What is Russian identity definition. Russian people and national identity

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

Confusion reigns on the question of the formula and mechanisms for asserting national identity as one of the foundations of Russian statehood, which is accompanied by superficial and conflicting debates. Ignoring or manipulating around the key points of using the concepts of "people" and "nation" carries serious risks for society and the state. Unlike the negative meaning given to nationalism in the national political language, nationalism played a key role in the formation of modern states and, in varying degrees and variants, remains the most important political ideology of our time.

In Russia, nationalism and nation-building are studied poorly and with the use of 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 - the national state of the Russian nation with minorities, whose members may become Russians or recognize the state-forming status of Russians;
• 3) Russia is a nation-state with a multi-ethnic Russian nation based on Russian culture and language, and which includes representatives of other Russian nationalities (peoples).

global context.

In world social practice, the concept of nations as territorial and political formations with complex, but unified socio-cultural systems has been established. No matter how heterogeneous the state communities may be in composition, they define themselves as nations and consider their states to be national or nation-states. In this case, the people and the nation are synonymous and give the original legitimacy to the modern state. The idea of ​​a single people-nation is a key moment in 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 civil nation includes the principles of a responsible citizen, a unified education system, a version of the common past with its dramas and achievements, symbols and a calendar, a feeling of love for the Motherland and loyalty to the state, as well as defending national interests. All this constitutes what is called nationalism in its civic and state form.

Civic nationalism is opposed by the ideology of ethnic nationalism on behalf of one or another ethnic community, which may constitute the 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 rejection of diversity, while civil nationalism is based on the ideology of solidarity and the recognition of diverse unity. A particular challenge to the state and the civil nation is radical nationalism on behalf of minorities who wish to leave the common state through armed secession. Ethnic nationalism of the majority also carries risks, as it can declare the state the exclusive property of one group, creating opponents among minorities.

Thus, in India, Hindu nationalism on behalf of the Hindu-speaking majority became one of the causes of civil wars. Therefore, the concept of the Indian nation is affirmed there, although there are many large and small peoples, languages, religions and races in the country. Beginning with Gandhi and Nehru, the elite and the state have championed Indian nationalism (the name of the leading party is the Indian National Congress) as opposed to Hindi and minority nationalism. Thanks to this ideology, India maintains its integrity.

In China, the dominant people - the Hans - and the Chinese nation almost coincide numerically and culturally. Nevertheless, the presence of 55 non-Han peoples numbering more than 100 million people does not allow us to speak of the Han 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 nation-citizenships have a complex ethnic, religious, racial composition of the population. The culture, language and religion of the majority are almost always the basis of national culture: the English component in the British nation, Castilian in Spanish, Han in Chinese, Russian in Russia; but the nation is understood as a multi-ethnic entity. For example, the composition of the Spanish nation includes both the main population - the Castilians, and the Basques, Catalans, Galicians.

In Russia, the situation is similar to other countries, but there are peculiarities in the handling 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 world norm.

New Russian project

Due to the inertia of political and legal thinking, the formula of multinationality has been preserved in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, although the formula of a “multinational nation” would have been 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 loaded concept as “nation” is possible within the framework of one country, although the primacy of civic national identity for its inhabitants is indisputable, no matter how 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 the 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 actually already recognized at the level of common sense and everyday life: in polls and in concrete actions, citizenship, connection with the state and recognition of Russianness are more important than ethnicity.

The proposal made 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 all those who consider themselves as such cannot be realized. Ukrainians and Belarusians will no longer agree to consider themselves Russians again, and Tatars and Chechens have never considered themselves as such, but all of them, along 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 affirming a dual identity, by improving the living conditions of the regions predominantly inhabited by Russians, by promoting their social and political representation in the Russian state.

In modern states, multiple, non-mutually exclusive identities are recognized at the level of collective communities and the individual. This weakens the ethno-cultural dividing lines within the framework of one co-citizenship and contributes to national consolidation, not to mention the fact that the self-consciousness of the part of the population consisting of the descendants of mixed marriages is more adequately reflected. In Russia, where a third of the population are descendants of mixed marriages, the practice of obligatory fixation of a single ethnicity of citizens is still preserved, which leads to violence against the individual and fierce disputes over who belongs to what people.

All states consider themselves national, and it makes no sense for Russia to be an exception. Everywhere, among the people of this or that country, the idea of ​​a nation is affirmed, regardless of the racial, ethnic and religious composition of the population. A nation is the result of not just ethno-cultural unification and “long-term historical formation”, but the purposeful efforts of the political and intellectual elite to establish among the population ideas about the people as a nation, common values, symbols, and aspirations. Such common perceptions exist 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 must be changed. National identity is affirmed through many mechanisms and channels, but above all through ensuring civil equality, the system of upbringing and education, the state language, symbols and calendar, cultural and mass media production. After reorganizing 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 concept of "civil identity" has recently entered the pedagogical lexicon. It was widely talked about in connection with the discussion and adoption of federal state educational standards, among the main priorities that set the task for the school formation of the foundations of civic identity of students .

In order to successfully work on the formation of civic identity and to build pedagogical activity accordingly, both at the individual level, it is necessary to clearly understand what is behind this concept.

The concept of "identity" came to pedagogy from the psychology of personality development.

Identity – this property of the human psyche in a concentrated form to express for him how he imagines his belonging to a particular group or community.

Each individual seeks himself simultaneously in different dimensions - gender, professional, national, religious, political, etc. Self-identification occurs both through self-knowledge and through comparison with one or another person, as the embodiment of the properties inherent in a particular group or community. "PIdentification is understood as the integration of a person and society, their ability to realize their self-identity in response to the question: who am I?

At the level of introspection and self-knowledge, identity is defined as an idea of ​​oneself as some relatively unchanging given, a person of one or another physical appearance, temperament, inclinations, who has a past that belongs to him and aspires to the future.

At the level of self-relationship with representatives of the surrounding social environment, a person is socialized. So, we can talk about the formation of a professional, ethnic, national, religious identity of a person.

The identity functions are, first, self-realization and self-actualization individuals in socially significant and socially valued activities; Secondly - protective function, associated with the realization of the need to belong to a group. The feeling of "We", uniting a person with a community, allows you to overcome fear and anxiety and provides confidence and stability of the individual in changing social conditions. .

The structure of any kind of social identity includes several components:

· cognitive (knowledge of belonging to a given social community);

· value-semantic (positive, negative or ambivalent (indifferent) attitude towards belonging);

· emotional (acceptance or non-acceptance of one's belonging);

· active (realization of one's ideas about belonging to a given community in socially significant actions).

The achievement of self-identity, as well as the development of personality, takes place throughout life. Throughout life, a person in search of himself goes through crises of transition from one stage of the psychosocial development of the personality to another, contacting different personalities and feeling belonging to different groups.

The founder of the theory of identity, the American psychologist E. Erickson, believed that if these crises are successfully overcome, then they end with the formation of certain personal qualities that together make up one or another type of personality. Unsuccessful resolution of the crisis leads to the fact that a person transfers with him the contradiction of the previous stage of development to a new one, which entails the need to resolve the contradictions inherent not only in this stage, but also in the previous one. As a result, this leads to personality disharmony, when a person's conscious aspirations are in opposition to his desires and feelings.

In this way, identity problem can be understood as choice in the process of establishing one's belonging to a particular group or other human community. At the same time, a person identifies himself in this connection with another person as an adequate representative of “significant others”, which puts the researcher before the task of identifying such “significant others” and establishing their role in the process of a person’s formation of his identity.

Civic identity - one of the components of the social identity of the individual. Along with civic identity, in the process of becoming a person, other types of social identity are formed - gender, age, ethnic, religious, professional, political, etc.

Civic identity acts as awareness of belonging to a community of citizens of a particular state, which has a significant meaning for an individual, and is based on the sign of a civil community that characterizes it as a collective subject.

An analysis of the scientific literature, however, shows that scientists do not have a single point of view regarding the understanding of this phenomenon. Depending on how the problem of civic identity is inscribed in the circle of scientific interests of researchers, various aspects of its study are chosen as decisive:

a) civic identity is determined, as a realization of the basic needs of the individual in belonging to a group(T.V. Vodolazhskaya);

b) civic identity is assessed as a politically oriented category, the content of which highlights the political and legal competence of the individual, political activity, civic participation, a sense of civic community(I.V. Konoda);

c) civic identity is comprehended as an awareness of a person's belonging to a community of citizens of a particular state, meaningful to him(in this vein, civic identity is understood, in particular, by the developers of the GEF);

d) civic identity appears as the identity of a person to the status of a citizen, as an assessment of one's civil status, readiness and ability to fulfill obligations associated with citizenship, to enjoy the rights, take an active part in the life of the state (M.A. Yushin).

Summarizing these formulations, we can define civic identity as a consciousness of belonging to a community of citizens of a particular state, having a significant meaning for an individual, as a phenomenon of supra-individual consciousness, a sign (quality) of a civil community that characterizes it as a collective subject. These two definitions are not mutually exclusive, but focus on various aspects of civic identity: from the side of the individual and from the side of the community.

The problem of civic identity, especially taking into account its ethnic and confessional components, has been relatively recently raised in Russian science. Among Russian specialists, one of the first to develop it was a well-known ethnologist V. A. Tishkov . In the 1990s, Tishkov put forward and substantiated in his articles the idea of ​​an all-Russian civil nation. According to Tishkov, a person should have one civic consciousness, while ethnic self-identification can be different, including double, triple or none at all. Anddea civic nation, negatively perceived at first,gradually won broad rights both in the scientific community and in the public consciousness of Russia. In fact, it formed the basis of the modern policy of the Russian state in the national question, and, among other things, was reflected in the Concept of Spiritual and Moral Development and Education of the Personality of a Russian Citizen, one of the developers of which, along with A.Ya. Danilyuk and A.M. Kondakov, became V.A. Tishkov.

Modern ideologists of civic identity proceed from the fact that a person's belonging to a nation is determined on the basis of a voluntary personal choice and is identified with citizenship. People are united by their equal political status as citizens, equallegal status before the law , personal desire to participate in the political life of the nation, commitment to common political values ​​and a common civic culture. It is essential that a nation be made up of people who want to live next to each other on a common territory. At the same time, confessional, ethno-cultural, linguistic features remain, as it were, on the sidelines.

The idea of ​​a civil nation makes it possible to achieve consolidation while maintaining the national identity of ethnic groups. This practice allows the state, if not to prevent inter-ethnic and inter-confessional conflicts, then to remain above them, to play the role of an arbitrator.

Civil identity is the basis of group self-consciousness, integrates the population of the country and is the key to the stability of the state.

The formation of civic identity is determined not only by the fact of civic affiliation, but by the attitude and experience with which this affiliation is associated. Civic identity is closely related to the need to establish ties with other people and includes not only the individual's awareness of his belonging to a civic community, but also perception of the significance of this community, an idea of ​​the principles and foundations of this association, the adoption of a behavioral model of a citizen, awareness of the goals and motives of activity, an idea of ​​the nature of the relationship of citizens among themselves.

Among the factors of formation and maintenance of the collective subjectivity of the civil community, the most significant are:

1) a common historical past (common destiny), rooting and legitimizing the existence of a given community, reproduced in myths, legends and symbols;

2) self-name of the civil community;

3) a common language, which is a means of communication and a condition for the development of shared meanings and values;

4) common culture (political, legal, economic), built on a certain experience of living together, fixing the basic principles of relationships within the community and its institutional structure;

5) the experience by this community of joint emotional states, especially those associated with real political actions.

Civil identity as a result of self-awareness of a civil community determines the interconnectedness and interdependence of its members, as well as its ability to show various forms of joint activity.

The process of self-awareness of the civil community is regulated by two tendencies. The first is the differentiation and isolation of the civil community, as a homogeneous community, from the “others” that are not included in it, the drawing of certain boundaries. The second is integration based on intra-group commonality on significant grounds, such as similarities in lifestyle, traditions, values, and worldview, supported by a shared historical past, present, and anticipated future.

The means of ensuring integration and experiencing a sense of belonging is symbol system. The presence of “own” symbols provides universal means of communication within a given community, becoming an identifying factor. The symbol is a materialized verbal event or subject carrier of the idea of ​​unity, integrity, reflects values ​​and images that are significant for the community, and provides motivation for cooperation.

The symbolic space of civil community includes:

· official state symbols,

· figures of historical (national) heroes,

· significant historical and contemporary events, fixing the stages of development of the community,

· everyday or natural symbols reflecting the features of the life of the community.

The image of the Motherland, which concentrates and generalizes everything connected with the life of a civil community, is a key integrating symbol of civil identity. It includes both the objective characteristics of the life of the community, such as the territory, economic, political and social structure, the people living in this territory with their own culture and language, and the subjective attitude towards them. The image of the Motherland does not always include all the selected components: rather, it reflects the most significant of them, allowing you to capture the meanings that integrate the commonality, the degree of their significance in the overall symbolic and semantic space.

The concept of civic identity is associated with such concepts as citizenship, citizenship, patriotism.

Citizenship as a legal and political concept means the political and legal belonging of a person to a particular state. A citizen is a person legally belonging to a particular state. A citizen has a certain legal capacity, endowed with rights, freedoms and burdened with duties. According to their legal status, citizens of a particular state differ from foreign citizens and stateless persons located on the territory of this state. In particular, only a citizen has political rights and freedoms. Therefore, a citizen is one who is ready to share responsibility for the country .

Ideas about citizenship at the level of everyday consciousness include:

· image of a state occupying a certain territory,

· the leading type of social relations in a given state,

· value system,

· the people (or peoples) inhabiting this territory, with their own culture, language and traditions.

citizenship is spiritual and moral concept. The criterion of citizenship is a holistic attitude of a person to the social and natural world, the ability to establish a balance of individual and public interests.

We can distinguish the main qualities that make up citizenship:

Patriotism,

law-abiding,

Trust in government

Responsibility for actions

conscientiousness,

Discipline,

self-esteem,

inner freedom,

Respect for fellow citizens

Social responsibility,

active citizenship,

Harmonious combination of patriotic, national, international feelings and etc.

These qualities should be considered as a significant result of the educational process.

Patriotism (from the Greek patriótes - compatriot, patrís - homeland, fatherland), according to the definition of V. Dahl - "love for the motherland." "Patriot" - "lover of the fatherland, zealot for its good, fatherland lover, patriot or fatherlander."

Patriotism - a sense of commitment to the civic community, recognition of its significant value. Patriotic consciousness is a reflection by the subject of the significance of his Fatherland and readiness to take the necessary actions to protect his national interests.

Speaking about the process of formation of civic identity, it should be noted its close connection with the formation civil competence .

Civic competence means a set of abilities that enable an individual to actively, responsibly and effectively implement a set of civil rights and obligations in a democratic society.

The following spheres of manifestation of civic competence are determined:

Competence in cognitive activity (independent search and receipt of social information from various sources, the ability to analyze and critically comprehend it);

Competence in the field of socio-political and legal activities (implementation of the rights and obligations of a citizen, performance of the functions of a citizen in interaction with other people and authorities);

Moral competence - the personal perfection of a person as a set of moral and ethical knowledge and skills to determine and evaluate their behavior, based on moral norms and ethical concepts that correspond to humanistic and democratic values;

Competence in the socio-economic sphere (compatibility, suitability of personal qualities for a future profession, orientation to the labor market, knowledge of labor and collective ethics).

Integral components of civic identity are legal consciousness and social notions of justice.

Fedotova N.N. Tolerance as an ideological and instrumental value // Philosophical Sciences. 2004. - No. 4. - p.14

Baklushinsky S.A. Development of ideas about the concept of social identity// Ethnos. Identity. Education: works on the sociology of education / Ed.V.S. Sobkin. M. - 1998

Flake-Hobson K., Robinson B.E., Skin P. Development of the child and his relationships with others. M., 1993.25, p.43.

Erickson E. Identity: youth and crisis. M. - 1996 - S. 51 - 52

Tishkov V.A. Essays on the theory and politics of ethnicity in Russia. Moscow: Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology RAS, 1997

V. Dahl. Dictionary.

The destruction of great-power traditions, ideas and myths, and then the Soviet system of values, 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, in all the newly formed states, it became necessary to create a new national identity. This issue was most difficult to resolve in Russia, since it was here that “Soviet” value orientations were introduced deeper 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 the old foundations of life, the displacement of the old value-semantic guidelines led to a split in the spiritual world of Russian society, as a result - the loss of national identity, a sense of patriotism, national and socio-cultural identification of citizens.

The destruction of the Soviet system of values ​​plunged Russian society into a deep value and identification crisis, in which another problem arose - national consolidation. It was no longer possible to solve it within the framework of the old one; it was not 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. The inert policy of the state in the period of the 90s. in the field of social reform and the lack of new value orientations led to an increased interest of citizens in the historical past of the country, people tried to find answers to the burning questions of today in it.

There was an interest in historical literature, 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 broadcasts, historical facts were interpreted in a rather free context, the arguments were not supported by arguments, many of the so-called “facts” had the character of falsifications. Today, it has become obvious to most educated people how much damage such programs have caused to society, first of all, young people, who are hostages of screen culture, have suffered.

On the front of screen culture, “confusion and vacillation” is still observed today, 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 effect. impact on the 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 flows of information that deform historical consciousness and perception of national identity. As a result, the myth of the “ideal” times of the past was firmly entrenched in the minds of Russian citizens. Despite these problems, positive trends have emerged in Russian society in recent years. So, according to sociological surveys in modern Russian society, the mass interest of people in patriotic ideas, slogans, symbols has significantly increased, there is an increase in the patriotic self-identification of Russians.

The problem of national identity today is widely discussed in society. This is due to the fact that in the age of global changes - integration, globalization, transnational migration and global catastrophes - man-made, environmental, people began to rethink their worldview baggage, while wondering about their involvement in the history of the country, the national community and the process of its development. The Russians have a need to revise the 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. It is obvious that in the event that the ideology and cultural and moral values ​​in society are not clearly defined, or do not meet the expectations of the main part of society, there is a gradual change in the structure of the individual's personality itself, a change in value orientations, which ultimately leads to an identification crisis.

The most clear characterization of the identity crisis was given by the outstanding psychologist Eric Erickson, who characterized 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. In a crisis, the individual is more and more detached from social communities - individualized, and the maintenance of identity is carried out through interpersonal communication, in particular, through social networks, which allows you to maintain your "I" and build a dialogue with "We".

The way out of the crisis is possible only if the political and cultural elites reach a balance within their social groups and start implementing new identification projects, the purpose of which is to cause 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 possible only 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 epochs, the balance in this pair was constantly disturbed. The beginning of the dominance of the “I” over the “We” is recognized as the Renaissance, it was at this time that the “I” broke free and left the bonds of the “We”. This was due to several factors - the erasure of class boundaries, increased attention to the individuality of a person in literature and painting, with the expansion of the boundaries of worldview due to scientific and geographical discoveries. Centuries passed, and in developed societies, the “I” became more and more isolated from the “We”, with the intensification of the processes of integration and globalization, it lost its clear outlines and national identity (national-state we-identity). At present, in Russian society, largely due to the policy 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 - the cultural heritage is being restored - the reconstruction of historical monuments, the creation of historical museums in various cities of Russia, there are series of programs dedicated to our history, literature, culture, the Olympics have become a new victory in this direction, now Crimea is being restored before our eyes . Today in Russia, the reassessment of the cultural and historical baggage of the past continues, which expands the boundaries for the search for social identifications, new identification constructs appear based on the combination of the pre-Soviet and Soviet periods of Russian history. Such cultural constructs have a serious impact on the formation of national identity. In recent years, young people in Russia have been demonstrating their national identity more and more, while the older generation, on the contrary, is discovering the inertia of Soviet identity.

This fact can be fully explained by the fact that the older generation experienced the shock of the “lost generation” at one time - in the post-perestroika period, many were thrown out of the “ship of modernity”, their knowledge, skills, and skills 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 complex of new cultural and moral attitudes. People whose active period of socialization took place during the period of totalitarian political culture, having lost sight of the ideological goals and moral values ​​rigidly set by the political elite, lost their I-We-identification in the new conditions of personal freedom, openness and initiative. 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 the 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 the 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 that form a structure of values ​​that not only determine the actions and actions of people in the present and future, but also 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, 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 a sense of purposefulness, self-esteem, and participation in the achievements of their country among citizens.

REFERENCES:

1. Bourdieu Pierre. Practical meaning / Per. from fr. / St. Petersburg, Aletheya, 2001.

2. Gudkov L. D. Russian neo-traditionalism and resistance to change // Otechestvennye zapiski. 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 III millennium. M.: Oriental literature. 1999.

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

5. Lapkin VV, Pantin VI 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 the value orientations of Russians in the 90s // ProetContra, vol. 4. 1999, no. 2.

7. Pokida A. N. The specificity of the patriotic feelings of Russians // Power. 2010. No. 12.

8. Khjell L., Ziegler D. Theories of personality. 2nd ed. SPb.: Peter, 1997. Erickson E. Identity: youth and crisis / Per. 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.

Doctor of Political Sciences, Head of the State Theory Department
and Law and Political Science of the Adyghe State University,
Maikop

Globalization as an objective process that largely determines the contours of the future world order, and the active integration processes that accompany it, have clearly exposed the problem of identity. By the beginning of the third millennium, a person found himself “on the borders” of many social and cultural worlds, the contours of which are increasingly “blurred” due to the globalization of the cultural space, high communication, and the pluralization of cultural languages ​​and codes. Realizing and experiencing his belonging to intersecting macro-group sets, a person became the bearer of a complex, multi-level identity.

The political changes in Russia, by their consequences, led to an identification crisis. The main questions characteristic of periods of transformational changes arose before society with all their severity: “who are we in the modern world?”, “in what direction are we developing?” and “what are our core values?”.

The absence of clear, unambiguous answers to these questions led to a multifactorial differentiation within Russian society, which accompanied the collapse of the former model of the identification system. The process of this disintegration actualized the entire set of existing levels of identity that fastened the framework of the former identification system, which led to the emergence of an increased interest in the problems of identifying various communities. “The problem of identity is “sick” today in countries, societies and people. The problem of self-identification reflects the interaction of different levels of identity, and that a person can absorb many identities. Difficulties in understanding this social phenomenon are associated with the diversity of its manifestations from the micro level to the macro level.

Sociocultural dynamics is accompanied by the evolution of identity levels, the content of which is not reduced to a linear movement from a generic form of identity (basically natural) to ethnic and national (with ever-increasing cultural mediation), but is a process of integration of identification bases. As a result, modern multi-level identity is a layering of the main levels of identity and is of a precedent nature. Depending on the specific historical situation, any of the identification grounds may be updated or a combination of them may arise. The structure of identity is dynamic and changes depending on how the weight of certain elements that make it up increases or, conversely, decreases. According to S. Huntington, the significance of multiple identities changes over time and from situation to situation, while these identities complement each other or conflict with one another.

The problem of multi-level identity today looks extremely complex, including, along with traditional levels of identity, new ones. As historical and cultural experience shows, a multi-ethnic Russia cannot have a “simple” identity: its identity can only be multi-level. The author's version is the allocation of the following levels of identity: ethnic, regional, national, geopolitical and civilizational. The designated levels are closely interconnected and represent a hierarchically structured, and at the same time complexly organized system.

The position seems justified, according to which the basis of identity as such is the identification of oneself with one or another group, belonging to something greater and different from the person himself. In this sense, the first level of identity - ethnic identity can be considered as the totality of meanings, ideas, values, symbols, etc., which allow ethnic identification. In other words, ethnic identity can be considered as belonging to a person in connection with his identification with an ethnic group. Ethnic self-identification of a person can be viewed as a process of appropriating ethnicity and turning it into ethnic identity, or as a process of entering identity structures and attributing a certain place to oneself in them, which is called ethnic identity.

Ethnic identity is a complex social phenomenon, the content of which is both the individual's awareness of community with a local group on the basis of ethnicity, and the group's awareness of its unity on the same grounds, the experience of this community. Ethnic identification, in our opinion, is due to the need of a person and the community to streamline ideas about themselves and their place in the picture of the world, the desire to gain unity with the outside world, which is achieved in replaced forms (linguistic, religious, political, and other communities) through integration into the ethnic space of society.

Based on the prevailing understanding of identity, the second level - regional identity can be considered as one of the key elements in constructing a region as a specific socio-political space; it can serve as the basis for a special perception of national political problems and is formed on the basis of a common territory, features of economic life, and a certain system of values. It can be assumed that regional identity arises as a result of the crisis of other identities and to a large extent is a reflection of the historically emerged center-peripheral relations within states and macroregions. Regional identity is a kind of key to constructing a region as a socio-political and institutional space; an element of social identity, in the structure of which two main components are usually distinguished: cognitive - knowledge, ideas about the characteristics of one's own group and awareness of oneself as a member of it; and affective - assessment of the qualities of one's own group, the significance of membership in it. In the structure of regional identification, in our opinion, there are the same two main components - knowledge, ideas about the features of one's own "territorial" group (sociocognitive element) and awareness of oneself as a member of it and an assessment of the qualities of one's own territory, its significance in the global and local coordinate system ( socioreflexive element).

Recognizing regional identity as a reality, let us single out a number of its features: firstly, it is hierarchical, since it includes several levels, each of which reflects belonging to different territories - from a small homeland, through political-administrative and economic-geographical formation to the country as a whole ; secondly, the regional identity of individuals and groups differs in the degree of intensity and in the place it occupies among other identities; thirdly, regional identity is a form of understanding and expression of regional interests, the existence of which is due to the territorial features of people's life. And the deeper these features are, the more noticeably regional interests differ from national interests.

Regional identity is a factor of territorial-geographical, socio-economic, ethno-cultural existence and an element of state-political structuring and management. At the same time, it is an important factor in the all-Russian political process. Among the levels of identity, it occupies a special place and is associated with certain territories that determine special forms of life practices, pictures of the world, symbolic images.

Considering a multi-level identity, it is necessary to turn to the third level - national identity, understood as common to all its citizens, which is the most multi-valued and multi-faceted of all those associated with the definition of Russian specifics. This is explained, on the one hand, by the lack of unity in approaches to the definition of an ethnos and a nation; close interweaving of ethno-cultural and national identities; purely linguistic difficulties, since the nouns "nation" and "nationality" (ethnos) correspond to the same adjective - "national". On the other hand, the objective criteria of national identity are the language, culture, lifestyle, behavior, common traditions and customs, the presence of an ethnonym, the state.

The difficulty of defining national identity is also explained by a number of its specific features: the ethnic diversity inherent in Russia, which predetermines the absence of ethnocultural unity, since 20% of the non-Russian population lives predominantly in almost half of its territory, identifying themselves with it, which makes it impossible to characterize Russia as a national state; uneven age of ethnocultural formations included in the civilizational field of Russia, which determines its pronounced traditional character; the presence of a basic state-forming ethnic group - the Russian people, which is the dominant feature of the development of Russian civilization; a unique combination of a multi-ethnic composition and a single state, which is one of the most stable and significant identification grounds; polyconfessionality of Russian society.

This is the source of the differences in the existing interpretations of the essence of identity: the interests of Russia cannot be identified with the interests of any of the ethno-cultural communities that form it, since they are supranational, therefore, we can only talk about geopolitical coordinates; the identity of Russia's interests with the interests of the dominant state-forming ethnic group, that is, Russian; The national identity of Russia is interpreted not according to the ethno-cultural, but according to the state-legal principle.

Russian national identity is understood as self-identification with the Russian nation, the definition of “who are we?” in relation to Russia. It is important to note that the problem of the formation of national identity is especially relevant in modern conditions. This is due, firstly, to the need to preserve the integrity of the country. Secondly, in the words of V. N. Ivanov, “national-cultural identity sets certain parameters for the development of the country. In line with these parameters, the country is making various efforts to optimize its movement and development, including subordinating the idea of ​​modernization (reform) to them.

Let us now turn to the analysis of the fourth level - geopolitical identity, which can be considered as a specific level of identity and a key element in the construction of socio-political space; it can serve as a basis for a special perception of national political problems. It should be noted that geopolitical identity does not replace or cancel the national one; in most cases, they are of an additional nature.

We understand geopolitical identity as the identity of a particular country and its people, as well as the place and role of this country among others and the ideas associated with it. Identity is closely connected with statehood, its character, with the position of the state in the international system and the self-perception of the nation. The features that characterize it are: geopolitical space, that is, a complex of geographical features of the state; geopolitical place and role of the state in the world; endogenous and exogenous ideas about political and geographical images.

It seems that the geopolitical identity includes such basic elements as citizens' ideas about the geopolitical images of the country, a set of emotions about their country, as well as a special geopolitical culture of the population. The specificity of geopolitical identity lies in the fact that it is an identity based on the awareness of the commonality of a whole people or a group of close peoples.

In the modern world, the fifth level - civilizational identity is becoming increasingly important in comparison with other levels of its analysis. This question arises when there is a need to comprehend the place of one's society and country in the civilizational diversity of the world, that is, in global positioning. Thus, analyzing the question of the civilizational and socio-cultural identity of Russia, K. Kh. Delokarov identifies factors that complicate the understanding of their essence: a systematic war with one's past, one's history; the habit of looking for sources of problems not at home, but from outside; the uncertainty of the strategic goals of Russian society. And on the basis of this, the author concludes that the criteria for the civilizational identity of Russia are blurred. .

Civilizational identity can be defined as a category of socio-political theory that denotes the identification of an individual, a group of individuals, a people with their place, role, system of connections and relations in a particular civilization. We can say that this is the limiting level of identification, above which only the identification of a global scale can be. It is based on the formed large inter-ethnic mega-community of people living in the same region for a long time, based on the unity of the historical collective fate of different peoples, interconnected by close cultural values, norms and ideals. This sense of community is formed on the basis of the distinction and even opposition of "one's own" and "alien".

Thus, civilizational identity can be defined as the self-identification of individuals, groups, ethnic groups, confessions on the basis of a certain socio-cultural community. This social problem of the continuity of the formative factors that determine the civilizational characteristics of society is of particular importance, since it concerns the definition of the civilizational identity not only of Russian society, but also of other societies. The civilizational identity of Russia is due to the fact that it is located in Europe and Asia, it is multi-ethnic and multi-confessional. The specificity of civilizational identity lies in the fact that it represents the highest level of social identity, since it is based on the awareness of the cultural and historical community of a whole people or a group of close peoples. The concept of "civilizational identity" describes a set of core, system-forming elements that structure the whole and define the self-identity of civilization.

Watching today the process of transformation of civilizational identity in Russia, it is important to realize that in many respects the future of democracy and the prospects of Russian statehood depend on the result of choosing the right identity. The need to adapt to the realities of post-Soviet existence and to a new geopolitical status contributed to the rapid erosion of the former and the emergence of a new identity.

The current crisis of the all-Russian identity is mainly a conflict with new realities, which entailed the process of abandoning the old social roles, national self-determinations, and ideological images. All this actualizes the problem of recreating the integrity of the all-Russian “we”, taking into account its civilizational features. Ideas about civilizational affiliation and the corresponding images of identity influence the formation of an orientation related to the perception of the place and role of Russia in the modern world.

It seems that the processes of globalization developing in the world, affecting the identification archetypes of all states, the unfolding transition to a post-industrial society in a new way poses the problem of forming a multi-level identity not only for Russia, but for the whole world.

Thus, the analysis carried out indicates that the rapid changes in the world associated with the contradictory processes of globalization and transformation have sharply exacerbated the problem of identity. According to the figurative expression of one of the researchers, scientists simultaneously found themselves both in the role of creators and in the role of prisoners of the world wide web of identities, in the face of its challenges. This problem began to “torment” people and countries from the end of the 20th century: they are constantly accompanied by a desire to either preserve their chosen identity, or make a new choice, or something else related to the search for their “I” or “we”.

Who are Russians in the 21st century? What unites them and makes them move together in the same direction? Do they have a common future - and if so, what is it like? Identity is a concept as complex and vague as "society", "culture", "order" and others. Discussions around the definition of identity have been going on for a long time and will continue for a long time. One thing is clear: without identity analysis, we will not be able to answer any of the above questions.

These questions will be considered by leading thinkers and intellectuals at the upcoming anniversary summit of the Valdai International Discussion Club, which will be held in Russia this September. In the meantime, it's time to "pave the way" for these discussions, for which I would like to propose a few, in my opinion, important points.

First, identity is not created once and for all, it is constantly changing as part of the process of social transformations and interactions.

Secondly, today we carry a whole "portfolio of identities" that may or may not be combined with each other. One and the same person, being, say, in a remote region of Tatarstan, is associated with a resident of Kazan; when he comes to Moscow, he is a "Tatar"; in Berlin he is Russian, and in Africa he is white.

Thirdly, identity usually weakens during periods of peace and strengthens (or, on the contrary, breaks up) during periods of crises, conflicts and wars. The War of Independence created American identity, the Great Patriotic War strengthened Soviet identity, the wars in Chechnya and Ossetia gave powerful impetus to discussions about contemporary Russian identity.

Modern Russian identity includes the following dimensions: national identity, territorial identity, religious identity and, finally, ideological or political identity.

National identity

In the Soviet period, the former imperial identity was replaced by an international Soviet identity. Although the Russian Republic existed within the framework of the USSR, it did not possess the most important features and attributes of statehood.

The collapse of the USSR was one of its reasons for the awakening of the national consciousness of Russians. But, having barely been born, the new state - the Russian Federation - faced the problem: is it the legal successor and legal heir of the USSR or the Russian Empire? Or is it a completely new state? The controversy over this continues to this day.

The neo-Soviet approach regards today's Russia as a "Soviet Union without ideology" and demands the restoration of the USSR in one form or another. On the political stage, this worldview is mainly represented by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF).

Another approach sees Russia as a multinational state within its current borders and as the legal successor of the Russian Empire and the USSR. There is no need for territorial expansion today, but one's own territory, including non-Russian regions, is considered sacred and indivisible. According to this approach, Russia also has primary interests and even a mission in the territory of the former USSR. Therefore, it must, on the one hand, try to integrate this space in various ways, and on the other hand, protect the rights of its compatriots living in the new independent states. This approach is shared by most Russians and proclaimed by President Putin and the United Russia party.

The third approach claims that Russia is the state of Russians, that the imperial and Soviet past are equally tragic pages of history that need to be closed. Instead, it is desirable to reunite the lands inhabited by Russians, such as the Crimea, Northern Kazakhstan, etc. At the same time, it is better to give away part of the territories, primarily the North Caucasus and especially Chechnya.

The main challenge to the national identity of Russians today is the question of the right of immigrants from the labor-surplus republics of the North Caucasus, without losing their language and faith, to freely move to large metropolitan areas and primordially Russian regions. Although there are no legal obstacles to this, the process of internal migration causes great tension and leads to the strengthening of Russian nationalist sentiments, including the most extremist ones.

Territorial Aspect of Russian Identity

Over the past five centuries, this aspect has been one of the most important. The territory of the Russian Empire, and then the USSR, continuously expanded, which led to the formation of the largest state on Earth, and this feature of Russia has long been a matter of our pride. Any territorial loss is perceived very painfully, so the collapse of the USSR inflicted severe trauma on Russian self-consciousness from this point of view as well.

The war in Chechnya demonstrated Russia's readiness to uphold this value, regardless of any casualties. While the idea of ​​accepting Chechnya's secession gained popularity at some moments of defeat, it was the restoration of Russian control over the republic that underpinned Putin's unprecedented popular support in the early 2000s.

The vast majority of Russians consider the preservation of the territorial integrity and unity of Russia to be the most important element of Russian identity, the most important principle that the country should be guided by.

The third aspect of Russian identity is religious

Today, more than 80% of Russians call themselves Orthodox, and the Russian Orthodox Church has received a semi-state status and has a great influence on the policy of the authorities in areas that are significant to it. There is a Russian version of the "symphony", the Orthodox ideal of cooperation between secular and sacred authorities, high priest and emperor.

And yet, the prestige of the church over the past two years in society has been shaken. First of all, the unofficial taboo against criticizing the Russian Orthodox Church, which had existed for more than two decades, disappeared. The liberal part of society moved into open opposition to the church.

Against this background, even atheism, forgotten after the collapse of communism, is gradually returning to the scene. But much more dangerous for the ROC is the missionary activity of non-Orthodox Christian denominations, primarily Protestant ones, as well as the spread of Islam beyond its traditional habitat. Most importantly, the power of faith of newly converted Protestants and Muslims is an order of magnitude greater than that which the parishioners of the Russian Orthodox Church have.

Thus, the return of post-communist Russia to Orthodoxy is of a purely superficial, ritual nature; there has been no real churching of the nation.

But an even more dangerous challenge to the Orthodox component of Russian identity is its inability to help the moral revival of Russian society, which today is dominated by disrespect for law, domestic aggression, aversion to productive work, disregard for morality, and a complete lack of mutual cooperation and solidarity.

Ideological aspect

Starting from the Middle Ages, Russian national identity was formed on the idea of ​​opposing others, primarily the West, and asserted its differences from it as positive signs.

The collapse of the USSR made us feel like an inferior, wrong country, which for a long time went "in the wrong direction" and only now is returning to the world family of "correct" peoples.

But such an inferiority complex is a heavy burden, and the Russians happily abandoned it once the horrors of oligarchic capitalism and the NATO intervention in Yugoslavia shattered our illusions about the "brave new world" of democracy, the market, and friendship with the West. The image of the West as a role model was completely discredited by the end of the 1990s. With the advent of Putin to the presidency, an accelerated search for an alternative model, other values, began.

At first it was the notion that after Yeltsin's departure, "Russia will rise from its knees." Then came the slogan about Russia as an "energy superpower". And, finally, the concept of "sovereign democracy" by Vladislav Surkov, which claims that Russia is a democratic state, but with its own national specifics, and no one from abroad has the right to tell us what kind of democracy and how we need to build.

The solid majority believes that Russia has no natural allies, and our belonging to a European civilization does not mean that our destiny is common with Western Europe and America. The younger and more educated part of Russians still gravitates toward the European Union and even would like Russia to join it, but they are in the minority. The majority wants to build a Russian democratic state in their own way and does not expect any help or advice from abroad.

The social ideal of modern Russians can be described as follows. It is an independent and influential, authoritative state in the world. It is an economically highly developed country with a decent standard of living, competitive science and industry. A multinational country where the Russian people play a special, central role, but the rights of people of all nationalities are respected and protected. It is a country with a strong central government headed by a president with broad powers. This is a country where the law triumphs, and everyone is equal before it. A country of restored justice in the relations of people with each other and with the state.

I would like to note that our social ideal lacks such values ​​as the importance of changing power on an alternative basis; the idea of ​​the opposition as the most important institution of the political system; the value of the separation of powers and, moreover, their rivalry; the idea of ​​parliament, parties and representative democracy in general; the value of minority rights and, to a large extent, human rights in general; the value of being open to a world that is seen as a source of threats rather than opportunities.

All of the above are the most important challenges to Russian identity, which the country will have to find an answer to if it wants to achieve national goals - a decent life, social justice and respect for Russia in the world.