The ideology of unity for multinational Russia. The historical unity of society and the development of forms of social consciousness

The article deals with the problem of ambiguity and fragility of the historical unity of society. civil society and the rule of law. The contradictory nature of the present stage of Russia's development. A special church in the life of modern Russian society. culture and sociality.

Unity. Civic Unity. Civil society. Church. culture.

Historical unity of the society

and development of public consciousness forms

In the article the problem of a polyconsequence and fragility of historical unity of society is examined. Interaction of a civil society and a lawful state. Discrepancy of the present stage of development of Russia. A special role of church in a life of a modern Russian society. Interrelation of culture and a sociality.

unity. civil unity. a civil society. Church. Culture.

Civil unity is the most important component of stabilizing the life of society in the interaction of external and internal factors. An urgent problem is the issue of preserving the democratic nature of unity, the harmonization of social relations in the context of acute conflict interactions, radical sociality. The socio-political unity of society presupposes the interconnectedness of the spheres of human life, excludes their states that are sharply isolated from each other. In this case, real social communities are formed on the basis of mutual understanding between people. In the actual sense, unity is a multi-valued symbol that is introduced into the public consciousness, updated during periods of reorganization of the life of society. In the socio-philosophical understanding, unity appears as a component of the historical process that explains the development of the world. Radical, economic, socio-political, individual-personal modernizations are inseparable from a single reorganization of the social system. But a certain "" unity lies in the fact that, as soon as it is consolidated, society turns to new problems. The former state does not reveal them, and in this sense it is necessary to enrich the internal interconnectedness of social and human life, everything, the universal foundations of social existence. It is they who determine how real the unity of society is, the qualitative degree of connection of the universal, particular and special. At the same time, the achievement of total unity leads socio-political aspirations to decline.

In modern sociology, the theory of structuralism has been developed, splitting into two streams: unity (consensus) and struggle in society.

Structuralists view society at the social level as a stable, interconnected, integrated whole. It has culture and social differentiation.

• 1. This approach was initiated by O. Comte and G. Spencer. They proposed the concepts of "structure" and "deduction", analyzed the social structure and its development, drew an analogy with the body, laid the foundations for a systematic view of society as a set of interrelated parts.
• 2. E. Durkheim continued the development of structuralism. He developed Hobbes' idea of ​​the "modern treaty" as a means to stop the war of all against all. Durkheim's social system is a moral integrity. Human associations are built on patterns of behavior - general perception, assessments, feelings, actions (collective consciousness).

Society is a moral reality, an integrity that stands above man.

The basis of order is unwritten rules, common values ​​- this is society. Simple, agrarian, traditional societies differ from modern industrial ones in forms of social solidarity and different systems of morality.

The division of labor makes modern society more stable than before. In a simple society - mechanical solidarity, and in modern - "organic". "Organic" - the relationship of different elements, and not the sameness. The change in society is associated with a change in consensus.

3. Bronisław Malinowski and Radcliffe Brown discussed issues of consensus in anthropology. Society is a social system, the elements of which are related to the basic needs of people: food, shelter, protection, sexual satisfaction. People come together to meet these needs. In this process, secondary needs appear, which contributes to the development of language, norms, rules, organization. And this leads to the emergence of coordinating governing institutions.

Conclusion: the system is generated by the very nature of man. Any properties of society are associated with some vital need and function. Functions fulfill needs in the social environment. All properties of the culture of a society realize some function or serve certain needs. The researcher must identify the need or function. When they are open, relationships between people reflected in cultural norms can be explained.

• 4. Talcott Parsons' concept of social system is based on four ideas:
  • - to provide food, shelter, a person creates a system of production and distribution, i.e. adapts to the environment;
  • - the society should have goals;
  • - in the process of life, people develop common norms;
  • - in society, coordination between parts of the system is necessary, i.e. integration.

Society is a system that strives for balance, everyone knows his role, understands what is expected of him. Complete balance cannot be achieved, but society must strive for it.

Means of achievement - socialization and social control. If the roles are fulfilled - rewarding, if not - punishment.

Mother and father are the main creators of personality.

Parsons draws on Freud, using the notion of identification as the child's assimilation of the mother's values ​​as a member of society. The role of emotions is important, a child is an empty vessel that needs to be filled with culture.

Deviants are people with inadequate socialization who have not sufficiently mastered the values ​​and norms of society, especially in the family.

Deviance is a pathology in relation to the prevailing system of values.

In a social system, deviation is a deviation from equilibrium, which requires such means of control as the police, psychiatric hospitals, prisons.

All parts of the social structure are interconnected. Thus, the structure of the family has changed from complex to nuclear, its functions have changed in a changed society.

Production requires mobile, skilled workers, and the education of children's abilities is required in the family, so its size is changing. The nuclear family is better suited to an industrial society. There is a process of structural differentiation.

Traditional society is based on kinship systems.

Industrial - on political organizations, church, industry and school. Some of the family functions are transferred to these institutions. Between the norms of different parts of the system there are contradictions that do not upset the balance. Thus, the family seeks to form a personality, and production needs only professional skills. The school plays the role of a bridge between the family and production, softening the contradictions between them.

Lesson topic: The nature of the unity of modern society
Objectives: to continue the formation of theoretical knowledge about the current stage of development of society;
Tasks:
To develop students' ability to assess the main processes (globalization and the creation
information society);
Concretize theoretical ideas about the role of politics in the global world based on analysis
politics (development of the information society);
Develop the ability to analyze social information, draw up a complex plan, carry out
cognitive tasks;
Lesson type: combined.
During the classes
I. Organizational moment
We will consider the following questions:
traditional society.
industrial society.
post-industrial society.
II. Checking homework
1. Terminological dictation (oral or written at the choice of the teacher). Mandatory inclusion
basic concepts throughout the previously studied material.
2. Completion of workshop tasks 1 and 2 (p. 38).
III. Learning new material
1. Typology of societies
All the real diversity of societies that existed before and exist now, sociologists
divided into certain types. Several types of societies united by similar features or
criteria form a typology. Different typologies are based on different bases. From one of
typologies are familiar to the students from the last lesson. The teacher asks to remember and characterize it.
Companies can be:
pre-written and written;
simple and complex;
primitive, slaveholding, feudal, capitalist, socialist;
traditional (agrarian), industrial, post-industrial.
(Students' reports about the views of L. Morgan, E. Durkheim, K. Popper are heard.)
The most famous periodization of the evolution of society is associated with the name of L. Morgan.
In 1877, his book Ancient Society, or an Inquiry into the Lines of Human Progress from
savagery through barbarism to civilization." L. Morgan distinguishes three stages in the history of mankind:
savagery, barbarism and civilization. Each stage is characterized by its own peculiarity of reproduction.
sociality. For example, at the stage of savagery, this is the production of such values ​​as power, holiness,
skill; at the stage of barbarism the value of glory; in the era of civilization, the market and wealth in the form
goods, money and capital.
3. Durkheim divided all societies according to the nature of the solidarity of their constituent people:
mechanical and organic.
Mechanical solidarity is a clan, a tribe, without which an individual is nothing
is. All aspects of his life are strictly regulated by general rules (taboos, rituals, ceremonies,
traditions).
Organic solidarity The highest value is the professionalism (skill) of an individual
individual. Hence, only in professional groups, or corporations, can
personality. Consequently, organic solidarity begins with the creation of medieval guilds
artisans.
K. Popper distinguishes between closed (magical, tribal, collectivist) and open societies.
The first group is a semi-natural unity of people, whose members are united by semi-biological
ties: kinship, common life, participation in common affairs, the same dangers, common troubles
and pleasures. These societies are totalitarian.

The second group of societies are democratic societies in which individuals have
independence and are forced to make decisions on their own.
(For the attention of the teacher: in recent years, universities such as Moscow State University, State University Higher School of Economics and others,
hold Internet Olympiads, subject Olympiads as a kind of rehearsal of introductory
exams. As tasks of different levels of complexity, questions related to theories
Morgan, Durkheim, Popper.)
Most modern researchers recognize historical development as either a continuous
the process of modernization of the technical and technological method of production and organization, or as
movement from primitive pre-market forms of economy to the formation and subsequent development
market system, its modifications. On this basis, pre-industrial (agrarian,
traditional), industrial and post-industrial society.
Characteristic features of each type of society:
1. Pre-industrial: production is focused on meeting the simplest needs;
the main goal is to survive; the production of wealth is based on technologies transferred
from generation to generation, manual or low-mechanized labor prevails; big addiction
from climatic conditions; social life is based on mythological and religious
ideas; power is based on authority; development is cyclical.
2. Industrial: the secular nature of social life; innovation prevails over tradition;
the formation of the personality of the individual; production develops for the sake of increasing material
good; power is democratic; the dominance of universal education; secular nature of education.
3. Post-industrial (post-modern, post-civilizational, informational): the main goal
production of intangible, spiritual goods and services; transition from a culture of mass consumption to
a culture of increased demands; the basis of social status is not economic indicators, but
education, professional competence; replaces representative democracy
direct democracy, or self-government.
IV. Consolidation of the studied material
Discussion of the results of the work of each group and filling in the table.
Homework
Textbook: § 5, tasks 17.

The systemic crisis that hit all aspects of the life of Russian society leads to the fact that there is a real possibility of deepening social contradictions of different segments of the population, who are on the verge of survival and have a clear lack of certain material and spiritual resources necessary for a full life.

The threat of non-satisfaction of people's needs for food, clothing, housing, not to mention the availability of preschool institutions, cultural and leisure institutions is becoming real.

A feature of the crisis of modern Russian society lies in the fact that there is an active (and even aggressive) planting of the values ​​of Western civilization. The fact is that an unstable society becomes open to external influences, fundamentally ready for the perception from the outside of some new forms of life as a desire for personal and public peace, stability and security.

The hopes of the population for a stable future, not supported by real guarantees from the authorities, give modern Russian society the danger of becoming a risk society.

A sharp violation of the balance of interests that has developed over decades and the people around him turns into instability of the internal state of people, which is an additional reason for increasing the instability of society.

Consequently, the spiritual and moral patriotic attitude of a person to the collective, to the social environment in which he lives, to Russian society and, in general, to the state cannot be formed.

Modern social science notes that a specific effect is manifested in the minds and behavior of people of the middle and older generations, which is called the "echo" of the Soviet period. The point is that the social conditions corresponding to the realities of this period "imprinted" in the psyche of people, and the social situation was already beginning to change dynamically. It was these stereotypes of the Soviet era that opposed the formation of appropriate behavior in the conditions of the beginning market transformations. It should also be taken into account that market transformations are associated with a sharp decline in the role of the state in the economy and public life.

Now a person must act not in accordance with the plan of the power structures surrounding him, expressing the will of the state, but from his own motives, which fundamentally contradicted the ideas that most people had about life and how to carry out life activities.

The era that Russia has entered today is extremely difficult. There have been significant changes in all systems of contradictions at the global, regional and national levels. A new world order is being formed, in which the tendency to establish a multipolar world and the tendency to create a unipolar world oppose.

In post-Soviet Russia, a society is being formed that has inherited a lot from the Soviet era, but on other, qualitatively different from the Soviet, economic and social foundations, as well as on the opposite ideological basis - on Western liberal ideas.

As a result, the personality acquires new qualities, its relationship with society and the state changes significantly. And the Russian society itself, as well as the state, have a significantly different character than in the Soviet period.

During the transition period, the public consciousness of what is happening becomes wider and more contrasting, since it is difficult for a person to understand in which direction society is changing. In such a state of crisis society, for a person who is losing his former positions and attitudes, habitual ideas and guidelines, the assessment of his own life becomes painful: a person reacts not only to the real situation of other people from his environment, but also to their standard of living, to their possible win and the probable loss.

Thus, a feature of a crisis society is the search for practical benefits from interaction with other people, the dominance of momentary interests and goals.

The peak of the crisis of the personality of the Soviet person came in 1991-1993. when the former political system collapsed, the Soviet Union collapsed, and the former worldview and ideological norms and attitudes were discarded.

The majority of Russians did not approve of this turn of events, they were unable to adapt to the changed conditions, both in the situation of rejection of the new realities of the Western model, and because of the lack of experience necessary for this. Indeed, the attempt to directly “transfer” the values ​​and principles of the West to Russia, which was undertaken by our liberals in the early 1990s, failed precisely because this model of life order did not take into account the socio-cultural peculiarities of Russia at all. Indeed, this model of individualism in modern society already looks mythological, not only because today the “economic individual” of the 18th century as the main “agent of action” does not exist in this model due to the most complex network of social ties, institutions developed in modern society.

The consciousness of the people inhabiting the post-Soviet space, by that time largely bifurcated and contradictory under the pressure of the prevailing circumstances and the massive impact of the media, turned out to be blocked.

Privatization along neoliberal Western principles has split Russian society. Judging by the data of the State Statistics Committee of Russia, the money income of the population as a whole is increasing, but extremely unevenly: only 10% of the country's inhabitants get 30% of the largest sums. 68% of payments for the work done are distributed among 80% of the poor, the remaining 10% of the poor get only 2% of the total income.

On the basis of these changes and under the influence of the entire set of political, legal and spiritual factors of social relations, there is an active restructuring of spiritual mechanisms associated with a new idea of ​​the individual about his place and role in society, patriotic self-awareness, including images of one's own "I", self-esteem and self-respect, on which the level of claims and the actual behavior of a person largely depend. There is a noticeable reorientation of the ideals and values ​​of the individual, his moral foundations, the moral justification of personal well-being, the desire to maximize the use of the rights and freedoms given by society in line with the unity of collective, public and state interests.

The history of Russian society shows that the establishment of a harmonious combination of state, collective, public and personal interests is a common thing in stable times, it is exacerbated in fateful times, when the very existence of Russia is called into question. For, “blessed is he who visited this world in its fatal moments ...” (A. S. Pushkin).

PROLOGUE

Russia is my homeland. I was born in Uzbekistan, but I have lived my entire adult life in Russia. My family has repeatedly moved: Fergana region (Ukrainian SSR), Nizhny Novgorod region, Kirov region. Now I live and work in Moscow.

For 23 years I managed to meet representatives of various nationalities, cultures, religions, social movements. Realizing my civil continuity of the path chosen by the Russian Federation in 1991, I can say with confidence that it is the multinationality of Russia that is its great asset, the basis for development and the unconditional possibility of becoming a rich, stable, prosperous state.

More than 180 peoples live on the territory of Russia: Russians, Tatars, Ukrainians, Avars, Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Chechens, Moldavians, Bashkirs and many others .. If you describe the cultural and historical heritage, centuries-old traditions, moral values ​​and ethnic uniqueness of each people - unfortunately, there will not be enough space for the competition work. Thus, I asked myself another question: what can unite all these 180 peoples, what will make diversity one?...

Ideology is the path to a united multinational Russia.

IDEOLOGY OF UNITY FOR A MULTINATIONAL RUSSIA

INTRODUCTION

They say that a high commission, visiting the oldest English university, did not find the rector in his office. Much to their surprise, the rector was reading Shakespeare on one of the benches in the university park.

Who runs the university? The members of the commission were surprised.

The university is ruled by tradition...

(Official site of RUDN University)

And the state - ideology ... (Aut.)

year 2013. Russia is in a state of "weightlessness" ... and not because it does not have significant "weight" (political, economic influence), but because of the inability to stand firmly on its feet in the face of all the challenges of our time. The strategies, programs and plans of state development for the next few years clearly demonstrate that we know what we want. The problem is different - we do not understand how exactly to do this.

Let us consider how this is done in the same English university mentioned as an example in the epigraph to this work. Traditions are not just a set of unwritten laws on the basis of which an educational institution functions. Traditions are not amorphous ideas of students about how their learning activities should be built. Traditions are guarantees of conscious sustainability and commitment to the educational process of both an individual student and teacher, and the entire student and teaching community. The diversity and antiquity of traditions speak of versatility and continuity.

The principle of operation of the national (which for the author is equivalent to the concept of "state") ideology is in many respects similar to the principles of creating and maintaining traditions. I am deeply convinced that it is the ideology of the state that is the driving force or even the metaphysical support of sustainable state development. But Russia is a special case, and the following comments are about this.

The Constitution of the Russian Federation begins with the words: “We, the multinational people of the Russian Federation, united by a common destiny on our land, asserting human rights and freedoms, civil peace and harmony, preserving the historically established state unity, based on the universally recognized principles of equality and self-determination of peoples ... adopt the Constitution of the Russian Federation". We, that is, the multinational people, as the only source of power, striving for the establishment of sovereign democracy, signed in 1993 under the words "ideological diversity is recognized." To think that this was a mistake is as stupid as to say that this is the only condition for intercultural interaction in a multinational society. We acknowledged this not unreasonably, namely: in order to thereby reinforce the right of everyone to nationality, religion, language ...

The Strategy of the State Ethnic Policy of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025 (dated December 19, 2012 No. 1666) states that “representatives of 193 nationalities live in Russia, 277 languages ​​and dialects are used ...”. The document also states that “the following negative factors influence the development of interethnic relations: a) a high level of social inequality; b) erosion of traditional moral values ​​of peoples...; c) legal nihilism...; d) persistence of manifestations of discrimination…; e) insufficiency of cultural and educational measures for the formation of Russian civic identity…”. To solve these problems, a large number of tasks were set, affecting migration policy, education, legislative framework and much more.

The question arises: in order to prepare resources (human, regulatory, financial) for such a big job, it is necessary to spend a lot of time organizing the process, the people themselves and searching for sources of cash receipts; In this case, who will do it and how?

Mikhail Ostrovsky, First Deputy Secretary of the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, speaking at a meeting of the Presidential Council on Interethnic Relations, spoke as follows: “I consider the main and priority task of civil society today to be , first of all, he identified himself as a citizen of Russia, and only then - everything else. According to Ostrovsky, “it is necessary to carry out measures at all levels to popularize positive examples of the friendly life of our peoples, what was called “internationalism” in the Soviet era. In the context of modernity, one could call it a “new state ideology”, of course, only after an amendment is made to paragraphs 1, 2 of Article 13 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which read: “1. Ideological diversity is recognized in the Russian Federation. 2. No ideology can be established as a state or mandatory.”

The second stage of the reforms would be the creation of a "pyramid" of executive bodies, specially organized and functioning on the basis of and in the name of maintaining the "new national ideology".

In order to come to the solution of such a global problem, Russian reality needs to get away from the cultural and ideological crisis, according to Agafonov Yu.A. which is based on "the need to change the basic ideas about the world and about oneself, reassessment of values, including both moral and ethical, addressed directly to the individual, and social and universal, addressed to the whole society." In other words, we need to decide what are the main values ​​for us, how we see the world and ourselves in it, and what is the model of these two-way communications. It is worth noting that we have done this... in many official documents, resolutions and orders of the Government of the Russian Federation and the President of the Russian Federation, the phrase "in order to create supra-ethnic civil unity" or a synonym for "national consolidation" is used.

In the response publications of the Russian media and the official opposition, one can see the necessary conditions for the implementation of "supra-ethnic civic unity": the people demand "attractive guarantees." Of course, here one can cite the Constitution as a guarantor of the rights and freedoms of a Russian. Nevertheless, a misunderstanding arises: the Constitution enshrines the rights that either belong to us from birth (natural), or are acquired by us as citizens of our state, to which we initially delegated some of our rights (functional; read “endowed authorities with powers”). In this case, interdependence is logical and acceptable, but then where are the guarantees (or, in other words, confidence) of a prosperous stable future? Where are the guarantees that attract us so much? It is on these guarantees that our futuristic attachment to the state is based, isn't it? It is the national idea or, in other words, the state ideology that allows you to calmly navigate in the social space, to know the answers to the most controversial, it would seem, social issues, to be ideologically assigned to the state as a “guardian” protecting civil interests, and most importantly, to be proud of that your “guardian” is precisely this state ...

Russia can become that "guard". Answer the question "How?" we will devote the next part of this work.

UNITY IN DIVERSITY

Russia is a multinational state. The largest diasporas seek to reunite the people through the creation of public organizations with a proven and tested experience, the charter, structure and goals of this organization, based mainly on religion or the idea of ​​​​unification and return to their historical homeland, transformation or development of the ethnic group. Such organizations create their own guidelines for achieving national consolidation: they gradually attract an increasing number of supporters, can have a significant impact on the current ethnic situation in the expanses of the Russian state, and also have the opportunity (primarily financial) to purposefully strive to restore "their national unity", of course, in the context of citizens of the Russian Federation of a certain nationality.

Then the question is quite natural: is it possible to create a state ideology of unity and instill this feeling of a nation, where every third is a fourth Ukrainian, Tatar, Caucasian, etc.? Yes, it's possible. And here we cannot do without an example from the 70-year experience of the USSR ...

Director of the Center for Geopolitical Expertise Korovin V.M. explains how such a request for ideology was realized during the period of the Soviet Union: “In a desacralized, secular modern society, the answer to the question of the meaning of life was given for many years by the state, especially in Russia. The state itself was moving towards a higher goal - towards the construction of communism, towards the construction of a kind of kingdom of God on earth. And each person was included in the achievement of this ultimate goal. It was provided with its own local goal in the general striving for a common goal. Even the smallest person was dedicated to this project and worked to achieve it. With the collapse of the communist ideology, our people, each of its individual individuals, lost this goal.

It is impossible to deny that modern Russia also has national interests (in my opinion, these are, first of all, foreign policy interests). They are expressed in such documents as the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation (dated February 12, 2013), a review of which helps us understand the foreign policy course for the next ten years: our country intends to actively participate in strengthening international peace, general security and stability; the goal is to establish a just and democratic international system; moreover, the latter should be based on collective principles in solving international problems and the rule of international law (primarily the UN Charter); equal and partnership relations between states are important with the central coordinating role of the UN; The priority areas of bilateral and multilateral cooperation include regions, individual states and international organizations that are of strategic importance to us for the effective achievement of foreign policy interests.

From the foregoing, let us pay special attention to the last provision of the Concept. In the presence of national interests, the reality of the nation-state ideology increases in direct proportion to the efforts that we make to achieve and implement both. Let's try to describe a possible model of Russian ideology.

MODEL OF RUSSIAN UNITY

So, some statistics. A survey conducted by the site "Nakanune.ru" presented the following figures: out of 2.6 thousand respondents, 88% answered positively the question of the need to create and implement a state ideology. An interesting fact is that among them, opinions were almost equally divided on what the state ideology should be based on: 27.3% believe that Soviet values ​​should be taken as the basis of ideology; 28.2% were in favor of putting patriotism at the forefront; and 31.6% supported the opinion that the ideology should be based on the thesis of the state-forming role of the Russian people.

We draw conclusions: Russians want to believe in their state, they want to believe in the bright future of the country, and, accordingly, the bright future of their children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren, they want to have an active citizenship and be part of the greatest ideological association with a great purpose. The question is purpose.

In my opinion, Soviet values ​​are a return to the past. Moreover, a return in the presence of completely different geographical, political, economic circumstances and an absolutely unprepared (one might even say “unfavorable”) environment (I mean the worldview of the modern generation).

As for the second option, the state-forming role of the Russian people cannot become the core foundation in a multinational state, especially given the sad experience of the modern policy of multiculturalism, which, for example, has failed in most European countries. It is possible to create an ideology with a similar basis in countries where the range of ethno-confessional differences does not exceed a certain number (small). And this is definitely not the case of Russia with 193 nationalities, moreover, when many ethnic conflicts have not been resolved. Inevitably, this will lead to social unrest and will only exacerbate the current situation. In addition, sociological studies show that, despite the strength of the Russian spirit, in associations of representatives of the Caucasian culture and similar associations of Russians, for example, a sense of belonging, solidarity and continuity of the peoples of the Caucasus overshadow such manifestations of cohesion among Russians. True, this is another problem, until we dwell on it.

So patriotism remains...

FAITH. ON THE WAY TO UNITY

Ideology is of paramount importance in the effective functioning of the state. A people that is not aware of its true national-state interests (and this awareness is precisely carried out in the form of the development of a national-state ideology) is inevitably doomed to non-existence. At best, it becomes a silent object of world politics. The Russian Federation is currently striving in every possible way to maintain its status as a subject of international relations, that is, as an actor influencing international processes, and not subordinating to them.

Based on this, it can be assumed that the interests of the people are reflected by the state in its ideology, namely: the principles of the functioning of political and economic systems are developed and a strategy for the development of national culture is created (it should be noted that the concept of "state" is synonymous with the concept of "nation", this provision is often found in the works of Hans Morgenthau, in particular: "Political relations between nations: the struggle for power and peace" in 1948, which coincides with the views of the author). Thus, the state is developing on a solid ideological foundation, and the effectiveness of this development depends on the implementation of the foreign and domestic policy.

On such aspects as the involvement of the people, the continuity of views, the feeling of universal patriotism and civil solidarity, the attitude towards the state from the outside is built. Stability and well-being within the framework of the state itself also depend on them. In order to work out the principles of raising the state to the status of a “faithful guardian” and to develop people's patriotism, it is necessary first of all to analyze on the basis of what, for what and what we are striving for.

The basis is formed by the interests of a strategic order (what is fixed in the Development Strategies and Concepts). At the same time, the established historical traditions, the mentality of the people (including as a special feature - its multinationality), the geopolitical position of Russia, as well as the economic, demographic, environmental and other conditions in which we now exist (the world order) are of paramount importance in the analysis our strategic interests, as well as, no doubt, the "internal life" of the state: the socio-political situation, economic, moral and ethical.

The question “why” can now be answered by the people themselves, for example, by conducting a sociological survey. I will try to comment on it, taking into account the opinions of my peers and those people who simply care about the future of Russia, because. they are going to stay in it, and not emigrate, following the example of quite a few (by the way, most often such “stolites” do not go to the polls, because they believe that nothing depends on their opinion).

So, we want our state to have a strong ideology, so that we have something to believe in, and nihilism would not become our cult in the era of globalism and the increasing spread of Western capitalist values, which are so unusual for the Russian mentality, spiritualized and multifaceted. We want to live in a prosperous state that takes care of its citizens and provides citizens with all the necessary conditions for a comfortable life. We want to believe that the state needs us to achieve a common goal, and it, in turn, is ready to provide us with opportunities for the effective development of our own personality for the benefit of the prosperity of the entire Russian people.

The very proclamation of ideology will answer the question “what are we striving for” when it is thought out and ready for implementation within the state. For example, a modern Russian sociologist, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences V.N. Kuznetsov writes: “... the formulation and adoption by all of us of a national goal can, in the shortest possible time and most effectively, unite Russian society, strengthen the unity of the entire country on the basis of real trust between the peoples and the authorities, and ensure confidence in the achievement of honesty, prosperity and security for every citizen of Russia ". Nevertheless, in the light of the discussions that have arisen on the topic of the purpose of ideology, opinions have diverged: many scientists talk about such an ultimate goal, or, in other words, a “national idea”, as the creation and promotion of Russian civilization; some believe in the ideologically antagonistic role of Russia in relation to the West (here we can cite Huntington and his theory of the clash of civilizations as an example); some believe that we need to work out our own “response” to the challenge of the spread of Western pop culture, to “move” our values ​​to the people, destroying stereotypes about Russian alcoholism, laziness and social inconsistency, as well as about the American dream, European financial well-being and Eastern uniqueness and exoticism. In any case, the main thing is to convince the Russian people of this, and the chain reaction will not keep you waiting long. Here's the catch: to convince the disillusioned is not an easy thing - that's exactly what the state ideology is needed for.

IDEOLOGY IN ACTION

If we analyze what was inspired by us from the West, the so-called Western values ​​and life guidelines, we can summarize: the goal that modern man is convinced of is life for himself, or rather, for the sake of satisfying his needs (A. Maslow's Pyramid in action). In fact, the goal of satisfying needs and maintaining existence is more inherent in animals, and a person with his characteristic rational thinking almost every minute asks a natural question about the meaning of his life.

State ideology will give an answer to such a complex question. But do not be confused: the ideology is designed to nurture a prosperous people in its civic unity and striving for a common goal, and not loyal subjects - soldiers who devote their lives to activities for the benefit of the development of the state as a driving, but totalitarian force. An ideological national state should be built not on coercion, but on awareness.

Let's try to guess on the basis of what principles the state ideology can work...

IDEOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES OF A plurinational state

So, the life of a multinational state, in my opinion, should be based on the principles of international law, where the subjects of law, in this case, are the various nationalities of the Russian Federation. Some of the following are enshrined in the UN Charter, namely:

• The principle of sovereign equality (nationalities where there is no concept of "absolute sovereignty" of any ethnic group, therefore the Russian people are not considered as state-forming)
• Principle of peaceful settlement of disputes
• The principle of conscientious fulfillment of obligations (in relation to each other)
• The principle of equality of peoples (in this case, nationalities)
• The principle of cooperation (nationalities)
• The principle of respect for human rights

I would like to pay special attention to human rights in Russia.

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” - this is how the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948 and still at the heart of numerous international human rights agreements, begins. "The source of the strength of human rights lies in their universality, whereby there is no border, obstacle or enemy that could block their path." However, despite its universality, it cannot be said that the attitude towards rights in Russia is of the same nature as, for example, in Europe.

At the same time, it is important to realize that even the General Assembly had no illusions about the speedy implementation of this Declaration. The document emphasizes that its purpose "to serve as a task to which all peoples and all states should strive in their efforts to secure universal and effective recognition of the observance of the enumerated rights and freedoms."

Thus, all is not yet lost. When creating and implementing a new state ideology, an integral part of which will be the observance of human rights in particular and nationalities in general, the citizens of Russia will be able to sincerely believe in their legal capacity and legal personality and, as a result, have an active civic position. But back to ideology...

The potential principles of the internal life of a multinational state were outlined above, what are the national principles?

Sovereignty (its protection). The sovereignty of the country is the dignity and capabilities of each person, projected onto the state level. Sovereignty is also a foreign policy expression of the value of national freedom. The integrity of the people depends on its protection, as well as the provision of conditions for its prosperous existence under full state protection.

economic well-being. This is a prerequisite for the development of democracy, and poverty is its enemy. The poorer the people, the less likely it is to create a stable democracy in this country. If a democratic government cannot create an efficient economy from which the majority would benefit, it deliberately makes its position unstable, so the growth of the welfare of society and the elimination of poverty are the fundamental directions of domestic policy.

national unity. If a society is internally split by separatism, then the existence of an ideologically strong state is problematic. In a democratic country, people should see the possibility of solving their problems within the framework of a democratic procedure, where citizens are clearly aware of national unity (as well as their commitment to it) and are ready to compromise in the name of the good of the majority, and not their own.

Developed political culture of society. It is necessary that the ideology be accepted by the society itself, and the national principles for the implementation of the ideology should be not just formal prescriptions, but a way of life for citizens. The absolute form of realization of the national ideology is the outlook of a citizen in the spirit of national unity. Therefore, a developed political culture is a necessary condition.

Return to traditional national values ​​and their propaganda. The cult of the family and a long happy marriage; the priority of the moral principle in human relationships; patriotism based on self-respect; involvement; respect for the history of the formation and development of the Russian state; preservation of cultural wealth; Orthodoxy and spirituality; tolerance and mutual assistance; unity.

Some of these principles are formed on the basis of the ideas proposed by the manual of the National Institute "Higher School of Management" ("Russia and the Modern World. Sovereign Democracy" edited by Nechaeva V.D.). I was lucky enough to acquire this edition while participating in the international session of the Seliger Forum, and even then (2010-2011) young people from all over the world in Tver Forest were developing concepts of ideologies for nation states. As a representative of the modern generation, I can say that young people are fully aware of the need for ideological reforms, moreover, they firmly believe in their effectiveness, provided that they are thought out, everyone is interested and involved, and that everyone has the right to choose.

By the way, in order to create and implement a new national ideology, we also have to choose people, organizations and new state bodies. In my opinion, in each of the three branches of power, it is necessary to create an additional department, department, council or commission, whose activities will be aimed at uniting the multinational people under the auspices of the new state ideology. The federation implies a two-level system of state bodies, and therefore such "departments" will be created both at the federal and at the regional (local) level. Only a well-thought-out structure, shared functionality and awareness of responsibility will lead to real results. With the right approach, such bodies will not be perceived by the people as imposed from outside: the “departments” will serve for the benefit of the people and the entire state. They will not demand, they will offer, interest, revive in every citizen of Russia patriotism and the desire to make their own contribution to the guaranteed prosperity of the state. To realize one's own importance both within the country and outside, presenting oneself as its citizen; feeling secure is what each of us strives for. That's what ideology is created for.

EPILOGUE

The epigraph to this work refers to traditions not by chance. Traditions are what connects us to our rich history. Ideology is a system that unites the traditions, cultural values ​​and historical ties of a multinational society.

Multinational Russia will then become united when all spheres of public life are permeated with the state ideology. Multinationality should be considered not as an inalienable complex condition under which we need to build the domestic and foreign policy course of the country's development, but as an extraordinary opportunity for the ideological reunification of peoples within the framework of a single state, where each nationality can make its unique contribution to the future prosperity of all of Russia.