For many centuries in a row, Russia and the Russians are trying to slander in all possible ways and means. The “civilized” West cannot come to terms with the existence of “bastard Russia”, and everything is screaming and screaming about its own superiority …
Why do we always consider ourselves different from other countries and peoples? Because it is true, and it is confirmed by domestic and world historiography, and lies abhor us. And the truth is that we are normal and do not see any special vices in ourselves. Others let them deal with themselves.
In public discussions, we often come across such arguments:
“Russian history is the same as the history of other countries, there is nothing special about Russians. Anyone who tries to present something unique from Russia simply does not know world history. What are YOU trying to pretend to be! This is YOU inferiority complex! Where is this notorious mysterious Russian soul? There is no her! Not!!! Show me where she is ?!"
Usually, all this is accompanied by an increased tone and uncontrolled salivation, up to splashes. Perhaps opponents regard these statements as a kind of control shot to finish off our point of view. But it is more likely that such a reaction happens out of fear of losing many years of ideological support.
Since the official science has taken away personally from each of us the right to the truth, then let's beat historiographers with their own blunt, crooked "swords". We use the materials of the abstract "Basic points of view on the problem of the peculiarities of Russian history."
First question
Promotional video:
As for the difference between the historical path of Russia and all other countries, in Russian and world historiography there are 3 main points of view on the problem of the peculiarities of Russian history.
Supporters of the 1st believe that all countries and peoples, including Russia and the Russian nation, go through the same stages in their evolution, common to all. The peculiarities of Russian history are interpreted as manifestations of the backwardness (delay in development) of Russia and the Russians. This point of view is characteristic primarily of historians of the Westernizing trend. It is presented in the writings of the Russian historian Sergei Mikhailovich Solovyov
Supporters of the second proceed from the multifaceted nature of historical development. They believe that the history of mankind consists of the histories of a number of distinctive civilizations, each of which develops one (or a combination of several) aspects of human nature, evolves along its own path; one of these civilizations is the Russian (Slavic) civilization. This approach is most substantiated by the Slavophile Nikolai Yakovlevich Danilevsky.
Proponents of the 3rd try to reconcile both of these approaches, and add the influence of individuals on the course of history. The Russian historian and public figure Pavel Nikolaevich Milyukov belonged to this trend.
Output
All historiographers believe that historical processes are natural and develop by themselves without artificial interference. This is the “sacred cow” of historians in general, and therefore they tend to explain all the most obvious facts of the interference of social parasites in the development of planetary historical processes with invented laws. It turns out badly and with great stretch.
No matter how weak and vulnerable (in comparison with Levashov's theory) the positions of official historiography, our opponents are obliged to reckon with them. As you can see, all its directions recognize the impact on the development of Russia of certain powerful factors (reasons, conditions), which determine the significant difference between the history of Russia and the history of Western societies.
What are the reasons for this, the second question. But if someone even hints at the innate qualities of the Russian people, allegedly hindering its development (which is why such conversations are often conducted), then such an orator should immediately, directly from the conference, be taken to the "monkey house" for public propaganda of extremism. We also know how to sculpt labels. After all, this is nothing but the humiliation of the nation, and according to today's world concepts, it should be mercilessly punished.
Consequently, the above argument of the opponents is not only not scientific, but according to the law of the Russian Federation (part 1 of Article 282 of 08.12.2003 No. 162 FZ), when publicly presented, it even contains corpus delicti. I suggest not to be ashamed of reminding about it, let them turn around.
Supplement on the first question for the curious
“In domestic and foreign historiography, 4 factors are usually distinguished that determined the features (backwardness, delay, originality, originality) of Russian history:
A comment. It makes sense to talk about backwardness and delay only when the goal of the progressive development of the historical process has been determined. Until now, none of the scientists have agreed on what to move towards. There is no target. And while it is not there, it is legitimate to move in any direction, even back to the primitive communal system, - ed.
1) Natural and climatic
"From century to century, our concern was not about how to get settled better or how to live easier, but only about how to somehow live, hold out, get out of the next trouble, overcome the next danger …" (IA Ilyin "On the ways of Russia")
“In central Russia, with all the fluctuations in climate, the cycle of agricultural work is only 125-130 working days (approximately, from mid-April to mid-September according to the old style). In western Europe, the working season is much longer. Field work break in some countries December-January. This provides a more favorable rhythm of work …”L. V. Milov.
A comment. This, of course, is true, with the exception of "generally somehow live, hold out." On our territory with a harsh climate, we have arranged a wonderful farm (if you do not take the descriptions devastated by social vampires of the area), which the visiting Europeans have repeatedly envied. In our case, it is also a factor limiting the ability of the less intelligent and patient to explore our territories.
2) Geopolitical
Vast, poorly populated area, not protected by natural barriers; isolation (throughout almost all history) from the seas (and, accordingly, from sea trade); the river network favorable to the territorial unity of the historical core of Russia; the intermediate position between Europe and Asia of the Russian territories.
A comment. Here, there is a complete misunderstanding of the author of the abstract of the real territory of the settlement of the Russian people and Asia, as such.
According to R. Pipes, "Russia has a unique network of navigable waterways, consisting of large rivers with their numerous tributaries, connected by convenient portages …"
A comment. This is true, and on this basis alone, the uniqueness of Russia is already being ensured. Therefore, I was always surprised by the stupidity of transport strategists who are trying to roll up the vast expanses of Russian forests and tundra with asphalt, so that later they will suffer a headache of how to maintain such a network of roads.
The real conditions of our country require a fundamentally different approach to the problem of transport. It is not necessary to fight against winter snows, but to use the effect of easy sliding and unlimited passability. We must not fight the rivers, blocking them with countless heavy cargo bridges; cargo must be moved along them both in summer and winter, which is several times cheaper than by road.
This was done before, at that, of course, the technical level. If we build our unique, cheap and efficient transport system in Russia, it will be the subject of yet another impotent envy on the part of Europe and the United States, and it will bring us prosperity. And this does not mean that we should become carriers of goods from Asia to Europe, as Putin and Medvedev say. Oh, damn it. Let in Vladivostok they sell to Russian trading companies, but in Kaliningrad and St. Petersburg they buy at a premium. Something I have not seen in our market of Africans selling bananas, which European sailors would provide transport services for inexpensively. You can write about this for a long time, let's move on.
3) Confessional (religious)
If the factors discussed above shaped the body of Russia, the temperament, skills and habits of the Russian people, then religion - Eastern Christianity, Orthodoxy - educated their soul.
A comment. Is it worth mentioning the role of the Greek religion in disfiguring the Russian spirit? I don't think it's worth it, and that's understandable. This is not just the difference, but the similarity of Russia's troubles with the tragedies of many peoples previously subjugated by the slavish ideology.
4) Social organization
Under the influence of the above factors: natural-climatic, geopolitical, religious, a specific social organization has developed in Russia. Its main elements are as follows:
a) the primary economic and social unit is a corporation (community, artel, partnership, collective farm, cooperative, concern, etc.), and not a private property entity, as in the West.
A comment. A very primitive look. I think that in Russia in good times both the public and the private were organically combined. It's just a different level of personal responsibility. Russian society, during the period studied by historiographers (from the 9th century A. D. to the present day), was actually beheaded, and several times. From a healthy, full-fledged social organism, where the entire spectrum of relations was present, only that artel part, which consisted of the most underdeveloped members of the social organism, remained. This part was saddled by an alien parasitic superstructure.
What arrogance - to kill all Russian scientists-magi, and then for centuries shout that Russians are not capable of science and medicine; kill the princes and the best managers, and then shout that the Russians are not able to govern themselves!
b) The state is not a superstructure over civil society, as in Western countries, but a backbone, sometimes even a demiurge (creator) of civil society.
A comment. The remark made above explains well the presence of this demiurge (social parasite). It would be high time to expose this story about Western civil society.
There is indeed a difference between the societies of the West and Russia. Western societies are more naive and are more often bought for the wiring of various kinds of "engineers" of the new world order, democratizers of different persuasions. There, the "superstructure over civil society" is not required, for the most part, to terrorize the population. It is easily deceived and milked trustingly.
It's different in Russia. Indigenous, embedded in genetics, practically indestructible folk wisdom and ingenuity does not give life to social parasites. You can't really deceive. In order to curb such a people, a regular bloodbath is required. Therefore, since the time they seized power in our country, there have always been 2 Russia, which live in parallel and rarely intersect.
One Russia is real, it is the one that, in the hour of mortal danger, shows wisdom and courage in itself. It wins wars, over and over again lifts the country from ruin and frightens both its own and Western parasites with power and greatness.
Another Russia, which is officially represented in the west. This is the one who is struggling to suck blood from the people as successfully as foreign. She tries to follow the example of the West in everything, but the people are different! She feels a dull, unbridled rejection from her own people, a constant threat to her position. This annoys her, and she fiercely hates the very Russian spirit that stubbornly prevents her from leading a well-fed, calm life as a leech.
It is appropriate here to recall the numerous complaints of Putin and Medvedev about the people "controlled" by them - they are economically passive, financially illiterate, politically inert, and so on and so forth … In short, it is not milked in any way!
c) Statehood either has a sacred character or is ineffective (“turmoil”).
A comment. Social parasites manage to effectively parasitize the people, only by zombifying them with the help of religion, which sanctified their power (the sacred nature of the state). As soon as the people awakened from the obsession, they immediately began to throw off the foreign superstructure (“turmoil”).
d) The state, society, personality are not divided, not autonomous, as in the West, but mutually permeable, integral, conciliar.
A comment. Here an ideology that was genetically comfortable for the Russian people manifested itself.
e) Statehood is based on the corporation of the service nobility (nobility, nomenklatura, etc.). This social organization was distinguished by extreme stability and, changing its forms, and not essence, was recreated after each shock in Russian history, ensuring the viability of Russian society, the inner unity of its historical existence.
A comment. I don’t know how about "vitality" and "inner unity", but it shows how tightly the social parasites have clung to their prey. As for ensuring viability, I think that there was only a goal to stay in power.
In general, these 4 factors do not reflect even half of the real reasons for the originality and originality of Russian history, but, unfortunately, this is the level of official historiography.
Second question
Well, as for the question of the Russian Spirit, the Russian soul, this should not be discussed with historians and historiographers. Official science has not matured to this and does not operate with such concepts. This place is in the cultural consciousness of the Russian people, and then only in the assessment of how we look from the outside.
But I think that even in a purely historical discussion, we should defend the "Russian soul" from dirty hints. It is enough to show that a particular historian or public figure is not a recognized expert in the field of Russian and world culture. Your own personal incompetent assessments should not be promoted in the framework of a scientific discussion.
It should be said that Russian culture (theater, ballet, painting, literature, etc.) occupies a significant position in the world. And it was the impact of this culture on Western minds that gave rise to this expression - the mysterious Russian soul.
What is mysterious to us? This is how we live! We can say that these are our internal needs. Are you going to be tormented by a riddle every day: “How! I want to sleep again! Why?! My God, how mysterious it is! That way, it won't be long to thunder into a psychiatric hospital. People don't live like that.
Now, if someone has broken away from our primordial Russian worldview, then for him, even who has lived all his life in Russia, the Russian soul is incomprehensible. It's a mystery to him. And for a man of Western culture, a mystery. It is to the Western world that the "Russian spirit" is so eyesore that they periodically let it slip publicly about it.
So it is not we, Russians, who fix the presence of a mysterious Russian soul. This is recorded by outside observers in the west. Here are the questions to them, why do they record this. If someone foaming at the mouth declares that there is no special “Russian soul”, then it doesn't make us feel bad, but even fun. After all, talking about it means blaming Western culture for insanity.
We do not see anything mysterious in the "Western soul". Something could be healed if asked, but everything is clear.
Alexey Artemiev