The problems of Russian national identity sharply worsened in connection with the collapse of the USSR and in subsequent years in connection with the search of the Russian people for their place in new Russia, your way in the world. In order to find their worthy place in the family of peoples of the world and Russia, Russians are trying to realize their Self, their Path, their Mission. And in order to engage in self-awareness of the Self, it is necessary to “look” into your recent past, say, several centuries, to understand the dynamics of your development. And this process of self-deepening into the Self of the people, the Self of culture, the Self of Russian society has begun. Thus, at the XVIII World Russian People's Council, the “Declaration of Russian Identity” was adopted, which defined some frameworks and directions for the search for Russian national identity. The “Declaration of Russian Identity” prompted many prominent representatives of the Russian people to discuss this sore issue for the Russian nation. In the reverse perspective, the Russian people can find many answers to the pressing issue of Russian national identity, many solutions to the challenges of today.

The path of finding oneself through turning “inward” is also indicated in another source of Russian thought: “Russian Doctrine”. In this interesting paper, the authors attempt to answer current issues Russian agenda and outline the main directions of the Russian revival (in economics, politics, art, education, science, state building, etc.). The “Russian Doctrine” contains a methodology for achieving Russian national identity. Thus, the document notes: “The revival and new ascent of Russian civilization will not begin without a “return to oneself.” You need to look for your own, organic. You have to go from your own self. And only then will we (Russia) be recognized as a full-fledged player when we stop focusing on this idea of ​​​​the need for recognition. Moreover, it is precisely in our otherness, dissimilarity from others, that is, in our civilizational independence, that is the key to our possible acquisitions and success along the paths of History.” The above and other documents indicate that the process of awareness of Russian identity is underway, but it is slow, intermittent, sometimes with great tension and disruptions. The process of Russians acquiring national identity evokes not only support, but also severe opposition from some part of society, oriented toward Western values ​​and idols. The fact that the process is underway is evidenced by discussions not only in the patriotic and Russian national press, but also in moderate publications, individual programs on central television, and other media. For example, a discussion entitled “What do the Russians want?” in the Literary Gazette.

Previously, officials were afraid of the “Russian question” like fire. Now a lot has changed: a number of government officials speak openly about the Russian path, Russian consciousness and Russian culture. The question of national identity was posed especially deeply by V.V. Putin. Speaking on September 19, 2013 at a meeting of the Valdai international discussion club in the Novgorod region, V.V. Putin linked the acquisition of national identity with the formation of a national idea. He noted: “There is a need for historical creativity, a synthesis of the best national experience and ideas, an understanding of our cultural, spiritual, political traditions from different points of view with the understanding that this is not a frozen something given forever, but a living organism. Only then will our identity be based on a solid foundation, will be directed to the future, not to the past.”

Understanding one’s national identity is closely related to deepening one’s Russianness. Understanding your Self is impossible without turning to the Self of the people, the Self of Russian culture, the Self of Russian society, the Self of the Russian state. The authors of the monograph “Russians” are right. The ABC of Russian national self-awareness,” talking about the following: “To be Russian, you need to recognize yourself as Russian. This is a clear watershed. Over several centuries of living together in Russia, many people in their culture and language have ceased to differ from Russians. But they retained the identity and name of their people and consider themselves, for example, Chuvash or Mordvins. This is not only their right, it is worthy of respect, since ethnic diversity with a common cultural core is a great value, although it complicates many public relations". The peculiarity of Russian identity is that representatives of other nations can recognize themselves as Russian, feel comfortable in Russian culture, and build the Russian world. Many representatives of other ethnic groups have long been no different from ethnic Russians in many mental characteristics. They are quite deeply integrated into the Russian world and feel comfortable in Russian statehood and society.

Basic values act as the basis of national identity. What values ​​are the basis for modern stage for the Russian people? This question was raised at the XV World Russian People's Council, which adopted the document: “Basic values ​​are the basis of national identity.” This source, important for Russian national consciousness, names the basic values: faith, justice, peace, freedom, unity, morality, dignity, honesty, patriotism, solidarity, mercy, family, culture and national traditions, human good, hard work, self-restraint and sacrifice. The formation of these basic values ​​among the younger generation and their cultivation in society is the most important pedagogical and social task. This task should unite everyone: social scientists, politicians, ideologists, and government officials. Everyone should be involved in developing a positive attitude towards these basic values. social institutions, public organizations, mass media. Otherwise, the Russian people will remain a people without solidarity, without those who know where go, what and why to do. The problem of basic values ​​should be raised more acutely and resolved at all levels of government, society, culture and business.

Currently, many basic values ​​in the Russian consciousness are blurred. The Russian consciousness is not deeply enough aware of their importance for moral health and spiritual development Russian nation. Moreover, in the era of civilizational shifts, when it is necessary to unite the nation around basic values, dangerous trends continue to develop leading to the degradation of culture, loss family values, dehumanization of man.

Knowledge of the Russian language and protection of the Russian language. The “Declaration of Russian Identity” adopted at the XVIII World Russian People's Council on November 11, 2014 notes the role of the Russian language in the formation of Russian identity. So the declaration says: “In the Russian tradition, the most important criterion of nationality was considered National language(the word “language” itself is an ancient synonym for the word “nationality”). Knowledge of the Russian language is mandatory for every Russian.”

IN last years pressure is increasing on the Russian language to change the genetic code of Russian culture. The Russian language is becoming clogged with slang and in foreign words. In connection with economic reforms, many words from in English, spoken by modern business. Although there are many words in the Russian language that could successfully replace linguistic borrowings. In the Russian language, some “scientists” are trying to legalize some slang words.

Belonging to the Orthodox faith is the most important element of Russian cultural and national identity. Difficult processes are unfolding in the spiritual sphere. Life is in full swing in the Church, they are reconstructing, restoring Orthodox churches, religious books and magazines are printed in large quantities, Orthodox music, book and film festivals are held. In the last decade, works of famous and forgotten Russian philosophers have been published in large editions: N.A. Berdyaeva, A.S. Khomyakova, N.O. Lossky, S.N. Trubetskoy, N.I. Ilyina, S.N. Bulgakova, S.L. Franka, V.V. Zenkovsky, G.P. Fedotova, A.F. Loseva, B.P. Vysheslavtseva, L.N. Gumeleva, I.V. Kirievsky, K.S. Aksakova, K.N. Leontyeva, V.V. Rozanov and many others. All this speaks of the revival of Russian culture, of the deepening of Russians into their Self.

Russian culture in general, Russian literature in particular, gives us a vivid idea of ​​the national character of the Russian person. The Russian reader discovers previously unknown names of outstanding Russian writers abroad. A Russian person is finally beginning to pay attention to himself, to delve deeper into his dignity, and to focus on the main and innermost things. Political scientist, philosopher, scientist Ivan Ilyin writes: “A Russian person lives, first of all, with his heart, imagination, and only then with his will and mind,” “Russian people expect from a person, first of all, kindness, conscience, and sincerity.” It has long been known that Russian culture brings light, kindness, spirituality, conscientiousness, and sincerity of the Russian soul, that Russian culture is universal and cosmic. But over the centuries of Russophobic policies of Western countries, primarily Great Britain, and now the United States, secondly, through the efforts of the “fifth column” inside Russia, Russian culture, the Russian people, its glorious past have been slandered, distorted, denigrated so that to the younger generation we have to rediscover Russian culture, look anew at the great achievements of our descendants in all areas of life and activity.

American political scientist S. Huntington wrote: “... cultural characteristics and differences are less susceptible to change than economic and political ones, and as a result they are more difficult to resolve or reduce to compromises. In the former Soviet Union, communists can become democrats, the rich can become poor, and the poor can become rich, but no matter how hard they want, Russians cannot become Estonians, Azerbaijanis cannot become Armenians... Religion divides people even more sharply than ethnicity. A person can be half-French or half-Arab, and even a citizen of both of these countries. It’s much more difficult to be half-Catholic or half-Muslim.” We must agree that religion really divides people more than nations and creates insurmountable obstacles to communication and dialogue. Acceptance of faith simultaneously means acceptance of Russianness, acquisition of Russian national identity. Russians and representatives of other nations, who once accepted the Orthodox faith, become staunch supporters and devotees of the Church. They become part of the Russian Orthodox Civilization, which has given the world so many examples of honest service to goodness, truth, peace, knowledge and justice.

The deep connection of man with the history of Rus', is the most important element of Russian national identity. Member of the State Duma, political figure V. Aksyuchets wrote on this occasion: “Only high spiritual ideals cultivated such rare traits in the character of the people that made it possible to survive and maintain dignity in uniquely difficult historical circumstances. These features are, first of all, the universal openness and responsiveness of the Russian people, their healthy instinct for community life, their amazing survival.” A key place in the history of Russian culture, statehood and people was occupied by spirituality, associated in the pre-Christian period with pagan beliefs, and in the Christian period - in the Orthodox faith. Over the two-thousand-year history of the spread and establishment of Christianity in Rus' (from Chersonese to Kiev, then to Moscow...), the Russian peoples have absorbed humility before the authority of the Creator, accepted the Ecumenical Cross and established themselves in their mission to bring love, goodness, truth, justice, knowledge , peace and wisdom to the nations. It is no coincidence that the Russian people are called the God-bearing people, that is, those who carry God within themselves.

The most important Russian characteristic is solidarity with the fate of the Russian people. In the Address of the Discussion Club of the World Russian People's Council to the thinking people of Russia, “We believe in ourselves, our people, our civilization!” dated April 24, 2013, it is noted: “Solidarity differs from totalitarianism in the non-violent, conscious nature of social unity, the preservation of broad personal freedom along with the imperative of national and civilizational duty. It also presupposes broad and regular participation of citizens in government, maximizing the use of direct levers of governance (referendums, self-government of small spaces) and minimizing the level of alienation of ordinary citizens from political decision-making. The ideal of solidarity, the conciliar unity of the people and the authorities was not a utopian dream for our civilization, but was deeply rooted in our national history.”

Solidarity presupposes the participation of the Russian people, all its representatives, from ordinary people to leaders, in specific management activities Russian state(elections, referendums, expressing opinions on the actions of deputies of all levels in the media, etc.), management of public associations, local governments, in companies to protect Russian interests at all meetings, rallies, in the media, support for Russians, Orthodox people all over the world, etc. Solidarity is also ensured by a real desire for conciliar unity of the people, government and business. These are the three great forces on which the Russian state rests.

According to V.K. Egorova “The Russians, despite their conciliarity and collectivism (which occur, but are manifested inconsistently in everyday life, and “in fatal moments” or when, as the people say, “their backing is against the wall”), are an undignified, atomized and long-suffering people , since human life is individual level and national life matter only before God (subconsciously, according to culture - even non-believers “stand on this”) and before the Fatherland. Life (both individual and national, people's) is protected only when there is danger. A “normal” life is built slowly, without striving for arrangement (comfort, if you like), because (subconsciously) main life– in the other world, or its meaning is almost to a decisive extent – ​​in the prosperity of Russia.” This conclusion of V.K. Egorova says that state institutions, public associations, and individual representatives of the Russian elite should develop a sense of solidarity among the people. It is necessary to create conditions for the manifestation of a sense of solidarity among the people on any issue.

Feeling of kinship with the Russian people and culture one of the most complex components of Russian national identity. And to the Russian people in the process historical development Many representatives of other ethnic groups joined. Thus, the “Declaration of Russian Identity” notes: “The Russian people had a complex genetic composition, including the descendants of Slavic, Finno-Ugric, Scandinavian, Baltic, Iranian and Turkic tribes. This genetic wealth has never become a threat to the national unity of the Russian people. Birth from Russian parents in most cases is the starting point for the formation of Russian identity, which, however, has never excluded the possibility of people from another national environment joining the Russian people who have adopted Russian identity, language, culture and religious traditions.” This means that the Russian people are international in their ethnic roots. Therefore, Russianness includes respect for the culture, feelings, character and temperament of all peoples living in Russia and beyond its borders.

Internationalism is the essence of Russianness. This feature of Russianness attracted oppressed peoples around the world to the Russian world. Not by chance Russian empire was formed in the process of voluntary entry into its composition of many neighboring peoples. These peoples sought protection in Russia from some aggressive neighbors and from the colonialist aspirations of Great Britain and France.

The identity of the Russian people is associated with the Russian state. Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus', speaking at the Tyumen Forum of the World Russian People's Council on June 21, 2014, noted: “Speculations about the heterogeneity of the Russian people are a myth that has a purely political nature. On a global scale, Russians are an exceptionally integral, united nation. In terms of the degree of religious and linguistic unity, and the proximity of cultural matrices, Russians have no analogues among the major nations of the planet. The phenomenon of Russian monolithicity is explained by the fact that in our national self-awareness the connection between the individual and the state occupies an exceptional place. The ethnic identity of Russians, more than that of any other people, is associated with the identity of the state, with Russian patriotism and with loyalty to the state center.” The merging of Russian national identity with state and civil identity leads to the fact that Russians have always fought and will fight, as long as they exist as a nation, for the sovereignty of the state in all senses: in symbolism, in defense, in making state decisions in politics and economics, which is not enough for most national cultures, especially the young, developing nations of Africa, Asia and Latin America. Considering the phenomenon of synthesis of the national, statist and civic identity of the Russian nation, Russian culture must create attractive models and programs for its development in the future. Internal and foreign policy Russia can be successful if it relies on the above trends in the development of Russian culture and the Russian people. This policy only strengthens the integrity and unity of the Russian people, to which its best representatives strive.

Bibliography:

1. Aksyuchets, A. “God and Fatherland - the formula of the Russian idea” / A. Aksyuchets // Moscow. – 1993. – No. 1. – P. 126
2. Egorov, V.K. Philosophy of Russian culture / V.K. Egorov. – M.: RAGS, 2006. – P. 446
3. Meeting of the international discussion club “Valdai” on September 19, 1913 / V.V. Putin // http: neus/kremlin/ru/transcripts/192443/print/ - P. 3
4. Ilyin, I.A. Against Russia / I.A. Ilyin. – M.: Voenizdat, 1991. – P. 329
5. Russian doctrine “Sergius Project” / Ed. A.B. Kobyakov and V.V. Averyanova. – M.: Yauza-press, 2008. – 864 p.
6. Russians. The ABC of Russian national identity. – M.: Generation, 2008. – 224 p.
7. Huntington, S. Clash of Civilizations? / S. Huntington // Political studies. – 1994. – No. 1. – P. 36

   RUSSIAN NATIONAL IDENTITY: THEORY ISSUES

   the article raises topical issues of the formation of Russian national identity; the main components and dynamics of Russian identity are analyzed; an attempt is made to determine the role of each component in the process of formation of Russian identity.

   Written by: Kargapolov Evgeniy Pavlovich

Outstanding politicians, economists and scientists speak about the role of Russia in the 21st century with its new threats, globalization and reactions to it. They talk about the causes of civilizational conflicts, whether Russian (Russian) civilization exists, how globalization affects identity and, finally, what the role of resource-rich countries, including Russia, will be in the new century.

Confusion reigns on the issue of the formula and mechanisms for establishing national identity as one of the foundations of Russian statehood, which is accompanied by superficial and conflictual debates. Ignoring or manipulating key points in the use of the concepts of “people” and “nation” carries serious risks for society and the state. In contrast to the negative meaning attached to nationalism in Russian political language, nationalism played a key role in the formation of modern states and, to varying degrees and variations, remains the most important political ideology of our time.

In Russia, nationalism and nation-building are studied poorly and using old approaches. This is one of the reasons for the existence of at least three different views on society and the state:

• 1) Russia is a multinational state with a population consisting of many nations, and this is its radical difference from other states;
• 2) Russia is a national state of the Russian nation with minorities, whose members can become Russians or recognize the state-forming status of Russians;
• 3) Russia is a national state with a multi-ethnic Russian nation, the basis of which is Russian culture and language and which includes representatives of other Russian nationalities (peoples).

Global context.

In world social practice, the idea of ​​nations as territorial and political entities with complex but unified socio-cultural systems has become established. No matter how heterogeneous in composition state communities may be, they define themselves as nations and consider their states to be national or nation-states. People and nation act in this case as synonyms and give the original legitimacy to the modern state. The idea of ​​a single people-nation is key point ensuring stability and harmony in society and a guarantee of the stability of the state no less than the Constitution, the army and protected borders. The ideology of a civic nation includes the principles of responsible citizenship, a unified education system, a version of a common past with its dramas and achievements, symbolism and a calendar, a sense of love for the motherland and loyalty to the state, and the defense of national interests. All this constitutes what is called nationalism in its civil and state version.

Civic nationalism is opposed by the ideology of ethnic nationalism on behalf of a particular ethnic community, which may constitute a majority or minority of the population, but which defines its members, and not fellow citizens, as a nation and on this basis demands its own statehood or privileged status. The differences are significant, because ethnic nationalism is based on the ideology of exclusion and denial of diversity, while civil nationalism is based on the ideology of solidarity and recognition of diverse unity. A particular challenge to the state and the civil nation is posed by radical nationalism on behalf of minorities who wish to secede from the common state through armed secession. Majority ethnic nationalism also carries risks because it can claim the state as the exclusive property of one group, creating opponents among minorities.

Thus, in India, Hindu nationalism on behalf of the Hindi-speaking majority became one of the reasons civil wars. Therefore, the concept of the Indian nation is affirmed there, although the country has many large and small nations, languages, religions and races. Since Gandhi and Nehru, the elite and the state have championed Indian nationalism (the name of the leading party, the Indian National Congress) as opposed to Hindi and minority nationalism. Thanks to this ideology, India remains intact.

In China, the dominant people - the Han - and the Chinese nation are almost identical numerically and culturally. Nevertheless, the presence of 55 non-Han peoples numbering more than 100 million people does not allow us to talk about the Han people as a state-forming nation. The image of the Chinese nation as all citizens of the country was constructed several decades ago and successfully copes with the task of ensuring the national identity of the Chinese.

A similar situation of two levels of identity (civil nation and ethno-nation) exists in other countries - Spain, Great Britain, Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Canada and others, including Russia. All modern co-citizen nations have a complex ethnic, religious, and racial composition of the population. The culture, language and religion of the majority are almost always the basis national culture: English component in the British nation, Castilian - in the Spanish, Han - in the Chinese, Russian - in the Russian; but a nation is understood as a multi-ethnic entity. For example, the Spanish nation includes both the main population - Castilians, and Basques, Catalans, and Galicians.

In Russia the situation is similar to other countries, but there are peculiarities in the treatment of the ideology of nation-building and the practice of using the category “nation”. These features should be taken into account, but they do not cancel the global norm.

New Russian project

Due to the inertia of political and legal thinking, the formula of multinationality was preserved in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, although the formula of a “multi-national nation” would be more adequate. It is difficult to correct the text of the Basic Law, but it is necessary to more consistently affirm the concepts of “nation” and “national” in the national and civil sense, without rejecting the existing practice of using the concept in the ethnic sense.

The coexistence of two different meanings for such a politically and emotionally charged concept as “nation” is possible within the same country, although the primacy of civil national identity for its inhabitants is indisputable, no matter how much ethnonationalists dispute this fact. The main thing is to explain that these two forms of community are not mutually exclusive and the concepts of “Russian people”, “Russian nation”, “Russians” do not deny the existence of Ossetian, Russian, Tatar and other peoples of the country. The support and development of the languages ​​and cultures of the peoples of Russia must go along with the recognition of the Russian nation and Russian identity as fundamental for the citizens of the country. This innovation is in fact already recognized at the level of common sense and everyday life: in surveys and in specific actions, citizenship, connection with the state and recognition of Russianness are more important than ethnicity.

The proposal expressed by some experts and politicians to establish in Russia the concept of “Russian nation” instead of “Russian” and to return the pre-revolutionary, broad understanding of Russians as everyone who considers themselves such, is impossible to implement. Ukrainians and Belarusians will no longer agree to consider themselves Russians again, and Tatars and Chechens never considered themselves as such, but all of them, together with representatives of other Russian nationalities, consider themselves Russians. The prestige of Russianness and the status of Russians can and should be increased not by denying Russianness, but by asserting a dual identity, through improving the living conditions of the regions where Russians predominantly live, through promoting their social and political representation in the Russian state.

Modern states recognize multiple, non-mutually exclusive identities at the level of collective communities and the individual. This weakens ethnocultural dividing lines within one co-citizenship and contributes to national consolidation, not to mention the fact that the self-awareness of the part of the population consisting of descendants of mixed marriages is more adequately reflected. In Russia, where a third of the population are descendants of mixed marriages, the practice of mandatory fixation of a single ethnicity of citizens is still maintained, which leads to violence against the individual and violent disputes about who belongs to which people.

All states consider themselves national, and there is no point in Russia being an exception. Everywhere among the people of a particular country, the idea of ​​a nation is being established, regardless of the racial, ethnic and religious composition of the population. A nation is the result not just of ethnocultural unification and “long-term historical formation,” but of deliberate efforts by the political and intellectual elite to establish among the population ideas about the people as a nation, common values, symbols, and aspirations. Such general ideas occur in countries with more divided populations. In Russia, there is a real community of Russians based on historical and social values, patriotism, culture and language, but the efforts of a significant part of the elite are directed towards denying this community. The situation needs to change. National identity is affirmed through many mechanisms and channels, but primarily through ensuring civil equality, the system of upbringing and education, the state language, symbols and calendar, cultural and mass media production. After restructuring the foundations of the economy and political system, the Russian Federation needs to update the doctrinal and ideological sphere of ensuring civil solidarity and national identity.

border russia national identity

The destruction of great power traditions, ideas and myths, and then the Soviet value system, where the key point was the idea of ​​the state as the highest social value, plunged Russian society into a deep social crisis, as a result - the loss of national identity, feelings, national and socio-cultural self-identification of citizens.

Key words: self-identification, national identification, identity crisis.

After the collapse of the USSR, the need arose to create a new national identity in all newly formed states. This issue was most difficult to resolve in Russia, since it was here that “Soviet” value guidelines were introduced more deeply than in other republics, where the key point was the idea of ​​the state as the highest social category, and citizens identified themselves with Soviet society. The demolition of old life principles, the displacement of previous value and semantic guidelines led to a split spiritual world Russian society, as a result, is the loss of national identity, feelings of patriotism, national and socio-cultural identification of citizens.

The destruction of the Soviet value system plunged Russian society into a deep value and identification crisis, in the context of which another problem arose - national consolidation. It was no longer possible to solve it within the framework of the old one; it could not be solved from the standpoint of the new domestic “liberalism,” which was devoid of a program for the development of society that was positive for the mass consciousness. Inert state policy during the 90s. in the field of social reform and the lack of new value guidelines led to increased interest among citizens in the historical past of the country; people tried to find in it answers to the pressing issues of today.

Interest in historical literature arose, primarily in alternative history, and TV programs in the context of “memories of the past” began to enjoy great popularity. Unfortunately, in most cases in such programs, historical facts were interpreted in a rather loose context, the arguments were not supported by argumentation, and many so-called “facts” were in the nature of falsifications. Today, it has become obvious to most educated people what damage such programs have caused to society, primarily the youth who are hostage to screen culture have suffered.

On the front of screen culture today there is “confusion and vacillation”, false, anti-scientific information is presented as the “truth of history”, the interest of viewers, Internet users and listeners of numerous radio broadcasts is bought through the beautiful presentation of various kinds of historical falsifications, which, due to their anti-state orientation, have a destructive action on historical consciousness and consciousness of the national identity of citizens.

At the same time, the state has not developed a unified policy in the field of examination of such information flows that deform historical consciousness and the perception of national identity. As a result, the myth of “ideal” times of the past has become firmly entrenched in the minds of Russian citizens. Despite these problems, positive trends have emerged in Russian society in recent years. Thus, according to sociological surveys in modern Russian society, the mass interest of people in patriotic ideas, slogans, and symbols has significantly increased, and there is an increase in the patriotic self-identification of Russians.

The problem of national identity is widely discussed in society today. This is due to the fact that in the age of global changes - integration, globalization, transnational migration and global disasters - man-made, environmental, people began to rethink their acquired ideological baggage, while wondering about their involvement in the history of the country, the national community and the process of its development. Russians have a need to revise existing concepts of social and national identity, and the need to construct new identities, which is primarily caused by instability in the world and the country - increased terrorism, transformation of political regimes, financial crises. Obviously, if the ideology and cultural and moral values ​​in society are not clearly defined, or do not correspond to the expectations of the main part of society, there is a gradual change in the structure of the individual’s personality, a change in value guidelines, which ultimately leads to an identification crisis.

The most clear description of the identity crisis was given by the outstanding psychologist Erik Erikson, who described it as follows: “An unpleasant psychosocial syndrome associated with mass dissatisfaction of people, which is accompanied by feelings of anxiety, fear, isolation, emptiness, loss of the ability to emotionally communicate with other people, turns into a mass pathology of identity"46. In a crisis, an individual becomes more and more detached from social communities - he becomes individualized, and identity is maintained through interpersonal communication, in particular, through social media, allowing you to support your “I” and build a dialogue with “We”.

A way out of the crisis is possible only if the political and cultural elites achieve balance within their social groups and will begin to implement new identity projects, the purpose of which is to bring about changes in society and establish a balance of new values ​​based on well-formed beliefs, principles and norms. In other words, the political elite must restore the lost balance of I-We identity in society. However, this is only possible if the authorities have not lost the trust of society, otherwise, the imposition of a new system of values ​​by the political elite can lead to a social explosion47.

In different historical eras, the balance in this pair was constantly upset. The era of the Renaissance is recognized as the beginning of the dominance of “I” over “We”; it was at this time that “I” broke out and left the bonds of “We”. This was due to several factors - the erasure of class boundaries, increased attention to human individuality in literature and painting, and the expansion of the boundaries of worldview thanks to scientific and geographical discoveries. Centuries passed and in developed societies the “I” became more and more separated from the “We”; with the intensification of the processes of integration and globalization, the national identity (national-state we-identity) lost its clear outlines. At the present time in Russian society, largely thanks to the policies of V.V. Putin, there are qualitative changes in the content of cultural meanings, symbols and foundations of the new “capitalist” Russia, there is a return to the cultural and moral values ​​of the Soviet era.

Quite a lot has already been done in this direction - cultural heritage is being restored - reconstruction of historical monuments, creation of historical museums in various cities of Russia, series of programs dedicated to our history, literature, culture are being broadcast, the Olympics became a new victory in this direction, now Crimea is being restored before our eyes . Today in Russia there continues to be a revaluation cultural-historical baggage of the past, which expands the boundaries for the search for social identifications, new identification constructs appear based on the combination of pre-Soviet and Soviet periods Russian history. Such cultural constructs have a serious impact on the formation of national identity. IN Lately in Russia, young people are increasingly demonstrating their national identity, while older generation, on the contrary, reveals the inertia of Soviet identity.

This fact is quite explainable by the fact that the older generation at one time experienced the shock of the “lost generation” - in the post-perestroika period, many found themselves thrown out of the “ship of modernity”, their knowledge, skills and abilities were not in demand by the new society. They look to the future with anxiety and are not inclined to trust the actions of the political elite aimed at creating a set of new cultural and moral guidelines. People whose active period of socialization passed during the period of totalitarian political culture, having lost sight of the ideological goals and moral values ​​strictly set by the political elite, in the new conditions of personal freedom, openness and initiative, lost their I-We identification. If such people are asked to behave “at their own discretion”, they usually experience frustration, it is difficult to make a choice, they are not taught to do so48.

In many ways, the conservatism of Russian society is associated with the peculiarities of historical and cultural memory formed during the period of totalitarian culture. Despite a certain incompleteness and mythologization, historical and cultural memory is the constant on the basis of which an individual’s behavioral models are formed. First of all, this is due to the fact that historical and cultural memory preserves in the mass consciousness assessments of past events, which form a structure of values ​​that not only determine the actions and actions of people in the present and future, but contribute to the formation of national identity.

Awareness of one’s national identity is extremely important for each of us due to the fact that national identity is also a special form of group identity, thanks to which, despite the lack of physical contacts, people consider themselves united together because they speak the same language, have common cultural traditions, live in the same territory, etc. The connecting links of national identity are historical memory, cultural traditions, and patriotism. The very concept of “national identity” is an “invention” of modernity, its political significance is associated with maintaining the feeling of “being at home”, creating in citizens a sense of purpose, self-esteem, and involvement in the achievements of their country.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL LIST:

1. Bourdieu Pierre. Practical meaning / Transl. from fr. / St. Petersburg, Aletheia, 2001.

2. Gudkov L. D. Russian neo-traditionalism and resistance to change // Domestic notes. M., 2002 No.

3. URL: http://old.strana-oz.ru/? numid=4&article=206 3. Kiselev G.S. Man, culture, civilization on the threshold of the 3rd millennium. M.: Eastern literature. 1999.

4. Lapkin V.V., Pantin V.I. Russian order. - Polis. Political studies. 1997. No. 3.

5. Lapkin V.V., Pantin V.I. Rhythms of international development as a factor in the political modernization of Russia. - Polis. Political studies. 2005. No. 3.

6. Lapkin, V.V., Pantin, V.I. The evolution of value orientations of Russians in the 90s // ProetContra, T. 4. 1999, No. 2.

7. Pokida A. N. Specificity of patriotic feelings of Russians // Power. 2010. No. 12.

8. Kjell L., Ziegler D. Theories of personality. 2nd ed. St. Petersburg: Peter, 1997. Erickson E. Identity: youth and crisis / Transl. from English / M.: Progress Publishing Group, 1996 - 344 p.

9. Shiraev E., Glad B. Generational Adaptations to the Transition // B. Glad, E. Shiraev. The Russian Transformation: Political, Sociological and Psychological Aspects. N. Y.: St. Martin's Press, 1999.

Plotnikova O.A.

A person’s Russian (civil) identity is his free identification of himself with the Russian people, which has a significant meaning for him; feeling and awareness of involvement in the past, present and future of Russia. The presence of Russian identity presupposes that for a person there is no “this city”, “this country”, “this people”, but there is “my (our) city”, “my (our) country”, “my (our) people” .

The task of forming a Russian identity among schoolchildren, declared strategic in the new educational standards, presupposes a qualitatively new approach in content, technology and responsibility for teachers to the traditional problems of developing civic consciousness, patriotism, tolerance of schoolchildren, proficiency in their native language, etc. So, if a teacher in his work focuses on the formation of Russian identity in a student, then:

- V civic education he cannot afford to work with the concepts of “citizen”, “civil society”, “democracy”, “relations between society and state”, “human rights” as speculative abstractions, in a purely informative style, but must work with the tradition and peculiarities of the perception of these concepts in Russian culture, in relation to our historical soil and mentality;

- in the education of patriotism, the teacher does not rely on the development in the child of unreflective pride for “what is his” or a kind of selective pride for the country (pride only in successes and achievements), but strives to educate holistic acceptance and understanding of the past, present and future of Russia with all the failures and successes, anxieties and hopes, projects and “projects”;

— the teacher works with tolerance not so much as political correctness (a fashionable trend in a secular consumer society), but rather as a practice of understanding, recognizing and accepting representatives of other cultures, historically rooted in Russian tradition and mentality;

— shaping the historical and political consciousness of schoolchildren, the teacher immerses them in the dialogue of conservative, liberal and social democratic worldviews, which is an integral part of Russian culture as a European culture;

— teaching the Russian language occurs not only in literature lessons, but in any academic subject and outside the lesson, in free communication with students; the living Russian language becomes a universal of school life;

- the teacher is not limited to communication with students in the protected, friendly environment of the classroom and school, but takes them out into the out-of-school public environment. Only in independent social action, action for people and with people who are not the “inner circle” and are not necessarily positively disposed towards it, does a young person really become (and not just learn about how to become) public figure, a free man, a citizen of the country.

Already this, far from complete, enumeration shows that the task of forming Russian identity quite rightly claims to be a key, turning point in current educational policy.

In modern pedagogical science, the civic (Russian) identity of a schoolchild is fruitfully considered as:

— the unity of a certain type of knowledge, values, emotional experiences and experience of activity (A.G. Asmolov, A.Ya. Danilyuk, A.M. Kondakov, V.A. Tishkov);

— a complex relationship between historical memory, civic consciousness and project consciousness (A.A. Andryushkov, Yu.V. Gromyko).

In our opinion, no less productive is consideration of civic identity from the perspective of the child’s school identity.

It’s almost a truism that a child’s love for the Motherland begins with love for family, school, small homeland. It is in small communities, where people are especially close to each other, that “hidden warmth of patriotism” that L.N. wrote about arises. Tolstoy and which the best way expresses a person’s experience of civic identity. That is, the Russian identity of a young person is formed on the basis of family identity, school identity, and identity with the territorial community.

Obviously, the school’s special responsibility is the child’s school identity. What it is? This experience And awareness own child involvement to school, which has significant meaning for him. Why is this necessary? School is the first place in a child’s life where he goes beyond blood ties and relationships, begins to live among others, different people, in society. It is at school that a child transforms from a family person into a social person.

What does the introduction of the concept of “child’s school identity” provide? In the usual role-playing reading, a child at school acts as a student, boy (girl), friend, citizen, etc. . IN identification reading, a schoolchild is “a student of his teachers”, “a friend of his classmates”, “a citizen (or everyman) of the school community”, “a son (daughter) of his parents”, etc. That is, the identity perspective allows us to see and understand more deeply thanks to someone or something the student feels connected (or not connected) with the school community, what or who gives rise to his involvement in the school. And evaluate, diagnose the quality of the places and people at school, which give rise to involvement in the child.

Here is our vision of these places and people:

School identity allows you to see whether a student associates his successes, achievements (as well as failures) with school; whether school is a meaningful place for him or not.

Low identity scores will indicate that school is not significant or has little significance for the child. And even if objectively he is successful as a student, then the source of this success is not in school (but, for example, in the family, tutors, extracurricular additional education and so on.).

High identity scores will indicate that school occupies an important place in the child’s life and is significant for him. And even if objectively he is not very successful as a student, his personal dignity, his self-esteem stems from his school life.

Since we assumed that each of the above identities is formed at school in certain “places” (processes, activities, situations), low scores for one or another identification position can show us the “bottlenecks” of school life, and high scores – “ growth points." This could be the beginning of a “reboot” of school activities, the launch of the development process.

Today we have the results of a study (using a sociological questionnaire) of the school identity of students in grades 7-11 from 22 schools in the cities of Moscow, Perm, Kaliningrad, and Tomsk. We selected schools that are considered “good” by the population and the teaching community; At the same time, the schools themselves believe that their educational activities are very well organized.

To visualize some of the key trends, we provide school-by-school aggregate data. We established a distinction on specific aspects of school identity at the level of “experienced - not experienced”, while specifying whether it is experienced positively or negatively (obviously, for example, a schoolchild can feel like the son of his parents when teachers praise him or, on the contrary, scold him, and a citizen of the class - when he manages to realize his ideas, plans in the class team or when this or that assignment is imposed on him). We were interested not only in the fact of the experience as an indicator that school in a specific aspect does not leave the child indifferent, but also in the nature of this experience. We also leveled out the spread of the values ​​of this or that indicator across schools by determining the average statistical value for 22 schools.

Here are the values ​​obtained for each aspect of school identity:

Conclusions regarding the civic (Russian) identity of schoolchildren who took part in the study:

- only 42% of teenagers feel positively involved in their class team as “citizens”, that is, people “doing something, even the simplest, that affects the life of their school class”;

- even fewer - 24% of teenagers feel like “citizens of the school community”;

- only 1 out of 10 students will leave school with a sense of citizen (non-philistine) of our Russian society.

Let us recall that this situation, which can most definitely be called a situation of alienation, was recorded by us in the educational reality of the so-called “good” schools. It's easy to imagine what's happening in the rest.

What's the solution? In our opinion, in a situation where children are alienated from school, responsible educational policy can only be “identity politics.” Whatever we do at school, no matter what new projects and technologies we offer, no matter what traditions we want to preserve, we must always ask ourselves: “Does this give rise to free participation of children in school? Will the child want to identify with this? Have we thought through everything and done everything to make him feel involved with us? Why suddenly what we did so diligently, with such efforts, is not perceived by children? And then we will not chase after novelties from pedagogy, pass off our inertia and lack of curiosity as loyalty to tradition, mindlessly follow educational fashions, rush to fulfill political and social orders, but we will work in depth, for the real development of personality, for social inheritance and transformation of culture.

For example, the school is faced with the social passivity of adolescents. Of course, you can increase the resource of social science disciplines, conduct a series of conversations “What does it mean to be a citizen?” or organize the work of a school parliament, but this work, in best case scenario, will provide students with useful social knowledge, form positive attitude to social action, but will not give the experience of independent action in society. Meanwhile, we understand perfectly well that know about what citizenship is, even value citizenship does not mean act as a citizen be citizen. But technology, which involves a movement from (1) problem-value discussion of adolescents to (2) a negotiation platform for adolescents with representatives of local authorities and public structures and further to (3) a child-adult social project demanded by the territorial community, brings adolescents into an independent social action.

Thus, the real, non-imitative formation of the Russian (civic) identity of students is possible only on the basis of their positive school identity. It is through the sense, consciousness and experience of citizenship acquired in school life (in the affairs of the class, the school community, in the social initiatives of the school) that a young person can mature in a stable understanding and vision of himself as a citizen of the country. A school with which children do not identify themselves and to which they do not feel involved does not educate citizens, even if it declares this in its concepts and programs.

And one more important effect of “identity politics” in the field of education: it can help conservatives, liberals and social democrats, if not unite, then at least not break with each other Russian education. Which is what we all, teachers, (each, of course, someone else and in our own way) are.