| Article |
|---|
| Article name |
POLITICAL TECHNOLOGIES OF THE NATIONAL-STATE IDENTITY FORMATION IN CONTEMPORARY RUSSIA |
| Authors |
Titov V.. , |
| Bibliographic description |
|
| Category |
Politology |
| DOI |
323 |
| DOI |
10.21209/2227-9245-2019-25-3-78-83 |
| Article type |
scientific |
| Annotation |
The article is devoted to such technologies of the Russian national-state identity formation as the historical policy and “symbolic design”. National-state identity is described as an integrated image of “us”, “ours”, which is a complex political, psychological and socio-cultural construct, the dynamics of which is due to both the transformation of the political system of Russia and a wide range of historical, cultural and psychological factors.
It is noted that the historical policy as a complex technology for the formation of national-state identity is a systematic activity of national political elites, the political and administrative structures which manage to form and maintain certain historical ideas in society.
In the 2000–2010s in Russia, systematic efforts were made in the field of “symbolic design” – formation of a “symbolic pantheon” of national memory. Considerable attention is also paid to national holidays: attempts to fill them with distinct semantic and symbolic content. However, (as the examples of the Day of Russia and the Day of National Unity show), such attempts are not always successful.
Analyzing historical politics and “symbolic design” in contemporary Russia, we can remark that today these key technologies for the formation of Russian identity are characterized by such disadvantages as weak institutional organization, reactive application, cognitive amorphism, internal inconsistency of symbolic field. Special attention is paid to the role of historical politics in the context of the modern geopolitical “agenda” transformation characterized by the exacerbation of “historical conflicts” in the world, escalation of “wars of memory” in the post-Soviet space. It is noted that the “war of memory”, numerous “historical claims”, addressed to Russia, imply not only the emotional component, but also a bright cognitive aspect, “struggle for meanings” and other content components of the image of the past
|
| Key words |
Key words: national-state identity; political technologies; image of “us”; historical policy; policy of memory; national memory; “memory wars”, self-identification patterns; “symbolic policy”, “symbolic design”
|
| Article information |
Titov V. Political technologies of the national-state identity formation in contemporary Russia // Transbaikal State University Journal, 2019, vol. 25, no. 3, pp.78-83 |
| References |
References
1. Bordyugov G. A. “Voyny pamyati” na postsovetskom prostranstve (“War of Memory” in the post-Soviet space). Moscow: AIRO-XXI, 2011. 256 p.
2. Bushuev V. V. Tsennosti i smysly (Values and meanings), 2012, no. 4, pp. 119–128.
3. Vyazemsky E. E. Problemy sovremennogo obrazovaniya (Problems of Modern Education), 2011, no. 6, pp. 89–97.
4. Evgenieva T. V., Selezneva A. V. Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya (Polis. Political studies), 2016, no 3, pp. 25–39.
5. Evropeyskie voyny pamyati. Kto vzorval konsensus istorii i chem za eto zaplatit. Interviyu s A. I. Millerom (European memory wars. Who blew the consensus of the story and what it will pay for. Interview with A.I. Miller). Available at: https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/2015/06/01/64370 (Date of access: 20.11.2018).
6. Kolerov M. A. “Istoricheskaya politika” v sovremennoy Rossii: poisk institutov i yazyka (“Historical politics” in modern Russia: the search for institutions and language). Available at: http://www.iarex.ru/articles/40226.html (Date of access: 08.12.2018).
7. Miller A. I. Politiya. Analiz. Hronika. Prognoz (zhurnal politicheskoj filosofii i sotsiologii politiki) (Politia. Analysis. Chronicle. Forecast (Journal of Political Philosophy and Sociology of Politics)), 2014, no. 4, pp. 49–57.
8. Nemensky O. Pamyatnik istorii (Monument of history). Available at: http://www.russ.ru/pole/Pamyatnik-istorii: (Date of access: 23.09.2018).
9. Romanova N. P., Lekontseva K. V. Vestnik Zabaykal. gos. un-ta (Transbaikal State University Journal), 2013, no. 6, pp. 95–105.
10. Romanova N. P., Lavrik N. V. Vestnik Zabaykal. gos. un-ta (Transbaikal State University Journal), 2016, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 83–89.
11. Semenenko I. S. Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya (Polis. Political studies), 2016, no. 4, pp. 8–28.
12. Fedorov M. M. Istoriya filosofii (History of Philosophy), 2018, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 108–121.
13. Castells M. A. International Journal of Communication (International Journal of Communication), 2011, no. 5, pp. 773–787.
14. Malinova O. Yu. Communist and Post-Communist Studies (Communist and Post-Communist Studies), 2014, no. 4, pp. 291–303.
|
| Full article | POLITICAL TECHNOLOGIES OF THE NATIONAL-STATE IDENTITY FORMATION IN CONTEMPORARY RUSSIA |
