Why Russia absolutely needs its own ideology


Dear Reader! This article is devoted to the study of the controversially acute issue of our Russian reality: does Russia need ideology? Least of all, the author would like to be in the role of a wise teacher teaching the plebs, while demonstrating his intellectual academic exceptionalism. The author pursues only one goal: to share his analytical research with a thoughtful and intelligent reader, so that, ultimately, in an open discussion, jointly form a collective, maximally constructive and uniting position of the actions of the patriotic forces of our country - people who are not indifferent to the fate of Russia and the fate of our children ... To the evil ignorant, the lowest request: skip this article without your comments and do not waste your expert peremptory sarcasm. Thanks!


* * *

Recently, in the socio-political space of Russia, long and stormy discussions about the need for ideology for the state have been increasingly emerging. Recently, the President of Russia V.V. Putin, despite the constitutional prohibition of state ideology (13th article of the Constitution), nevertheless started talking about it. So, in his opinion, "the national idea of ​​Russia is patriotism, but it should not be leavened, musty and sour." About this in an interview with the program “Moscow. Kremlin. Putin "said the Russian President. Let us also try to look for an answer to the question: does Russia need an ideology, and if so, why and why? To increase the objectivity of the answer, let us consider this question through the prism of a number of geopolitical and geostrategic circumstances.

The end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century were marked by a number of significant events: the collapse of the world socialist system and the growing crisis of capitalism. The latter is closely related to the collapse of liberalism as the ideological formulation of the classical capitalist socialeconomic model of society. By the way, V.V. Putin in an interview with the Financial Times in 2019.

The liberal idea is outdated. She came into conflict with the interests of the vast majority of the population

- he said.

Financial and economic globalization, covering the whole world, has reached its political, geographical and socio-economic limits. In recent years, a tendency has become increasingly clear: the main “engine” of the capitalist system - loan interest (payment for a loan) in the formula “money-commodity-money” does not work. Loans at 0-0,25%, the introduction of a negative bank rate in Sweden, Denmark, Japan, Switzerland indicate that the system has reached the limit of its capabilities. Hence the search for other sources of financial profit, one of which may be the exchange rate: the payment for the exchange of one currency for another. But this requires the presence of a multi-currency global system and the formation of several regional self-sufficient and relatively independent financial and economic zones with their own currencies. By the way, the main representatives of the "money changers" are the Rothschilds.

It must be said that the decline of globalization and the "bloc" tendency in the development of the world were predicted long ago. The original plan for global transformations was drawn up by the Club of Rome (the authorship is attributed to the Rothschilds), and it provided for the creation of two or three "world regional blocks". The configurations of the blocks, the basic principles and the roadmap for their construction were determined using exclusively the mechanisms of financial and economic coercion of national elites and total psychological and ideological zombification of the population of the candidate countries. At the same time, Russia was assigned a place either as a raw material appendage of the Atlantic civilization, or it should be divided between the eastern and western blocs.

And today we see that in place of Globalization, which has drawn almost the whole world into a single financial and economic system, there is a fragmentation of what some time ago was brought together under the shadow of the WTO and the dollar. An opposition process is visible ahead - political and economic regionalization. It is no coincidence that D. Trump's foreign policy program contains the thesis of rejecting globalism. In this case, the question inevitably arises: why should the collapse of globalization end with regionalization, and not national “atomization”? Because the world economic science has recognized that for the progressive development of a closed economy, the volume of the domestic market must be at least 250-300 million people. It is not yet entirely clear who will end up in which conglomerate and in which company. Actually, this is what a fierce struggle is going on today between the core-forming countries. The United States, for example, expects to take control of three large regions, imposing on them its own undivided leadership - Europe, South America and the Asia-Pacific region (Asia-Pacific region). And for the latter, the geopolitical confrontation between the USA and China is taking place today. Great Britain would like to revive the British Empire under its auspices. This is precisely the main reason for leaving the EU. Europe would like to keep its zone and draw the CIS countries into it. And the example of Ukraine, in particular, is extremely illustrative here. Russia is forming, not without problems, the EurAsEC.

The integration experience of recent years irrefutably testifies that the success of the process of formation of regional entities depends not only on the attractiveness of economic proposals from the core-forming countries. Today, among the national elites of medium and small states, especially in the post-Soviet space, the idea of ​​neutrality is extremely popular - an attempt to build equidistant political and economic relations with all centers of power. The policy of the so-called "multi-vector" is based on the reluctance of the national elites and small-town princelings to sacrifice almost monarchical powers, obtained by chance as a result of the collapse of the USSR. Of course, the short-sightedness and erroneousness of such aspirations is obvious. The Achilles' heel of small countries is the narrowness of the domestic market. The process of regionalization will inevitably lead to political and economic delimitation and fierce inter-bloc political and economic rivalry. This will surely put before small and even medium-sized countries the question of bloc affiliation. In the context of harmonization of intrablock financial and economic competition against the background of interblock contradictions, access for "neutral" countries to intraregional markets will be significantly hampered, and their own material and intellectual potential for innovative development will clearly not be enough.

But despite these arguments, it is extremely difficult to overcome the egoism and separatism of national elites with economic instruments alone, as the experience of the EurAsEC shows. After all, how to prove to the whole people or to an individual simple person of a particular country that he personally will receive some benefits from the creation of the Customs Union. But there will always be so-called "nationally oriented" voices that will explain that Russia in this union is robbing poor Belarusians or Kazakhs. That is exactly how the USSR was destroyed: against the background of the ideological collapse of the CPSU, the absence of a modern integration idea accepted by the whole society, the peoples were “divorced” on economic egoism. That is why the United States, as an informal initiator of the unification, put the ideas of "Atlanticism", the common security of the "golden billion", the ideology of universal human values ​​and liberal freedoms as the basis for building the European Union.

Thus, the success of interstate integration is determined, among other things, by the attractiveness of the socio-political, moral, and ideological unifying model that is proposed by the country - the nucleus of the crystallization of the future regional conglomerate. It should be especially noted that the formation of regional unions will undoubtedly be based on the use of the principles of etatism (etatism is an ideology that determines the priority role of the state in society), the implementation of which is impossible without ideological design.

Based on the foregoing, it should be recognized that today the main geopolitical mistake of the current leadership of Russia, in our opinion, is the rejection of ideology, and the fact that all its integration projects both with the countries of the former USSR and far abroad, it tries to build exclusively only on the search for mutual economic interest, which is only partly true. The ideas of "economic determinism", which give rise to the President of Russia deep confidence that the benefits of economic cooperation will inevitably lead to close interaction and will help to rebuild the entire spectrum of interstate relations, which were valid a few decades ago, now work partially or do not work at all.

One of the reasons for the low efficiency of integration projects solely based on the search for mutual economic interest is that the class of the national industrial bourgeoisie, which is directly interested in the economic preferences of interstate cooperation, in many countries under the conditions of "bureaucratic-corporate capitalism" has lost most of its political influence and authorities. Real power today has passed to the class of bureaucracy, which includes not only high-ranking civil servants (politicians), but also top managers of transnational banking and industrial corporations (corporatocracy). The latter, under the conditions of corporate ownership (there is no pronounced physical owner), usurped economic and administrative power in their corporations and acquired unprecedented political influence. By the way, D. Trump is trying to return political significance to national capital. This thesis is clearly illustrated by the story of Nord Stream 2. Certainly beneficial in all respects to German industrialists, the new pipeline is being torpedoed by the German state bureaucracy to please the transatlantic solidarity of the "distributor" class. Therefore, it should be recognized that it is impossible to unite countries and build a stable political and economic structure only on a mercantile basis. All countries have different resources and capabilities, therefore, with economic integration, the one who is larger and stronger inevitably wins. To unite only on the basis of economic benefits is unproductive: the constituent parts of such an alliance will always look around, looking for a "thicker" proposal, and they will be right. After all, the main goal of such an economic association is to "earn more."

To justify the current government of Russia, it should be said that it itself does not have a clear ideological platform for building its own state, because one cannot seriously say that patriotism is a national idea. "Devotion and love for their homeland, readiness for any sacrifices and deeds in the name of the interests of their homeland" are also inherent in Americans, Germans and Chinese alike. And the superficial thesis: “the well-fed will not rebel, therefore, first we will feed, and then we will think about ideology” - is completely false and has long been refuted by history. The hungry and unkempt Parisian communards of revolutionary France utterly defeated the well-fed armies of Europe near Valmy, and the Russian people not only won the Civil War, but also built a most powerful state in the shortest possible time. Not to understand this is the most dangerous political myopia.

Another very serious geostrategic factor should force the current leadership of Russia to think about ideology. Undoubtedly, the cosmopolitan state-corporate bureaucracy, having won unprecedented political influence in recent years, is persistently leading the world to the abolition of nation states and the creation of a global corporate zone for humanity. The instrument for this is the fascization of the world distribution system - "global hegemony" with the "king of the mountain" - a group of countries that will distribute global resources. In this case, Russia can survive only in the regime of a besieged fortress. This can be resisted only by forming a stable nationally oriented and ideologized political and economic structure within the country.

Thus, it should be recognized that state building, and even more so the building of multinational conglomerates, is impossible without a developed ideology. And therefore, Russia needs a detailed ideological platform, its own distinctive national idea based on long-term strategic development goals, taking into account the distinctive features of the mentality of the Russian (state-forming) people.

In addition, today no one doubts that the system of public administration of the Russian Federation is inadequate and does not fulfill its main purpose: the organization of the country's progressive development. It requires urgent and deep reform. There is also no doubt that radical reform should be carried out on a fundamentally new political and ideological basis, since the concept of the public administration system is largely determined by the state ideology. As you know, ideology is not only a theoretical formulation of ideas about the laws of development of society, but also a system of values ​​and norms that set guidelines for social development and state building of the management system.

The quintessence, so to speak, the core of ideology is the national idea. It should be noted right away that this is not necessarily an idea that describes national priorities and views on the structure of life and the principles of building a state of a particular people. A national idea can be put forward by some, most often a state-forming people, but due to its attractiveness, it can become ideas of consolidation for other peoples and national state formations. The national idea is always the goal of a dynamic process extended in time and necessarily projected territorially. This is a movement towards something or somewhere, but more often than not, it is the construction of something somewhere. Any national idea is always formed and subsequently implemented on the basis and within the framework of one or another global geopolitical and geostrategic concept.

Undoubtedly, the need for state ideology should be recognized by society and, above all, by political movements and parties, which are called upon to "move" social progress, develop and improve the political structure of society. And here we have to agree with the unflattering opinion of V.V. Putin about political parties and political movements of our country. Speaking about the possibility of introducing a parliamentary republic in Russia, he rightly noted that our parties do not have a well-developed intelligible ideology as a system as a political basis for their social activities: the principles of organizing society, strategic and tactical goals of its development. Numerous parties and social movements are mainly focused on the proclamation of social demands.

Let's summarize all of the above: Russia needs an expanded ideology, its own distinctive national idea based on long-term strategic development goals, taking into account the distinctive features of the mentality of the Russian (state-forming) people for the following reasons:

1. The crisis of the capitalist socio-economic model of society predetermined the end of the era of globalism, which is being replaced by global fragmentation - the creation of regional supranational alliances-blocs.

2. The need to form the largest possible "bloc" internal consumer market is the essence of the world geopolitical confrontation without an ideological component in this struggle cannot be won.

3. Inter-bloc rivalry will force small and medium-sized countries to choose bloc affiliation, since access for “neutral” countries to intra-regional markets will be significantly hampered.

4. The construction of integration associations is impossible only on an economic basis, due to the inequality of economic and resource opportunities of the participants. The success of the formation of regional formations also depends on the attractiveness of the proposed ideological integration model as the basis for overcoming the separatism of the elites of the uniting countries.

5. The core of a unifying ideology can be the national idea of ​​a state-forming people, provided it is attractive to other peoples and national state formations as the basis for interethnic consolidation.

6. The national idea describes national priorities and views on the structure of life and the principles of building a state. The national idea is always the goal of a dynamic process of development, extended in time and necessarily projected territorially.

7. Russia currently does not have a clear ideological platform for building both its own state and a supranational integration association. State building, and even more so the building of multinational conglomerates, is impossible without a developed ideology.

8. Aggravation of geopolitical confrontation is forcing Russia to form a stable nationally oriented and ideologized political and economic structure inside the country.

To be continued ...
24 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in
  1. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 13 October 2020 09: 48
    +5
    And who said that Russia does not have its own idiology?
    Is.

    They are called "Money does not smell, money loves silence, for the sake of 300% profit go to anything"
    Wherever you look - Sobyaninskaya tile, Il, Vostochny Cosmodrome, friend Endogan, Arshukovs and clans, Gazprom, constitution, pension reform, VTB and Sberbank, Armata, Su 57, superjets - it is everywhere.

    And here, suck up to "VV Putin's opinion on political parties and political movements", do not suck up, but this is the ideology of the Elite. How many times do you repeat - Putin, Putin, Putin - (how many times is he there in the text?) And no one wants to part with awesome profits ...

    By the way, they write that the "unifying national idea" is the initial phase of Italian, German and other fascism. They say that the oligarch and the janitor are one ... only at the first account and children over the hill often ...
    1. Bitter Offline Bitter
      Bitter (Gleb) 13 October 2020 10: 48
      +1
      ... the oligarch and the janitor are one ...

      Before god and king, one is more equal than the other. This is what the people in the galleys are currently working on in sweat, it is for this that churches and churches are riveted like hot cakes. A couple of years more and the platform for the ideology will be finally built, and then you can look at the candidate for the throne.
  2. Cyril Offline Cyril
    Cyril (Kirill) 13 October 2020 09: 49
    +1
    Least of all, the author would like to be in the role of a wise teacher teaching the plebs, while demonstrating his intellectual academic exceptionalism.

    But this is exactly what happened in the end, taking into account all these "must be admitted", "undoubtedly" and other forms of unreasonable imposition of thoughts.

    And now for the content:

    The original plan for global transformations was drawn up by the Club of Rome (the authorship is attributed to the Rothschilds), and it provided for the creation of two or three "world regional blocks".

    What is this plan? Where can you read it? Why are its authors - the Rothschilds, if they never entered this club? And there is no particular influence of the Rothschilds, especially now.

    Moreover - the Club of Rome is just one of many organizations of intellectuals, which are a dime a dozen in Europe .. This is no secret society, developing "mysterious and terrible plans for the redivision of the world." Nobody ever made any secret reports of members of the Club of Rome.

    And the author once again draws a new version of the old propaganda about the "wise men of Zion."

    By the way, V.V. Putin in an interview with the Financial Times in 2019.

    The liberal idea is outdated. She came into conflict with the interests of the vast majority of the population

    With all due respect to Vladimir Putin, he is not an authority in the field of political science.

    Financial and economic globalization, covering the whole world, has reached its political, geographical and socio-economic limits. In recent years, a tendency has become increasingly clear: the main “engine” of the capitalist system - loan interest (payment for a loan) in the formula “money-commodity-money” does not work.

    Where did the author get this from? Where did he get it. that "loan interest" is the main engine of capitalism? Where is it written, who said it? What limits does the author speak about? Who set these limits?

    In general, here each sentence would have to be analyzed - this is a very long time.

    But this statement clearly testifies to the author's level of competence in social sciences:

    The hungry and stripped Paris communards of revolutionary France utterly defeated the well-fed armies of Europe near Valmy

    1. Author, the Battle of Valmy took place in 1792. Then there were no "Parisian Communards" yet. The Paris Commune was in 1871.

    2. The author, there were no "utterly defeated well-fed armies of Europe" - the loss of counter-revolutionary troops in this battle amounted to only 184 people, while the loss of the victorious French - almost twice as much (300 people).

    3. In the battle of Valmy there were no "hungry and stripped communards" - it was a well-organized and trained army, which included both cavalry and artillery. This army was commanded by experienced and talented professional soldiers - Charles François Dumouriez and Kellerman, François Christophe. At the same time, politically, both of these people were hardened political cynics who quite easily flew from one political camp to another.

    So, the summary. "Swipe for a ruble - a blow for a penny." The article contains a lot of unfounded and false premises, conspiracy speculations, distortions of history, attempts to pass off wishful thinking. All this makes the article as a whole weak and purely speculative.
    1. Alexzn Online Alexzn
      Alexzn (Alexander) 13 October 2020 10: 24
      0
      If there is a mention of the Rothschilds in the text, then it is possible not to read it, but if some club is also added ...
      Where does love for the Rothschilds come from in Russia? Why is the role of this particular group being demonized? Tradition? It's like love to refer to the meaningless in Brzezinski's politics ...
      1. Cyril Offline Cyril
        Cyril (Kirill) 13 October 2020 10: 38
        -1
        Where does love for the Rothschilds come from in Russia?

        Oh, this is the good old Russian tradition of anti-Semitism :) Not only Russian, I must admit
  3. steelmaker Offline steelmaker
    steelmaker 13 October 2020 10: 05
    +4
    To the evil ignorant

    We had everything. And the best thing. Until these evil ignoramuses came to power - Gorbachev - Yeltsin - Putin. Professor with purchased education. It was they who began to impose and introduce Western best standards, while destroying their own. Pederasty and pedophilia! This is what appears instead of ideology. Monuments to Kolchak, manning boards, EBN centers, films with evil political instructors and correct criminals. Who prevents the current government from banning this whole "sabbath of devils"? Constitution!
    Article 13, part 1-2. ideological diversity is recognized in the RF.

    2). No ideology can be established as state or compulsory.

    And you are "my educated", remember with which articles the amendments to the Putin Constitution began? From 67th century! The amendments just did not touch on ideology, retirement age and the main thing that defines Russia as a state.
    In Russia now there is a special occupation ideology. What it stands for: 1) Serving a foreign state, i.e. improve the lives of the American people by lowering their standard of living. 2) We are offered the ideology of the "Golden Calf" of debauchery. Ideology is not the ability of the inhabitants of Russia to solve the problems of their state. The educational situation is dire. Let's say history books. All history textbooks, and there are about 600 of them, which are registered with the Ministry of Education, were all written with American grants, under their order. And a man without history, without a flag, how does such a man become?

    ... forces Russia to form a stable nationally oriented and ideologized political and economic structure within the country.

    So that they do not interfere with stealing? 20 years is a long time. Education is not enough to understand?
    1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
      Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 13 October 2020 18: 37
      0
      Quote: steel maker
      Pederasty and pedophilia! This is what appears instead of ideology.

      What do you mean, these are traditional Russian values. Even older than Philotheus, in his famous letter to Basil III, he complained

      I am writing about the third commandment, and with weeping I speak bitterly, so that you eradicate this bitter tare in your Orthodox kingdom, which is still evidenced by the sulfurous flame of a burning fire in the squares of Sodom,
      ....
      God created man and the seed in him for the birth of children, and we ourselves kill our own seed and sacrifice it to the devil. And this abomination has multiplied not only among the laity, but also among others, about whom I will keep silent, but let the reader understand.

      And this is still 200 years before Peter I and half a millennium before EBN.
      1. isofat Offline isofat
        isofat (isofat) 13 October 2020 19: 36
        0
        The homeland of the sins of Sodom is the cities of Sodom and Gamorrah.

        Ezekiel argues that Jerusalem on one side it borders on Samaria, and on the other (on the south or southeast) - with Sodom (Ezek. 16:46).

        And this is modern Israel.


        Oleg Rambover, these are the traditions of the Jewish people, you are confused. love
        1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
          Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 13 October 2020 20: 20
          0
          I understand that you, as a Jew and a citizen of Israel, are closer to the problems of Israel, but I suspect that this kind of "tradition" is characteristic of all peoples of the Earth.
          1. isofat Offline isofat
            isofat (isofat) 13 October 2020 20: 45
            0
            Oleg Rambover, traditions in quotes and without them are completely different concepts.

            If you are looking for the source of the spread of the abomination in question, look to the West.
            By the way, you don’t excuse Israel for an hour, why, they say, are others doing this too?
            Then look at the information, they are among the leaders of the gay movement.

            PS. God has already deprived them of their state once, and they are again for the old. smile
            1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
              Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 14 October 2020 02: 06
              0
              I don't understand, are you a Jew or what? Are you a latent Jew? Why is Israel so worried about you?
              It is difficult to name what is determined by genetics, tradition.

              Quote: isofat
              If you are looking for the source of the spread of the abomination in question, look to the West.

              You don't know history well. Before the Westernizer Peter I, sodomy in the Russian kingdom was very tolerant, in contrast to Europe, where they burned for it. They say that Ivan the Terrible himself was fond of his oprichnik. And only Peter, under the pernicious influence of the West, introduced punishment by copying the norms in the same West. Before that, the "source" was Russia.
              Are you really interested in this topic? What do you care how people do it by mutual agreement? And it is in Israel. Why does she bother you? Want to talk about it?
              1. isofat Offline isofat
                isofat (isofat) 14 October 2020 11: 50
                0
                1. Oleg Rambover... You are trying to pass off the sins of Sodom as the traditions of the Russians.

                Quote: Oleg Rambover
                What do you mean, these are traditional Russian values.

                2. And it was you who wanted to steal from Russia more than five hundred years of its history. And you continue to shit.


                Question: - is it liberal ideology that makes you screw everything up and deceive everyone?
                You have nothing to offer. Liberals have no values, and never had.
                1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
                  Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 15 October 2020 00: 36
                  0
                  Quote: isofat
                  1. Oleg Rambover. You are trying to pass off the sins of Sodom as the traditions of the Russians.

                  No, I'm not trying to betray anyone's traditions, I'm trying to make fun of some of the users of this forum who react inappropriately to this topic. What you have successfully demonstrated.
                  But seriously, we can say with confidence that this aspect of human relations was in Russia even before Peter the Great, and was not introduced from the West not by Peter (who, under the influence of the West, introduced the first homophobic laws), let alone Yeltsin. This phenomenon is inherent in humanity as a whole, regardless of nationality.

                  Quote: isofat
                  2. And it was you who wanted to steal from Russia more than five hundred years of its history. And you continue to shit.

                  Will you deny that Ivan III Vasilievich was the creator of the Russian state?
                  Your brains are so, shall we say, soiled that even if I wanted to add something from myself personally, nothing would come of it, it would not fit.

                  Quote: isofat
                  You have nothing to offer. Liberals have no values, and never had.

                  This statement of yours again speaks of your complete lack of knowledge of the issue.
                  I did not understand what your citizenship is, the Russian Federation or Israel. So we have a constitution in the Russian Federation. This is the country's fundamental document defining the powers of the authorities.
                  What is a constitution?
                  That's right, this is the embodiment of the liberal idea of ​​limiting power by law. And accordingly, if you are a citizen of the Russian Federation, your relationship with the state is determined by the constitution, that is, the liberal idea.
                  And if you also read this document, chapter 2, these same liberal values ​​are simply spelled out there.
                  1. isofat Offline isofat
                    isofat (isofat) 15 October 2020 00: 49
                    -1
                    Quote: Oleg Rambover
                    No, I'm not trying to betray none tradition, I'm trying to play

                    Oleg Rambover... I'm stumped. How can I now determine - where are you lying, where are you kidding, and where will you suddenly tell the truth? How?

                    PS. Oleg Rambover, and the liberals have a CONSCIENCE? Or missing? smile
                    1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
                      Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 15 October 2020 10: 51
                      +1
                      Quote: isofat
                      Oleg Rambover. I'm stumped. How can I now determine - where are you lying, where are you kidding, and where will you suddenly tell the truth? How?

                      Oh, it's simple. I'll explain now.
                      I never lie, the maximum is sometimes mistaken. And with you I am always pinned, you must agree, it is pointless to conduct a serious discussion with you.

                      Quote: isofat
                      PS. Oleg Rambover, do the liberals have a CONSCIENCE? Or missing?

                      Eeee .... well, probably about the same as other people. Although if you think about it, the liberal ideas of the last 300 years have determined the development of mankind and to some extent form the idea of ​​good and bad (attitude to human life, for example), then we can say that liberals are the mind and conscience of our era.
              2. The comment was deleted.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
                      2. The comment was deleted.
                      3. The comment was deleted.
                      4. The comment was deleted.
                      5. The comment was deleted.
          2. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
            Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 15 October 2020 00: 43
            +1
            Oh, you flatter me. Dear Cyril, to smithereens you, together with the Dear sofa expert, cut you in the topic "Such a different democracy: what are the differences in approaches in Russia and in the West", I never dreamed of.
  • Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
    Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 13 October 2020 16: 22
    0
    It should be especially noted that the formation of regional unions will undoubtedly be based on the use of the principles of etatism (etatism is an ideology that determines the priority role of the state in society), the implementation of which is impossible without ideological design.

    And therefore, Russia needs a detailed ideological platform, its own distinctive national idea based on long-term strategic development goals, taking into account the distinctive features of the mentality of the Russian (state-forming) people

    Statism, nationalism, is the author going to introduce fascism in the Russian Federation?
    And it is difficult to understand how the ideology put forward by the "state-forming people", that is, nationalistic and chauvinistic, can become attractive to other peoples.
    1. isofat Offline isofat
      isofat (isofat) 13 October 2020 16: 31
      -1
      Quote: Oleg Rambover
      And it is difficult to understand how the ideology put forward by the "state-forming people", that is, nationalistic and chauvinistic, can become attractive to other peoples.

      Quote: Oleg Rambover
      Statism, nationalism, is the author going to introduce fascism in the Russian Federation?

      Oleg Rambover... Turn your eyes to Israel.
  • Bulanov Offline Bulanov
    Bulanov (Vladimir) 13 October 2020 16: 24
    0
    At the moment, Russia does not have a clear ideological platform for building both its own state and a supranational integration association.

    - The first step of Russia's new ideology should be: - Tranquility in the country, fruitful, paid work and the peaceful development of the Russian people! All Soros grant-eaters, messing with neighboring states, do a disservice to the West and America. Russian propaganda should repeat from every iron that only after entering Russia (with different rights), these states will begin to develop calmly again, without any color revolutions and a drop in living standards! We need to create our own, pro-Russian NGOs that will call on neighboring countries to unite within the borders of Russia. Thus, you can recruit the first 250 million people. to create your own economic agglomeration. This way it will be easier to launch your industry for more consumers! Together with a rich and peaceful Russia, into a bright future with full-fledged healthy families, without the grin of nationalism generated by the fierce West!
    1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
      Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 13 October 2020 18: 13
      +1
      Quote: Bulanov
      We need to create our own, pro-Russian NGOs that will call on neighboring countries to unite within the borders of Russia. Thus, you can recruit the first 250 million people. to create your own economic agglomeration.

      Dadada ... With Ukraine and Georgia as in this regard, it turned out well.
  • Jacques sekavar Offline Jacques sekavar
    Jacques sekavar (Jacques Sekavar) 13 October 2020 20: 25
    +1
    Does Russia Need Ideology?

    1. Any ideology reflects the aspirations of the ruling class, and therefore it is necessary to start "from the stove" - ​​the ruling class of the Russian Federation, who is this ???
    2. Periodic crises of capitalism do not lead to its collapse, but a transition to another level of development and the end-edge is not yet visible.
    3. Blocked domestic consumer market, something vague. In reality, there is a clash of two different social systems and the formation of three main world political, economic, scientific, military, etc. centers represented by the PRC-USA-EU.
    4. The different level of development of all states predetermines different forms and methods of domination of the ruling class, which dooms to failure any attempts to lead to a “common denominator”, for example, to the so-called. "Democracy".
    5. National ideas are the fantasies of political scientists, designed to “blur” class contradictions and class solidarity.
    6. At the moment Russia does not have a clear ideological platform - that's for sure.
    The President is actually pursuing the Lenin New Economic Policy - state control of big capital, monetary policy, pricing, trade, entrepreneurship, education, the media, etc., gradually reforming what happened as a result of the coup d'etat of 1991 under the leadership of Yeltsin. Moreover, all political parties profess the capitalist ideology under the prodigal cover of market relations. “New people” - what's new with them ??? Nothing, everything is also verbiage.
    As a result, we have a president outside of political parties, which means he has no support. That is why the consequences of the 2024 elections are so unpredictable - how big business will behave, dreaming of getting out of state control, how its national groups will behave, but how Western democrats will behave is clear.
  • Old man Offline Old man
    Old man (Old man) 14 October 2020 14: 51
    -2
    Russia does not need to come up with an ideology or a national idea, but simply start to correspond to its mission - to be the Core ("Concept of the Core and Periphery"

    http://2tretiy-mir.mirtesen.ru https://www.proza.ru/2018/12/17/810)

    Everything else will follow automatically.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 15 October 2020 06: 37
    -2
    Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality!

    Why another ?!
    1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
      Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 15 October 2020 15: 53
      +2
      Well, I don’t know, it was outdated at the time of its creation and led the Russian Empire to collapse in 17.
      1. "Orthodoxy"
      70 years of Soviet power were not in vain and the influence of the church on life was greatly reduced. Significantly less than in the same America or Ukraine. In order to return everything to the time of Uvarov, all the schools in the church must be remade, and then in fifty years it is possible.
      2. "Autocracy"
      It follows from the first point, if 150 years ago it was possible to convince an illiterate strongly believing population that a guy in a funny gilded pan on his head rules them according to the will of God (and even then, judging by 1917, it was not possible to convince), today it is generally unrealistic.
      3. "Nationality"
      In my opinion, this nationalist idea is quite destructive for our multinational country. If we recall the same 17, then the revolution was promoted to no small extent by Jews, who were strongly oppressed in Ingushetia.
      PS It's funny that the idea of ​​the Black Hundred movement was formulated by Mr. Uvarov, who is gay. How do the Black Hundreds live with this?