Известия Иркутского государственного университета. Серия: Политология. Религиоведение. 2020. Т. 31. С. 21-35., 2020
This paper discusses the role and place of orientalism in the discourse of contemporary Russian n... more This paper discusses the role and place of orientalism in the discourse of contemporary Russian nationalism. The concept of the international relations history by D. Galkovsky is seen as a theoretical background for the development of orientalism in the ideology of contemporary Russian nationalism. While being similar to the hegemonic theories, it describes the succession of the world orders defined by the political dominance of opposite powers: hegemon and sub-hegemon. The term “Asiatic” in this interpretation serves as an ideological instrument for the European elites to ensure their political superiority over Russia. The authors showed the interrelation of orientalist and colonial discourses in the way the contemporary Russian nationalists see the Russian government. The role of the image of the East in explaining the problems of the Caucasus and migration from Central Asia has been considered as well. The role of Orientalism in establishing a political and cultural concept of the West by Russian contemporary nationalists has been examined. The authors have come to the following conclusions: firstly, in the eyes of contemporary Russian nationalists Russia is a part of Europe resulting in their rejection of Eurasian ideas. The historical narrative of the contemporary Russian nationalism is determined by associating the soviet and contemporary Russia with the "East." Secondly, Russian nationalist discourse has some features peculiar to Orientalism. The nationalists however do not perceive themselves as orientalists; moreover, they believe Russia to be one of the objects of Orientalism. Thirdly, not abandoning Eurocentrism Occidentalism is introduced in the discourse of the contemporary Russian nationalism. Negative qualities of the East are applied to the image of the West. The West gets on an equal footing with the East. Russia acquires more “western” characteristics than the West has, and is proclaimed to be the last bearer of authentic European qualities.
Вестник Пермского университета. ПОЛИТОЛОГИЯ. 2019. Том 13. №2 , 2019
The article deals with the special aspects of creating enemy images in Russia in the period of th... more The article deals with the special aspects of creating enemy images in Russia in the period of the sociopolitical crisis caused by the 2011/2012 elections. Since 2011, securitization of socio-political space became a key strategy of Russia’s domestic policy and the official rhetoric acquired a conservative national discourse. The change in the depoliticization strategy has led to the redetermination of the key actors in power relations. The most extreme forms of enemification in modern Russia’s socio-political discourse turned to be militaristic and can be reduced to two main concepts: ‘traitor’ and ‘occupant’. The restriction of the political space inevitably leads to intensifying ‘aggressive rhetoric’ in the political discourse. In this case, those excluded have to pursue controversial policies. On the one hand, the excluded part tries to return to the political space. On the other hand, it implements a counterstrategy of securitization built around the concept of occupation. Enemification strategies in modern Russia are closely connected with memory practices. The Great Patriotic War is supposed to be in the center of social memory and such words as ‘occupant’ or ‘traitor’ are identified with Nazism and, therefore, have extremely negative connotations. The process of enemification in modern Russia’s socio-political discourse can be examined from different points of view. Firstly, enemification is an important part of the nation-building and self- determination of any political community. Secondly, militarization of discourse indicates special cultural aspects of Russia’s social memory.
В статье исследуется российская несистемная оппозиция как политический феномен, категоризация кот... more В статье исследуется российская несистемная оппозиция как политический феномен, категоризация которого произошла в 2000-х гг. Несистемная оппозиция рассматривается в контексте принципиального изменения характера деполитизации после президентских выборов 2012 г., когда административно-бюрократическая рациональность сменилась секьюритизацией ключевых сфер общественной жизни. Отмечается, что мобилизация понятия «неси-стемная оппозиция» является частью стратегии властного дискурса. Постепенно «несистемность» переводится из юридического в культурное предметное поле посредством противопоставления «стабильности» — основному по-стулату риторики президентской кампании Владимира Путина 2012 г. Таким образом запускается механизм отчуж-дения части политического сообщества и формирования негативного к ней отношения в общественном сознании. По мере реализации стратегии секьюритизации это понятие постепенно выходит из публичного оборота.
The third presidential term of Vladimir Putin is characterized by the active inclusion of a natio... more The third presidential term of Vladimir Putin is characterized by the active inclusion of a national security agenda in the social policy context. In this regard, it appears some ideologems from contemporary Russian nationalist movements are being incorporated into mainstream state discourses. One of the best examples of this is the theme of 'internal enemies'. This article unpacks some of the key features behind the formation of 'internal enemies'. The term 'Russian nationa-lists' can be problematic as a category of analysis due to the fragmented and diffuse movements potentially contained under this heading. To avoid this issue the term is used in this article as a category of political practice. Of particular interest here are those public figures who call themselves Russian nationalists. In this intellectual space, there are three rhetorical strategies that shape the image of the 'internal enemy': historical, theoretical and ethnic. The first is reduced to the idea that the national minorities have played a key role in the destruction of the Russian Empire. The second rhetorical line attacks the official formulations of Russian state nationality policy, something that can be under-stood as a reaction against the multicultural ideology of contemporary Russia. Finally, the third and most aggressive rhetorical line targets specific ethnic communities. The central place in characteristics of the internal enemy in this sense is given to representatives of the North Caucasus
Usage of the colonial discourse as a way to represent social relationships provides additional op... more Usage of the colonial discourse as a way to represent social relationships provides additional opportunities for the analysis of the political situation in Russia. The object of research is the work of contemporary intellectuals who identify themselves as “Russian nationalists.” A significant role in the development and promotion of nationalistic ideology is played by a community formed around the magazine “Voprosy natsionalizma” and internet project “Sputnik i Pogrom.” Russia is seen as a cryptocolony of Great Britain. Caucasians are traditionally seen as main representatives of the colonial administration. Actions of liberal public figures also apply to the manifestations of colonization. At the same time, the idea of hidden forms of enslavement implicates formulation of the internal colonialism idea: national elites, who “realized” the tragedy, are reflecting on the theme of Russians, who don’t understand the situation. Internal colonialism of nationalists differs from the ideology of Russian liberals, because of less expressed desire to change people. “Backwardness” is interpreted by them as “special qualities” and romanticized as the criterion of “Russianness.” This does not mean that contemporary Russian nationalist intellectuals were deprived from the “complex of the progressor.” “Wildness” and “conservatism” are treated by Russian nationalism not as inherent properties but as the qualities imposed by an external enemy. That’s why there exists little perceptible difference between the goals of education - concerning the liberals, and cleansing - in the case of the nationalists. The versatility of the rhetoric of internal colonialism, which is manifested in the reproduction of the cultural distance between the elite and the masses, allows for the attraction of the theoretical foundation, formulated by nationalistic intellectuals in an attempt to solve this problem. Conclusions are made regarding the fundamental conflictual nature of intellectuals, because the objectification of discourse will inevitably reproduce the inequalities, inherent in their status.
Идеологема возрождения и конструирование алтайских национализмов В статье на основе анализа одног... more Идеологема возрождения и конструирование алтайских национализмов В статье на основе анализа одного из ключевых элементов национальных историографий — идеологемы возрожде-ния — предпринимается попытка ответить на вопрос, каким образом в различных по содержанию идеологических проектах, формируемых в разных социально-экономических условиях, происходит объективация и реификация кон-цепта «алтайцы». Идеологема возрождения позволяла сибирским областникам решать фундаментальную задачу включения инородцев в современный политический процесс. В начале XX в. содержание идеологемы возрождения менялось в зависимости от социальных сил, стоявших за алтайским национальным проектом: ломка традиционной картины мира породила идею Ойротии в ревитализационном смысле, местные интеллектуалы в 1917 г. эти идеи секу-ляризировали и поставили на службу государственного строительства, а советские деятели связали с борьбой за ос-вобождение. Особенности сталинской национальной политики приводили к сочетанию в историографии марксист-ских и «позитивистских» установок, идеологема возрождения позволяла снимать теоретические противоречия между формирующимися в связи с этим контрповествованиями. Идеологема возрождения заняла центральное место в на-циональных процессах современной республики Алтай, которые приобрели разнонаправленный, зачастую конфликт-ный характер. Она позволяет безболезненно преодолевать провалы в историческом нарративе, обусловленные из-бирательностью социальной памяти, и тем самым обеспечивать формирование в общественном сознании гармонич-ного и целостного образа национального сообщества. Ключевые слова: алтайцы, республика Алтай, областничество, национализм, социальная память.
The article discusses the infl uence of oblastnichestvo movement on the shaping and development of... more The article discusses the infl uence of oblastnichestvo movement on the shaping and development of Altai nationalistic discourse. The author examines the ways in which oblastnichestvo leaders understand and interpret nationalism. He draws attention to four principal discursive mechanisms that have been instrumental in propelling the idea of Altai nation. First, it is the practice of describing nature which played an essential part in creating the image of a unique region. Second, it is the shaping of a particular ethnographic, and above all folkloristic, image of Altai. Third, it is the impact of anti-colonial and separatist themes and discourses. Fourth, it is the myth of the Golden Age of Siberian natives and its infl uence on the European culture, which has been laid in the foundation of Altai historical memory. The article further examines the part that oblastnichestvo played in forming and consolidating the milieu of Altai intellectuals.
The paper presents comparative characteristics of nationally motivated ethno-cultural concepts of... more The paper presents comparative characteristics of nationally motivated ethno-cultural concepts of the XIX century based on the interpretation of the history of peoples of Siberia. Genesis of ethnological discourse was the result of a collision educational settings participants of the first academic expeditions to cultural diversity Siberia. In the second half of XIX century. National motives were an important factor in historical research and are largely determined by the nature and direction of ethnic interpretations. Finnish nationalism sought the ancestral home of the Finns in the Altai and tried to link them with the Turkic- Mongol states of antiquity and the Middle Ages . Under the influence of cultural- historical theories regionalists begins to form itself Siberian National discourse that is particularly evident on the example of the genesis of the Altai nationalism. Russian great-power nationalism sought to make Slavic history more ancient and associate it with the prestigious Scythian culture.
The article characterizes the determinants of the mobilizing potential of archaeological sources ... more The article characterizes the determinants of the mobilizing potential of archaeological sources and considers the role of archeology in the formation of social memory. The determinants of mobilizing potential archaeological sources; characterized the role of archeology in the formation of social memory. From the point of view of social reality construction, the identification of archaeological sources of a social organism and the establishment of their direct link with a modern community are of great importance. An indicative tool inherent to pseudoscientific works was monism, expressed in the identification of linguistic, cultural, racial, genetic phenomena with archaeological sources, and allowing to construct arbitrary sociological reconstructions. Conventionality of archaeological places of social memory is due to the fact that historical events, for which there is no national consensus, are always closely related to the current political context, and their conflicts will fade away with time. Archaeological sources may only be a thing, which facilitates their perception. Their historical and social significance seems obvious and compelling. Materiality determines the possibility of routinization of archaeological sites of social memory. Another feature of archaeological sites simplifies their routinization as places of social memory: they tend to be geographically referenced and clearly inscribed in the historical and cultural landscape. Thus, archaeological sites of social memory due to their ability to objectify social phenomena, regularity, prestige, conventionality and triviality allow to keep the subject in a political community gravity field with particular ideological force. This means that the historical interpretation of archeology can not be considered outside the socio-political context. As the current methodology does not make rigid boundaries between historical consciousness and social memory, problems of pseudoscience are inevitably relevant. Inability to obtain refined historical knowledge makes archaeologists address the issues of professional ethics in recent years
Purpose. Ideology in the archaeological science are manifested in three problem areas: ontologica... more Purpose. Ideology in the archaeological science are manifested in three problem areas: ontological as a problem by studying the archaeological sources, the role of ideology in the life of ancient societies; in the epistemological problem of how to influence ideological principles on the research process; in an ethical responsibility as a problem of scientists working in concrete political situation. This work focuses on the latter two issues, its purpose – to describe the main stages of discussing the relationship of scientific knowledge and ideology in archeology XX. Results. The article describes the basic steps of the scientific discussion of the relationship of knowledge and ideology in archaeology XX, starting with «Marxist archaeology» end 1920 – early 1930s the party principle posed the problem of truth in relation to the class positions of the scientist. In Stalin time, this problem has experienced a number of dramatic transformations, while the second half of the XX century issues of socio-political context of archaeology almost touched. A new upsurge of interest in these issues in the 1990’s associated with the ideological crisis of the state and the emergence of methodological pluralism. In the works of contemporary Russian authors problems of relationship of science and ideology are discussed in relation to issues of history of archaeology, professional ethics, social memory and nationalism. The article also provides a periodization of the study of the relationship between science and ideology of western archaeology and cultural anthropology, with its focus is on the characteristics of modern Marxists and postmodernists.
Conclusion. To a large extent it is affected by the political situation, the commercialization of antiquities and the details of the professional community. Features of the study of the social context of archaeology explained by the differences in the perception of time interacting key stakeholders: society, power, and science. State ideology depends on the type of political regime and can be unpredictable or variable, or mixed Public opinion is changing with the generations, it is influenced by the class situation. Perception of the past society much more inert and discrete compared to the scientific. Researchers are constantly included in the learning process, therefore responds to changes not only critical, but also much more dynamic. Keywords: archaeology, ideology, pseudo-archaeology, Marxist archaeology, post-processual archaeology.
На протяжении нескольких десятилетий обсуждаются вопросы природы интеллектуалов как социального я... more На протяжении нескольких десятилетий обсуждаются вопросы природы интеллектуалов как социального явления, их функций, отношений с властью, их ответственность перед обществом. Утвердившаяся в национализмоведении конструктивистская парадигма сделала проблему интеллектуалов одной из ключевых, ее не обошел стороной ни один из крупных теоретиков. На особенности видения места и роли интеллектуалов в национальном процессе накладывают область интересов исследователя, его научный профиль, методологические особенности подхода, понимание самого феномена интеллектуалов, конкретный эмпирический материал. Внутри проблемы можно выделить четыре междисциплинарных исследовательских площадки. Во-первых, интеллектуалы – изобретатели концепта «нация». Во-вторых, интеллектуалы – авторы национальных политических проектов. В-третьих, колониальная национальная интеллигенция. В-четвертых, интеллектуалы как социальная группа, обеспечивающая повседневное воспроизводство национальной идеи.
Известия Иркутского государственного университета. Серия: Политология. Религиоведение. 2020. Т. 31. С. 21-35., 2020
This paper discusses the role and place of orientalism in the discourse of contemporary Russian n... more This paper discusses the role and place of orientalism in the discourse of contemporary Russian nationalism. The concept of the international relations history by D. Galkovsky is seen as a theoretical background for the development of orientalism in the ideology of contemporary Russian nationalism. While being similar to the hegemonic theories, it describes the succession of the world orders defined by the political dominance of opposite powers: hegemon and sub-hegemon. The term “Asiatic” in this interpretation serves as an ideological instrument for the European elites to ensure their political superiority over Russia. The authors showed the interrelation of orientalist and colonial discourses in the way the contemporary Russian nationalists see the Russian government. The role of the image of the East in explaining the problems of the Caucasus and migration from Central Asia has been considered as well. The role of Orientalism in establishing a political and cultural concept of the West by Russian contemporary nationalists has been examined. The authors have come to the following conclusions: firstly, in the eyes of contemporary Russian nationalists Russia is a part of Europe resulting in their rejection of Eurasian ideas. The historical narrative of the contemporary Russian nationalism is determined by associating the soviet and contemporary Russia with the "East." Secondly, Russian nationalist discourse has some features peculiar to Orientalism. The nationalists however do not perceive themselves as orientalists; moreover, they believe Russia to be one of the objects of Orientalism. Thirdly, not abandoning Eurocentrism Occidentalism is introduced in the discourse of the contemporary Russian nationalism. Negative qualities of the East are applied to the image of the West. The West gets on an equal footing with the East. Russia acquires more “western” characteristics than the West has, and is proclaimed to be the last bearer of authentic European qualities.
Вестник Пермского университета. ПОЛИТОЛОГИЯ. 2019. Том 13. №2 , 2019
The article deals with the special aspects of creating enemy images in Russia in the period of th... more The article deals with the special aspects of creating enemy images in Russia in the period of the sociopolitical crisis caused by the 2011/2012 elections. Since 2011, securitization of socio-political space became a key strategy of Russia’s domestic policy and the official rhetoric acquired a conservative national discourse. The change in the depoliticization strategy has led to the redetermination of the key actors in power relations. The most extreme forms of enemification in modern Russia’s socio-political discourse turned to be militaristic and can be reduced to two main concepts: ‘traitor’ and ‘occupant’. The restriction of the political space inevitably leads to intensifying ‘aggressive rhetoric’ in the political discourse. In this case, those excluded have to pursue controversial policies. On the one hand, the excluded part tries to return to the political space. On the other hand, it implements a counterstrategy of securitization built around the concept of occupation. Enemification strategies in modern Russia are closely connected with memory practices. The Great Patriotic War is supposed to be in the center of social memory and such words as ‘occupant’ or ‘traitor’ are identified with Nazism and, therefore, have extremely negative connotations. The process of enemification in modern Russia’s socio-political discourse can be examined from different points of view. Firstly, enemification is an important part of the nation-building and self- determination of any political community. Secondly, militarization of discourse indicates special cultural aspects of Russia’s social memory.
В статье исследуется российская несистемная оппозиция как политический феномен, категоризация кот... more В статье исследуется российская несистемная оппозиция как политический феномен, категоризация которого произошла в 2000-х гг. Несистемная оппозиция рассматривается в контексте принципиального изменения характера деполитизации после президентских выборов 2012 г., когда административно-бюрократическая рациональность сменилась секьюритизацией ключевых сфер общественной жизни. Отмечается, что мобилизация понятия «неси-стемная оппозиция» является частью стратегии властного дискурса. Постепенно «несистемность» переводится из юридического в культурное предметное поле посредством противопоставления «стабильности» — основному по-стулату риторики президентской кампании Владимира Путина 2012 г. Таким образом запускается механизм отчуж-дения части политического сообщества и формирования негативного к ней отношения в общественном сознании. По мере реализации стратегии секьюритизации это понятие постепенно выходит из публичного оборота.
The third presidential term of Vladimir Putin is characterized by the active inclusion of a natio... more The third presidential term of Vladimir Putin is characterized by the active inclusion of a national security agenda in the social policy context. In this regard, it appears some ideologems from contemporary Russian nationalist movements are being incorporated into mainstream state discourses. One of the best examples of this is the theme of 'internal enemies'. This article unpacks some of the key features behind the formation of 'internal enemies'. The term 'Russian nationa-lists' can be problematic as a category of analysis due to the fragmented and diffuse movements potentially contained under this heading. To avoid this issue the term is used in this article as a category of political practice. Of particular interest here are those public figures who call themselves Russian nationalists. In this intellectual space, there are three rhetorical strategies that shape the image of the 'internal enemy': historical, theoretical and ethnic. The first is reduced to the idea that the national minorities have played a key role in the destruction of the Russian Empire. The second rhetorical line attacks the official formulations of Russian state nationality policy, something that can be under-stood as a reaction against the multicultural ideology of contemporary Russia. Finally, the third and most aggressive rhetorical line targets specific ethnic communities. The central place in characteristics of the internal enemy in this sense is given to representatives of the North Caucasus
Usage of the colonial discourse as a way to represent social relationships provides additional op... more Usage of the colonial discourse as a way to represent social relationships provides additional opportunities for the analysis of the political situation in Russia. The object of research is the work of contemporary intellectuals who identify themselves as “Russian nationalists.” A significant role in the development and promotion of nationalistic ideology is played by a community formed around the magazine “Voprosy natsionalizma” and internet project “Sputnik i Pogrom.” Russia is seen as a cryptocolony of Great Britain. Caucasians are traditionally seen as main representatives of the colonial administration. Actions of liberal public figures also apply to the manifestations of colonization. At the same time, the idea of hidden forms of enslavement implicates formulation of the internal colonialism idea: national elites, who “realized” the tragedy, are reflecting on the theme of Russians, who don’t understand the situation. Internal colonialism of nationalists differs from the ideology of Russian liberals, because of less expressed desire to change people. “Backwardness” is interpreted by them as “special qualities” and romanticized as the criterion of “Russianness.” This does not mean that contemporary Russian nationalist intellectuals were deprived from the “complex of the progressor.” “Wildness” and “conservatism” are treated by Russian nationalism not as inherent properties but as the qualities imposed by an external enemy. That’s why there exists little perceptible difference between the goals of education - concerning the liberals, and cleansing - in the case of the nationalists. The versatility of the rhetoric of internal colonialism, which is manifested in the reproduction of the cultural distance between the elite and the masses, allows for the attraction of the theoretical foundation, formulated by nationalistic intellectuals in an attempt to solve this problem. Conclusions are made regarding the fundamental conflictual nature of intellectuals, because the objectification of discourse will inevitably reproduce the inequalities, inherent in their status.
Идеологема возрождения и конструирование алтайских национализмов В статье на основе анализа одног... more Идеологема возрождения и конструирование алтайских национализмов В статье на основе анализа одного из ключевых элементов национальных историографий — идеологемы возрожде-ния — предпринимается попытка ответить на вопрос, каким образом в различных по содержанию идеологических проектах, формируемых в разных социально-экономических условиях, происходит объективация и реификация кон-цепта «алтайцы». Идеологема возрождения позволяла сибирским областникам решать фундаментальную задачу включения инородцев в современный политический процесс. В начале XX в. содержание идеологемы возрождения менялось в зависимости от социальных сил, стоявших за алтайским национальным проектом: ломка традиционной картины мира породила идею Ойротии в ревитализационном смысле, местные интеллектуалы в 1917 г. эти идеи секу-ляризировали и поставили на службу государственного строительства, а советские деятели связали с борьбой за ос-вобождение. Особенности сталинской национальной политики приводили к сочетанию в историографии марксист-ских и «позитивистских» установок, идеологема возрождения позволяла снимать теоретические противоречия между формирующимися в связи с этим контрповествованиями. Идеологема возрождения заняла центральное место в на-циональных процессах современной республики Алтай, которые приобрели разнонаправленный, зачастую конфликт-ный характер. Она позволяет безболезненно преодолевать провалы в историческом нарративе, обусловленные из-бирательностью социальной памяти, и тем самым обеспечивать формирование в общественном сознании гармонич-ного и целостного образа национального сообщества. Ключевые слова: алтайцы, республика Алтай, областничество, национализм, социальная память.
The article discusses the infl uence of oblastnichestvo movement on the shaping and development of... more The article discusses the infl uence of oblastnichestvo movement on the shaping and development of Altai nationalistic discourse. The author examines the ways in which oblastnichestvo leaders understand and interpret nationalism. He draws attention to four principal discursive mechanisms that have been instrumental in propelling the idea of Altai nation. First, it is the practice of describing nature which played an essential part in creating the image of a unique region. Second, it is the shaping of a particular ethnographic, and above all folkloristic, image of Altai. Third, it is the impact of anti-colonial and separatist themes and discourses. Fourth, it is the myth of the Golden Age of Siberian natives and its infl uence on the European culture, which has been laid in the foundation of Altai historical memory. The article further examines the part that oblastnichestvo played in forming and consolidating the milieu of Altai intellectuals.
The paper presents comparative characteristics of nationally motivated ethno-cultural concepts of... more The paper presents comparative characteristics of nationally motivated ethno-cultural concepts of the XIX century based on the interpretation of the history of peoples of Siberia. Genesis of ethnological discourse was the result of a collision educational settings participants of the first academic expeditions to cultural diversity Siberia. In the second half of XIX century. National motives were an important factor in historical research and are largely determined by the nature and direction of ethnic interpretations. Finnish nationalism sought the ancestral home of the Finns in the Altai and tried to link them with the Turkic- Mongol states of antiquity and the Middle Ages . Under the influence of cultural- historical theories regionalists begins to form itself Siberian National discourse that is particularly evident on the example of the genesis of the Altai nationalism. Russian great-power nationalism sought to make Slavic history more ancient and associate it with the prestigious Scythian culture.
The article characterizes the determinants of the mobilizing potential of archaeological sources ... more The article characterizes the determinants of the mobilizing potential of archaeological sources and considers the role of archeology in the formation of social memory. The determinants of mobilizing potential archaeological sources; characterized the role of archeology in the formation of social memory. From the point of view of social reality construction, the identification of archaeological sources of a social organism and the establishment of their direct link with a modern community are of great importance. An indicative tool inherent to pseudoscientific works was monism, expressed in the identification of linguistic, cultural, racial, genetic phenomena with archaeological sources, and allowing to construct arbitrary sociological reconstructions. Conventionality of archaeological places of social memory is due to the fact that historical events, for which there is no national consensus, are always closely related to the current political context, and their conflicts will fade away with time. Archaeological sources may only be a thing, which facilitates their perception. Their historical and social significance seems obvious and compelling. Materiality determines the possibility of routinization of archaeological sites of social memory. Another feature of archaeological sites simplifies their routinization as places of social memory: they tend to be geographically referenced and clearly inscribed in the historical and cultural landscape. Thus, archaeological sites of social memory due to their ability to objectify social phenomena, regularity, prestige, conventionality and triviality allow to keep the subject in a political community gravity field with particular ideological force. This means that the historical interpretation of archeology can not be considered outside the socio-political context. As the current methodology does not make rigid boundaries between historical consciousness and social memory, problems of pseudoscience are inevitably relevant. Inability to obtain refined historical knowledge makes archaeologists address the issues of professional ethics in recent years
Purpose. Ideology in the archaeological science are manifested in three problem areas: ontologica... more Purpose. Ideology in the archaeological science are manifested in three problem areas: ontological as a problem by studying the archaeological sources, the role of ideology in the life of ancient societies; in the epistemological problem of how to influence ideological principles on the research process; in an ethical responsibility as a problem of scientists working in concrete political situation. This work focuses on the latter two issues, its purpose – to describe the main stages of discussing the relationship of scientific knowledge and ideology in archeology XX. Results. The article describes the basic steps of the scientific discussion of the relationship of knowledge and ideology in archaeology XX, starting with «Marxist archaeology» end 1920 – early 1930s the party principle posed the problem of truth in relation to the class positions of the scientist. In Stalin time, this problem has experienced a number of dramatic transformations, while the second half of the XX century issues of socio-political context of archaeology almost touched. A new upsurge of interest in these issues in the 1990’s associated with the ideological crisis of the state and the emergence of methodological pluralism. In the works of contemporary Russian authors problems of relationship of science and ideology are discussed in relation to issues of history of archaeology, professional ethics, social memory and nationalism. The article also provides a periodization of the study of the relationship between science and ideology of western archaeology and cultural anthropology, with its focus is on the characteristics of modern Marxists and postmodernists.
Conclusion. To a large extent it is affected by the political situation, the commercialization of antiquities and the details of the professional community. Features of the study of the social context of archaeology explained by the differences in the perception of time interacting key stakeholders: society, power, and science. State ideology depends on the type of political regime and can be unpredictable or variable, or mixed Public opinion is changing with the generations, it is influenced by the class situation. Perception of the past society much more inert and discrete compared to the scientific. Researchers are constantly included in the learning process, therefore responds to changes not only critical, but also much more dynamic. Keywords: archaeology, ideology, pseudo-archaeology, Marxist archaeology, post-processual archaeology.
На протяжении нескольких десятилетий обсуждаются вопросы природы интеллектуалов как социального я... more На протяжении нескольких десятилетий обсуждаются вопросы природы интеллектуалов как социального явления, их функций, отношений с властью, их ответственность перед обществом. Утвердившаяся в национализмоведении конструктивистская парадигма сделала проблему интеллектуалов одной из ключевых, ее не обошел стороной ни один из крупных теоретиков. На особенности видения места и роли интеллектуалов в национальном процессе накладывают область интересов исследователя, его научный профиль, методологические особенности подхода, понимание самого феномена интеллектуалов, конкретный эмпирический материал. Внутри проблемы можно выделить четыре междисциплинарных исследовательских площадки. Во-первых, интеллектуалы – изобретатели концепта «нация». Во-вторых, интеллектуалы – авторы национальных политических проектов. В-третьих, колониальная национальная интеллигенция. В-четвертых, интеллектуалы как социальная группа, обеспечивающая повседневное воспроизводство национальной идеи.
Uploads
Papers by Dmitriy Mikhailov
soviet and contemporary Russia with the "East." Secondly, Russian nationalist discourse has some features peculiar to Orientalism. The nationalists however do not perceive themselves as orientalists; moreover, they believe Russia to be one of the objects of Orientalism. Thirdly, not abandoning Eurocentrism Occidentalism is introduced in the discourse of the contemporary Russian nationalism. Negative qualities of the East are applied to the image of the West. The West gets on an equal footing with the East. Russia acquires more “western” characteristics than the West has, and is proclaimed to be the last bearer of authentic European qualities.
Enemification strategies in modern Russia are closely connected with memory practices. The Great Patriotic War is supposed to be in the center of social memory and such words as ‘occupant’ or ‘traitor’ are identified with Nazism and, therefore, have extremely negative connotations. The process of enemification in modern Russia’s socio-political discourse can be examined from different points of view. Firstly, enemification is an important part of the nation-building and self- determination of any political community. Secondly, militarization of discourse indicates special cultural aspects of Russia’s social memory.
in the formation of social memory. The determinants of mobilizing potential archaeological sources; characterized the role of
archeology in the formation of social memory. From the point of view of social reality construction, the identification of archaeological
sources of a social organism and the establishment of their direct link with a modern community are of great importance. An indicative
tool inherent to pseudoscientific works was monism, expressed in the identification of linguistic, cultural, racial, genetic
phenomena with archaeological sources, and allowing to construct arbitrary sociological reconstructions. Conventionality of archaeological
places of social memory is due to the fact that historical events, for which there is no national consensus, are always closely
related to the current political context, and their conflicts will fade away with time. Archaeological sources may only be a thing,
which facilitates their perception. Their historical and social significance seems obvious and compelling. Materiality determines the
possibility of routinization of archaeological sites of social memory. Another feature of archaeological sites simplifies their routinization
as places of social memory: they tend to be geographically referenced and clearly inscribed in the historical and cultural landscape.
Thus, archaeological sites of social memory due to their ability to objectify social phenomena, regularity, prestige, conventionality
and triviality allow to keep the subject in a political community gravity field with particular ideological force. This means
that the historical interpretation of archeology can not be considered outside the socio-political context. As the current methodology
does not make rigid boundaries between historical consciousness and social memory, problems of pseudoscience are inevitably relevant.
Inability to obtain refined historical knowledge makes archaeologists address the issues of professional ethics in recent years
as a problem by studying the archaeological sources, the role of ideology in the life of ancient
societies; in the epistemological problem of how to influence ideological principles on the research
process; in an ethical responsibility as a problem of scientists working in concrete political situation.
This work focuses on the latter two issues, its purpose – to describe the main stages of discussing
the relationship of scientific knowledge and ideology in archeology XX.
Results. The article describes the basic steps of the scientific discussion of the relationship of
knowledge and ideology in archaeology XX, starting with «Marxist archaeology» end 1920 – early
1930s the party principle posed the problem of truth in relation to the class positions of the scientist.
In Stalin time, this problem has experienced a number of dramatic transformations, while the second
half of the XX century issues of socio-political context of archaeology almost touched.
A new upsurge of interest in these issues in the 1990’s associated with the ideological crisis of the
state and the emergence of methodological pluralism. In the works of contemporary Russian authors
problems of relationship of science and ideology are discussed in relation to issues of history of archaeology,
professional ethics, social memory and nationalism. The article also provides a periodization
of the study of the relationship between science and ideology of western archaeology and
cultural anthropology, with its focus is on the characteristics of modern Marxists and postmodernists.
Conclusion. To a large extent it is affected by the political situation, the commercialization of
antiquities and the details of the professional community. Features of the study of the social context
of archaeology explained by the differences in the perception of time interacting key stakeholders:
society, power, and science. State ideology depends on the type of political regime and can be unpredictable
or variable, or mixed Public opinion is changing with the generations, it is influenced by
the class situation. Perception of the past society much more inert and discrete compared to the scientific. Researchers are constantly included in the learning process, therefore responds to changes
not only critical, but also much more dynamic.
Keywords: archaeology, ideology, pseudo-archaeology, Marxist archaeology, post-processual archaeology.
soviet and contemporary Russia with the "East." Secondly, Russian nationalist discourse has some features peculiar to Orientalism. The nationalists however do not perceive themselves as orientalists; moreover, they believe Russia to be one of the objects of Orientalism. Thirdly, not abandoning Eurocentrism Occidentalism is introduced in the discourse of the contemporary Russian nationalism. Negative qualities of the East are applied to the image of the West. The West gets on an equal footing with the East. Russia acquires more “western” characteristics than the West has, and is proclaimed to be the last bearer of authentic European qualities.
Enemification strategies in modern Russia are closely connected with memory practices. The Great Patriotic War is supposed to be in the center of social memory and such words as ‘occupant’ or ‘traitor’ are identified with Nazism and, therefore, have extremely negative connotations. The process of enemification in modern Russia’s socio-political discourse can be examined from different points of view. Firstly, enemification is an important part of the nation-building and self- determination of any political community. Secondly, militarization of discourse indicates special cultural aspects of Russia’s social memory.
in the formation of social memory. The determinants of mobilizing potential archaeological sources; characterized the role of
archeology in the formation of social memory. From the point of view of social reality construction, the identification of archaeological
sources of a social organism and the establishment of their direct link with a modern community are of great importance. An indicative
tool inherent to pseudoscientific works was monism, expressed in the identification of linguistic, cultural, racial, genetic
phenomena with archaeological sources, and allowing to construct arbitrary sociological reconstructions. Conventionality of archaeological
places of social memory is due to the fact that historical events, for which there is no national consensus, are always closely
related to the current political context, and their conflicts will fade away with time. Archaeological sources may only be a thing,
which facilitates their perception. Their historical and social significance seems obvious and compelling. Materiality determines the
possibility of routinization of archaeological sites of social memory. Another feature of archaeological sites simplifies their routinization
as places of social memory: they tend to be geographically referenced and clearly inscribed in the historical and cultural landscape.
Thus, archaeological sites of social memory due to their ability to objectify social phenomena, regularity, prestige, conventionality
and triviality allow to keep the subject in a political community gravity field with particular ideological force. This means
that the historical interpretation of archeology can not be considered outside the socio-political context. As the current methodology
does not make rigid boundaries between historical consciousness and social memory, problems of pseudoscience are inevitably relevant.
Inability to obtain refined historical knowledge makes archaeologists address the issues of professional ethics in recent years
as a problem by studying the archaeological sources, the role of ideology in the life of ancient
societies; in the epistemological problem of how to influence ideological principles on the research
process; in an ethical responsibility as a problem of scientists working in concrete political situation.
This work focuses on the latter two issues, its purpose – to describe the main stages of discussing
the relationship of scientific knowledge and ideology in archeology XX.
Results. The article describes the basic steps of the scientific discussion of the relationship of
knowledge and ideology in archaeology XX, starting with «Marxist archaeology» end 1920 – early
1930s the party principle posed the problem of truth in relation to the class positions of the scientist.
In Stalin time, this problem has experienced a number of dramatic transformations, while the second
half of the XX century issues of socio-political context of archaeology almost touched.
A new upsurge of interest in these issues in the 1990’s associated with the ideological crisis of the
state and the emergence of methodological pluralism. In the works of contemporary Russian authors
problems of relationship of science and ideology are discussed in relation to issues of history of archaeology,
professional ethics, social memory and nationalism. The article also provides a periodization
of the study of the relationship between science and ideology of western archaeology and
cultural anthropology, with its focus is on the characteristics of modern Marxists and postmodernists.
Conclusion. To a large extent it is affected by the political situation, the commercialization of
antiquities and the details of the professional community. Features of the study of the social context
of archaeology explained by the differences in the perception of time interacting key stakeholders:
society, power, and science. State ideology depends on the type of political regime and can be unpredictable
or variable, or mixed Public opinion is changing with the generations, it is influenced by
the class situation. Perception of the past society much more inert and discrete compared to the scientific. Researchers are constantly included in the learning process, therefore responds to changes
not only critical, but also much more dynamic.
Keywords: archaeology, ideology, pseudo-archaeology, Marxist archaeology, post-processual archaeology.