Came across a poll by the Levada center. The center asked respondents: Russian – the same people, like other peoples, or a very special people?
Answer. Russian – exactly the same people, like other peoples, there are very special people.
It is a stumbling block to our consciousness – we are special or not special? If special, can fool. Not special – no need to show off, you have to live like everyone else.
Here’s what grew out of mythology, historical materialism, having been on the road, and naive anti-communism (“all people as people, are we?”). Hence, too – about the high road of history, about the “we lost”, about “we must catch up” and so on.
The misunderstanding here global. Of course, there are things that United all Nations. Well, for example, that every nation consists of people. But the differences that make EACH nation a very special, unique, these differences are much greater.
First of all, what is the people? What makes a group of people by the people?
We partially answer this question know only too well. Partially – we understand bad. There are self-evident things – language, culture, history… There are less obvious – a destiny, a purpose, a mission… But in any case we can call the totality of differences of one people from other peoples idea of the people. This very idea is what makes a group of people in the nation.
Not phenotype, not genes: people-differ from cattle breeds or species of animals, humans, though animals but not only animals. People appears the idea of the nation, and ends when it ends idea. The people who made up the people, of course, do not disappear with the end (“death”) people, biologically they continue in the offspring. But people have not. Of the most obvious examples – the Egyptians. Ancient. Egypt is filled with people. Many of them (if not all) are descendants of the ancient Egyptians. But the Egyptian people there. And Greek not. The descendants is, “genes” on the spot. And the people there.
Here, by the way it is seen that through historical materialism stages of development – primitive, slave, feudal, etc., it is not necessary for every people. The Egyptians, for example, to feudalism did not survive. And the French did not know the primitive communal system. In contrast, for example, the peoples of Oceania, which, however, as the ancient Egyptians, also not fortunate enough to enjoy the delights of feudalism.
The idea is each nation has its own. When it is the same in different people, it means that these people are no different, and one people. However, it so happens that the ideas of a few people not same, but close – they are like different versions of one large “parent” ideas. This relationship of ideas peoples have in common, making them “brothers” – children of “parent” super-people. Like relatives, we are particularly well know in Europe: the European super-people, and many of its constituent Nations, with similar destinies, the crops, often by language.
The idea of a people emerges in a mysterious way, as if out of nowhere. (To remove the aura of mystery with this event now I will not.) Arisen, it captures the soul (psyche) of the people in this time and in this place. By themselves, these people may be at different stages of development. Therefore, the starting conditions in different people different ways: some become savagery, others (like the people of the United States and even the majority of the American peoples) – to relatively high degrees. Accordingly, the trajectory of development of different Nations are different: the Americans were not, for example, through the majestic era of Catholicism, which established their European relatives. And never will be, as a people, they were born above this era.
Is different in different people, of course, and the mission – the functions that a particular nation performs in the world’s history – the history of mankind.
In General, every special people. And see its difference from other peoples is not less important than to see the similarities. This can be a collective self-understanding.
And then begins the most difficult question: how many differences that define the uniqueness of the people, to distinguish essential, important, and how to separate them from the unimportant. Well, for example, the Swiss people to fruit moonshine, the Scots love to drink from barley and love Russian vodka is the essential difference? Or not? The difference is very striking. But how is it important? And will not the important something that catches the eye much less?
Problem of the Russian identity (I am, as always, of course, not about “Russian passport”, and the people of the Russian culture) today is that often essential substituted secondary.
Well, let’s say, the same Orthodoxy and autocracy. Is it essential to us? Of course not. Russian culture reached the higher UPS and then when she was religioznoi, and when was anti-religious. Great to live in Russia without autocracy. Well, at least in Novgorod. (Though not the only one in Novgorod.) To declare Orthodoxy and autocracy by our intrinsic traits beneficial to the clergy and autocrats. That’s all.
It’s the same with many of our other outrages – from tradition to beat up the tradition to steal. Assign them the essential beneficial to those who are engaged in these outrages. If essential, it seems, is not a disgrace.
And that is essentially for us? What is our idea? The essential things. For example, the dream about the Kingdom of God on earth. A dream of justice. essential. About the truth. Disregard for the intrinsic value of the material side of life is also essential. Lavishly live many want, but be satisfied with one’s wealth no one wants. Any rich claim more.
This is about the framework on which we could build our lives.
Of course, today only. Really in the condition in which we ourselves were loaded, nothing to build. First you need to untie their hands, to repent of what we have done and continue to do. But there is a direction. The light at the end of the tunnel.
Many Russian from among the holders of the Passepartout of the Russian Federation will be able to reach the exit of this tunnel? Of course, not as much as we would like. The loss of our human material is huge. Not physically, but spiritually over the last decade killed tens of millions of people.
But the idea of people continues to live. Even today, not so much in the country, described himself as “Russia” and declared the successor of the historical Russia. (Here the General case is not who yourself who declared, and who lives and who it wants to live.) And yet the idea lives, lives and people.
And the people? People will appear. And replace the victims of spiritual autogenocide. Perhaps they are not as blue-eyed and less snub-nosed. But it will be people of the same nation.
