Tsymbursky made his PhD thesis «The Morphology of Russian Geopolitics and the Dynamic of International Systems of XVIII–XX centuries» in about 1997-2003. He could not complete his work but he left some fragments of it in manuscript. In the fifth chapter of thesis entitled «The first Eurasian interlude: from Sebastopol to Port-Arthur» the scholar made the analysis of the geopolitical thought of this period of time which was periodically repeated in the Russian history. This period is characterized by temporary backwash after the Russian onslaught on Europe and concentration on the eastern borders of Empire. The chapter describes in detail geopolitical views of prominent authors such as Fyodor Dostoevsky, Nikolai Danilevsky, Alexander Hertzen, Rostislav Fadeev etc.
Keywords: Eurasian interlude, Baltic-Black Sea region, European bipolarity, Balkan question.

Vasiliy Vanchugov
From «Island» to «Fortress»: Methaphor as an Instrument of Political Analysis and Practical Politics (№ 1, 2015)

This article is devoted to the representation of ideas, in particular, the use in the field of geopolitics, metaphors, analogies, comparisons, as well as cases of mythologizing ideologies. For this purpose, the author has made a comparison of the various narratives, methods and techniques of modern production of knowledge in the humanities in general, and in politics in particular. Taking the complex of ideas from the book “The Island of Russia”, the author of the article is going to highlight one of his key works in the context of contemporary issues, because, in his opinion, the most topical issue is the “dismantling” of the empire, discussion of which gives us the opportunity to be engaged in designing future.
Keywords: politics, geopolitics, history, philosophy of history, metaphor, formula, hermeneutics, myth, empire, power, governance.

Yan Vaslavsky
Russia and Europe: A New Crossroads (№ 3, 2015)

The article analyses the changing concept of united Europe from the times of Napoleon Bonaparte. The author ponders on two visions of European politics and development promoted by advocates of Napoleon Bonaparte and philosophers who eschewed the Napoleonic imperial model, respectively. Moreover, the article seeks to study the current relations between Europe and Russia given the changing concept of united Europe.
Keywords: France, Napoleon Bonaparte, Pan-European idea, Napoleonic Wars, Russia and Europe, Russian-European Relations.

Anton Zakutin
Modern Conservatism in the UK and in Russia: Possible Convergence Points (№ 3, 2015)

The article compares and contrasts basic conservative notions of modern political discourse in the UK and in Russia. Despite profound differences between the two political cultures, the two conservative brands exhibit a number of possible convergence points. The need to defend genuine traditional values against a background of expanding globalization, can unite advocates of various and diverse conservative trends. This article gives an overview of the most common ideas in parties’ platforms, among think tanks, among conservative thinkers of the states in question.
Keywords: Conservatism, Comparative Politics, Euroscepticism, Toryism.

Lyubov Bibikova
Postmodernism and the Value Crisis of the European Historical Science (№ 3, 2015)

The article analyzes causes and consequences of the shift towards postmodernism in Europe’s historiography against a background of social and political trends in Europe in the late 20th-early 21stcentury. The text focuses on the crisis of values in European studies of history, and, above all, the philosophy of history, which has been driven by postmodernism to eschew classical positivist notions of objectivity and validity as the fundamental values of historical knowledge. Consequently, leading European historical methodologists have arrived at the conclusion that historical science is predominantly aimed at reaching and maintaining public consensus on various political trends. The state of affairs in the 20th century impelled European historians to search for the roots of the European unity.
Keywords: Postmodernism, Philosophy of History, Historical Science of Europe, Historiography, Memory, Microhistory, Linguistic Shift.

Anatoly Chernyaev
Nikolai Berdyaev’s “Theocratic Socialism” (№ 3, 2014)

Basing on the analysis of Nikolai Berdyaev’s works of 1903–1917, the article reconstructs his project of “theocratic socialism”. It demonstrates the similarity between the concept of Berdyaev and the ideology of European religious Reformation, and also discusses the question of the relevance and applicability of Western experience of the Reformation in Russian socio-historical conditions.
Keywords: Reformation, Orthodoxy, theocracy, socialism, revolution, freedom, personality, new religious consciousness, Berdyaev, Merezhkovsky, Kartashov.

Paul Grenier
Russian Conservatism and its Reception the West through the Prism of Ideological Liberalism (№ 3, 2015)

Leonid Ionin
Projects of Total Democracy: Power of Referendums, E-Democracy, “One Man – One Vote” (№ 3, 2015)

Stanislav Khatuntsev
“Preserving the Future”: Konstantin Leontiev’s Seven Geopolitical Pillars (№ 4, 2015)

Alexey Kozyrev
“At the Walls of Chersonese”: Russian Philosophy and Crimea (№ 3, 2014)

The article includes three sketches dedicated to the eminent personalities of the Russian philosophical culture, whose lives were strongly connected with the Crimea. Writer, philosopher and publicist Konstantin Leontyev (1831–1891) took part in the Crimean military campaign of 1853–1856 as a medical officer in Kerch. He was the one who suggested creating «the uchebnitsa of natural sciences» in Nikitsky botanical garden. Nikolai Berdyaev (1874–1948) had deep existential experiences while visiting the house Evgenia Gertsyk in Sudak in 1909 and 1910. In 1914, Berdyaev’s ideological antagonist Ivan Ilyin (1883–1954), who was returning home from Germany after the beginning of World War I, happened to visit the same house. The town of Oleiz near Yalta is related to Sergei Bulgakov (1871–1944), who often stayed in the father-in-law manor. In 1909 Bulgakov lost his little son Ivan there. This event turned out to be the defining one in the thinker’s life. In 1918, Sergei Bulgakov comes back to the Crimea as a priest. There he wrote «The philosophy of name» and «The tragedy of philosophy». In the Crimea he thought about the correctness of a historiosophical choice of Russia, which resulted in the dialogues called “At the walls of Chersonese”. He was exiled from Sevastopol under the resolution of GPU in 1922, and never returned to homeland.
Keywords: life esthetic, historiosophy, landscape, intimacy, freedom, spirit, spiritual trials, imyaslavye (glorification of name), Catholicism, Bolshevism.

Alexey Kozyrev
The Issue of Human Dignity in the Past and Present of Russian Thought (№ 3, 2015)

The concept of human dignity (dignitas) dates back to Roman law. Originally denoting “worthiness”, the word “dignity” now stands for a fundamental category of human rights, with the coins’ value evolving into inherent dignity, ensured by equal rights. To cite Protagoras, if man is the measure of all things, dignity can be described as the measure of humanity. The human rights system promotes and protects human dignity through the protection of one’s right to a decent life. Vladimir Solovyev was the first Russian thinker to speak about this right. In his reply to French journalist Jules Huret’s questionnaire on social issues in Europe (1892), he wrote: “There is an intrinsic value in every human being, and one possesses an inalienable right to an existance, which is commensurate with one’s human dignity”. The concept of dignity is one of the pillars of “The Basis of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church” (2000), with references to it made in Chapter X “Personal, family and public morality”. This document links human dignity to the human individual being in the image of God, through this establishing the foundation of true theonomous ethics, natural law. The value of human dignity has also been mentioned in the “Russian Orthodox Church’s Basic Teaching on Human Dignity, Freedom and Human Rights” (2008), which specifically examines the concept of human rights.
Keywords: Human Dignity, Morals, Human Rights, Inherent Nature of Dignity, Personality

Yegor Kholmogorov
Searching for Lost Tsargrad: Tsymbursky and Danilevsky (№ 1, 2015)

Mikhail Maslin
Konstantin Leontiev and Eurasianism. Lessons of Russian Conservatism (№ 3, 2014)

The article examines the influence that Konstantin Leontiev works had on the formation of the Eurasianism through its founders. Social conditions of Russian emigration, which determined the formation of classical Eurasianism, are characterized.
Keywords: Konstantin Leontiev, classical Eurasianism, Russian Diaspora, Russian conservatism.

Mikhail Maslin
Classic Eurasianism and Its Modern Transformations (№ 4, 2015)

Mikhail Maslin
Russia and Europe: Dialogue on Russian Philosophy (№ 3, 2015)

The author focuses attention on the recent publishing sensation – «The Black Notebooks» by Martin Heidegger, which emphasized the need for broadening the philosophical dialogue between Europe and Russia. The article analyzes the evaluation of Russian philosophy in the West: from the first study of T. Masaryk (1913) to the works of sovietologists and modern experts in Russian philosophical studies.
Keywords: “The Black Notebooks” by M. Heidegger, “Russia and Europe” by T. Masaryk, Russian Emigration, Russian Philosophy Abroad, Sovietology and Russian Studies, Europe-Russia Dialogue.

Oleg Matveychev
“The Philosophy of Inequality” by N. Berdyaev – the Manifesto of Liberal Conservatism (№ 3, 2015)

Leonid Polyakov
The Eternal and Momentary in Russian Conservatism (№ 4, 2015)

Alexei Rutkevich
Peculiarities of Russian Conservatism. Map and Territory (№ 4, 2015)

Alexander Tsipko
Soviet Intellectual Community Converting to Russian Conservatism (On Spontaneous Anti-Communism Untying USSR Ideological Bonds) (№ 4, 2015)

Vasiliy Vanchugov
From «Island» to «Fortress»: Methaphor as an Instrument of Political Analysis and Practical Politics (№ 1, 2015)

This article is devoted to the representation of ideas, in particular, the use in the field of geopolitics, metaphors, analogies, comparisons, as well as cases of mythologizing ideologies. For this purpose, the author has made a comparison of the various narratives, methods and techniques of modern production of knowledge in the humanities in general, and in politics in particular. Taking the complex of ideas from the book “The Island of Russia”, the author of the article is going to highlight one of his key works in the context of contemporary issues, because, in his opinion, the most topical issue is the “dismantling” of the empire, discussion of which gives us the opportunity to be engaged in designing future.
Keywords: politics, geopolitics, history, philosophy of history, metaphor, formula, hermeneutics, myth, empire, power, governance.

Vasily Vanchugov
The Image of Europe in Ethnosophical Portraits by Russian Philosophers (№ 3, 2015)

The author refers to the part of the philosophical legacy in which Russian philosophers dwell on national characteristics and qualities, on perception peculiarities of European peoples, on collective European identity and its positive and negative attributes. Thus, the author manages to highlight information which affects the images of “otherness” nowadays as well as it did in the past, and to bring to the fore the role of intellectuals in creating stereotypes, adopted by the masses, which use them as a “formula” to account for the behavior of the opponent.
Keywords: Ethnosophy, Ethnology, Ethnography, Nation, Mentality, National Image, Stereotype, Collective Soul, Psychology, Mythology, Philosophy, Regional Studies, Country Study, Regional Geography, Geopolitics, Europe, Identity, Self-Knowledge.

Lyubov Bibikova
Postmodernism and the Value Crisis of the European Historical Science (№ 3, 2015)

Andrey Ivanov
The Slogan “Russia for Russians” in Conservative Thought in the Second Half of the XIX Century (№ 4, 2015)

Stanislav Khatuntsev
Europe: Sovereignty, Cultural Identity and the Future of Civilization (№ 3, 2015)

The article dwells on the issue of fading political subjectivity, sovereignty and ethno-cultural identity of the European civilization. The author believes that Europe has entered the fourth and final stage of the developmental cycle it proclaimed – the Era of Global Cities, and draws historical parallels between the modern community of Celtic-Romano-Germanic peoples and in the ancient world of the Ist century BC – the Vth century BC.
Keywords: Sovereignty, Ethnic and Cultural Identity, Europe, USA, Civilization, Atlanticism, Russia, External Proletariat, Internal Proletariat, Urban Stage of the Formation Cycle.

Yegor Kholmogorov
Russia’s Shift to Conservatism from the Global Historical Perspective of Fernand Braudel (№ 3, 2015)

The author expresses doubt about the validity of possible predictions, while pointing to reasons for the current civilizational split in the West. While analyzing possible splits and alliances among civilizations, he appeals to the thesis of Fernand Braudel, which runs as follows: “A civilization does not deserve the name if it does not eschew something, if it does not reject something.” The author argues that by defending traditional values, modern Russia lives up to the criterion of rejection, and supposes that conservatives in the West will be perceived as pro-Russian, as their vision of an individual coincides with the one promoted and cherished in Russia.
Keywords: Civilization, Traditional Values, Russia and West.

Yury Kondakov
The Crisis in State-Church Relations and Church Conservatism in the First Half of the XIX Century (№ 4, 2015)

The article deals with state-church relations in the first half of the XIX century. At that time, the conservative wing of the Russian clergy opposed the religious reforms. A series of individual statements was followed by the emergence of the Russian Orthodox opposition movement. Fierce political struggle resulted in the victory of the conservative clergy.
Keywords: State, Church, Conservatism, Clergy, Political Struggle, Freemasonry, Orthodoxy, Christianity, Religious Literature.

Aleksander Kotov
“Modern Non-Feudal Monarchy”: Russian Conservative Press Searching for National Ideology in the Late 19th Century (№ 4, 2015)

The article classifies and analyzes different forms of Russian conservative nationalism in the late 19th century: M. Katkov’s bureaucratic nationalism, late Slavophiles’ liberal nationalism, R. Fadeev and V. Meshchersky’s aristocratic conservatism, T. Filippov’s orthodox traditionalism, K. Leontiev’s conservative romanticism, and L. Tikhomirov’s neo-conservatism.
Keywords: Conservatism, Nationalism, Political Journalism, Katkov, Aksakov, Gilyarov-Platonov, Kireev, Fadeev, Meshchersky, Filippov, Leontiev, Tikhomirov

Aleksey Kozhevnikov
Russia’s Present and Future in A. Solzhenitsyn’s and I. Shafarevich’s Works: “From Under the Rubble” Collection (1974) (№ 4, 2015)

Alexey Kozyrev
“At the Walls of Chersonese”: Russian Philosophy and Crimea (№ 3, 2014)

Mikhail Maslin
Konstantin Leontiev and Eurasianism. Lessons of Russian Conservatism (№ 3, 2014)

Arina Meshcheryakova
“Poetic Conservatism” under Nicholas I (№ 4, 2015)

The article deals with Russian conservatism in its heyday, i.e. in the reign of Nicholas I. The article puts special emphasis on Russian classical writers and poets, such as A. Pushkin, V. Zhukovsky, F. Tyutchev, and P. Vyazemsky and their participation in the conservative movement. Their views and public life are studied within the context of the key political events of the epoch, such as the November Uprising, European revolutions of 1848–1849, Crimean War of 1853–1856 and their impact on the literary works.
Keywords: Russian Conservatism, Russian Literature, Orthodox Christianity, Monarchy, West, Russophobia, Anti-Westernism.

Oleg Milevsky
Russian Economic Alternatives: Conservative Approach (№ 4, 2015)

The article analyzes the approaches to Russia’s socio-economic development adopted by conservative thinkers in the late XIX – early XX centuries.
Keywords: Conservatism, Socio-Economic Development, State, Autarchy, Protectionism, Financial Reform, Factory, Agrarian Issue, Social Politics, Labour Issue.

Arkady Minakov
The Birth of Russian Conservatism: Lessons of the Past (№ 3, 2014)

The report describes the specific features оf Russian conservatism in the first quarter of the XIX-th century. Russian conservatism was a reaction to the radical modernization initiated by autocracy in XVIII and at the beginning of XIX century. The author analyses the main aspects of the activity of early Russian conservatives: their centres, ideological trends, peculiarity of their views, their influence on the internal politic of Russian Empire. The study analyzes the role of conservatives in the events of 1812-1815, presented the typology of the early Russian conservatism.
Keywords: Russian conservatism, westernization, Gallomania, nationalism, “Russian Rarty”, role of conservatives in the events of 1812-1815, typology of the early Russian conservatism.

Arkady Minakov
Аnti-Westernism in Early Russian Conservatism (№ 3, 2015)

The article analyzes the root causes of Russian conservatism in the early nineteenth century. Russian conservatism arose as a reaction against Gallophilia (Gallomania), a strain of Russian Westernism. Early Russian conservatism took shape amid full-scale aggression by Napoleonic France.
Keywords: Russian conservatism, Gallomania, Westernism

Arkady Minakov
Conservative “Russian party” in the Early XIX century (№ 4, 2015)

The article discusses the history of the conservative “Russian party” in the early nineteenth century, its activities and attitudes of the key party members, main viewpoints, periodicals and associations.
Keywords: Early Russian Conservatism, Conservative “Russian Party”, Nikolay Karamzin, Alexander Shishkov, Fyodor Rostopchin, Sergey Glinka, Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna.

Arkady Minakov
Russian Conservatism in Modern Russian Historiography (№ 4, 2015)

The article examines the key stages and characteristics of Russian conservatism in the last two decades. It also analyzes the main scientific papers on Russian conservatives.
Keywords: Historiography of Russian Conservatism, Russian Conservatism.

Igor Omelyanchuk
Russian Conservatism Searching for Party Self-Determination in the Early Twentieth Century (№ 4, 2015)

The article describes the first attempt to institutionalize Russian conservatism made by the Black Hundreds, which emerged in 1901, and the reasons for the failure in 1917.
Keywords: Russian Empire, Black Hundreds, Monarchist Organizations, Conservatism.

Tatyana Plyashchenko
Conservative Liberalism in Russia the Post-reform Period: The History of a Failure (№ 4, 2015)

Andrei Ratchinski
Alexander I of Russia and the Holy Alliance of 1815 (№ 3, 2015)

The report interprets Emperor Alexander I’s contribution to a new world order, the Holy Alliance, which underpinned the collective security system. During his reign Petersburg was virtually the capital of Europe, and the world’s fate was decided in the Winter Palace. The expert ponders on how to account for slanders against Alexander I, which made him a most maligned figure in Russian history, and arrives at the conclusion that slanderers are resentful of the Emperor’s victory against “global revolution” and Napoleon’s totalitarian world order.
Keywords: Alexander I of Russia, Holy Alliance.

Svetlana Sankova
Russian Nationalists Party: Reality Without Myths (№ 4, 2015)

The study deals with the emergence of Russian National Union, a Russian moderate conservative party, in the early 20th century, and reveals the essence of its relations with P. Stolypin. The author expatiates on the peculiar party ideology of Russian nationalists and characterizes key party leaders. The paper also describes the main activities of the party in the III and IV State Duma.
Keywords: All-Russian National Union, Nationalism, Moderate Right, Progressive Block, State Duma, P. Stolypin, M. Menshikov, V. Shulgin, P. Balashov, Metropolitan Eulogius.

Aleksey Shchavelev
The Islander or Thinking about “Conjunctures of Land and Time…” (№ 1, 2015)

The paper is a survey commentary on the last book by V.L. Tsymburskiy “Conjunctures of Land and Time”.
Keywords: V.L. Tsymburskiy, review, philosophy of history, historiography

Alexander Tsipko
Soviet Intellectual Community Converting to Russian Conservatism (On Spontaneous Anti-Communism Untying USSR Ideological Bonds) (№ 4, 2015)

Sergey Udalov
Empire at anchor: Conservative Ideology in Russia in the Second Quarter of the Nineteenth Century (№ 4, 2015)

The article deals with the state conservative ideology in the reign of Nicholas I. Тhe article addresses the influence of ideology on the state educational policy against the background of the changing public opinion in Russia.
Keywords: Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality, State and Social Conservatism, Enlightenment, Censorship, Public Opinion.

Yan Vaslavsky
Russia and Europe: A New Crossroads (№ 3, 2015)

«Essays on conservatism» presents the retrospective of the conservative thought and publishes articles by contemporary philosophers, politologists, sociologists and economists dealing with the same theme. it also publishes the proceedings of academic conference and other fora. the journal is published by the ISEPR foundation and disseminated across education facilities and libraries.

Go to Top