Reference material to prepare for the seminar on the topic “SOVEREIGN RUSSIA: CHOICE OF DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN POLICY ROUTES (SECOND HALF OF THE 80S – EARLY XXI CENTURY)”
Annex 1
Features of the political and spiritual development of the country in the 60-70s.
| Peculiarities | Social consequences |
| The gap between the proclaimed ideals of developed socialism and real life | Increasing ossification of party-state structures |
| Unresolved problems of development of national republics | Gradual awakening of the national self-awareness of peoples |
| Avoiding analysis of real contradictions in social development | Increasing mass skepticism, political apathy, cynicism; dogmatism in the ideological sphere |
| Intensification of the ideological struggle | Prohibitions and restrictions in spiritual life; creating the image of an “external enemy” |
| Ideological rehabilitation of Stalinism | The exaltation of the new leader - L.I. Brezhnev |
| Confrontation between official dogmatic and humanistic, democratic culture | Formation of spiritual prerequisites for perestroika |
Appendix 2
USSR in the early 80s.
Economy
o Sharp decline in economic growth
o Strengthening the command and administrative system of economic management
o Attempts to further strengthen the centralization of management during the 1979 reform.
o Crisis of rigid bureaucratic management agriculture
o Crisis of the system of non-economic coercion
o inefficient use of material and labor resources and delay in the transition to intensive production methods
o inflationary processes, commodity shortages, huge pent-up demand.
Politic system
o The rigidity of the party and state structures, the tightening of repression against dissidents
o Increased bureaucratization of the state machine
o Strengthening contradictions in the social and class structure of society
o Crisis of interethnic relations
Spiritual realm
o Increasing gap between word and deed
o Avoidance of objective analysis of the state of affairs in society
o Tightening ideological dictate
o Ideological rehabilitation of Stalinism
o Growing mass skepticism, political apathy, cynicism
The emergence of the pre-crisis state of our society can be explained by both objective and subjective reasons. Objective features include the development of our country in the 70s. A difficult demographic situation, the removal of sources of raw materials and energy resources from traditional areas of their use, worsening economic problems, an unfavorable global economic situation, and an increasing burden of costs to maintain military-strategic parity and to help allies played a role here. In this regard, it is worth paying attention to the fact that the USSR’s share within the Warsaw Pact accounted for 90% of total expenses, and only 10% fell on the allies (for comparison: within NATO, US expenses are 54%).
The characteristics and results of previous years of the country's development also contributed to the formation of the pre-crisis state. Processes such as, for example, excessive centralization of economic management and the nationalization of the cooperative form of ownership were identified and gained momentum much earlier. But in the 70s, along with the increase in the scale of production, they began to appear more clearly.
The diagnosis of the situation in which the development of our society finds itself is stagnation. In fact, a whole system of weakening the instruments of power arose, a kind of mechanism for inhibiting socio-economic development was formed. The concept of “inhibition mechanism” helps to understand the causes of stagnation in the life of society.
The braking mechanism is a set of stagnant phenomena in all spheres of life in our society: political, economic, social, spiritual, international. The braking mechanism is a consequence, or rather a manifestation of the contradictions between productive forces and production relations. The subjective factor played a significant role in the development of the braking mechanism. In the 70s and early 80s, the party and state leadership turned out to be unprepared to actively and effectively counter the growing negative phenomena in all areas of the country's life.
Appendix 3
The main stages of perestroika in the USSR
Appendix 4
Stages of economic reform in the USSR (1985 – 1991)
Appendix 5
Production of main types of food products (in% of the previous year)
Appendix 6
Perestroika and changes in the spiritual life of society at the turn of the 1990s.
1985 became a landmark year in the spiritual life of the USSR. The principle proclaimed by M. S. Gorbachev publicity created conditions for greater openness in decision-making and for an objective rethinking of the past (this was seen as continuity with the first years of the “thaw”). But the main goal of the new leadership of the CPSU was to create conditions for the renewal of socialism. It is no coincidence that the slogan “More glasnost, more socialism!” was put forward. and the no less eloquent “We need publicity like air!” Glasnost implied a greater variety of topics and approaches, a more lively style of presenting material in the media. It did not amount to an affirmation of the principle of freedom of speech and the possibility of unhindered and free expression of opinions. The implementation of this principle presupposes the existence of appropriate legal and political institutions, which in the Soviet Union in the mid-1980s. did not have.
The size of the CPSU in 1986, when the XXVII Congress took place, reached a record level in its history of 19 million people, after which the ranks of the ruling party began to decline (to 18 million in 1989). In Gorbachev's speech at the congress, it was said for the first time that without glasnost there is no and cannot be democracy. It turned out to be impossible to keep publicity in check, in measured volumes, especially after the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (April 26, 1986), when it was revealed that the country's leadership was unwilling to provide objective information and raise the question of responsibility for the tragedy.
In society, glasnost began to be seen as a rejection of ideological narrow-mindedness in covering current events and in assessing the past. This opened up, as it seemed, inexhaustible opportunities for the formation of a new information field and for open discussion of all critical issues in mass media. The focus of public attention in the first years of perestroika was journalism. It was this genre of the printed word that could react most sharply and quickly to the problems that worried society. In 1987-1988 The most pressing topics have already been widely discussed in the press, and controversial points of view have been put forward about the country's development paths. The appearance of such sharp publications on the pages of censored publications was unimaginable just a few years ago. Publicists on a short time became real “masters of thoughts.” New authoritative authors from among prominent economists, sociologists, journalists and historians found themselves at the epicenter of attention. Popularity has grown to incredible levels printed publications, which published stunning articles about failures in the economy and social policy - “Moscow News”, “Ogonyok”, “Arguments and Facts”, “Literary Gazette”. A series of articles about the past and present and about the prospects of the Soviet experience (I. I. Klyamkina “Which street leads to the temple?”, N. P. Shmeleva “Advances and debts”, V. I. Selyunina and G. N. Khanina “Evil figure”, etc.) in the magazine “ New world", in which the editor was the writer S.P. Zalygin, caused a huge response from readers. The publications of L. A. Abalkin, N. P. Shmelev, L. A. Piyasheva, G. Kh. Popov, T. I. Koryagina on the problems of economic development of the country were widely discussed. A. A. Tsipko proposed a critical understanding of Lenin’s ideological heritage and the prospects of socialism, publicist Yu. Chernichenko called for a review of the agrarian policy of the CPSU. Yu. N. Afanasyev organized historical and political readings “The Social Memory of Humanity” in the spring of 1987; they had a response far beyond the boundaries of the Moscow Historical and Archival Institute, which he headed. Particularly popular were collections that published journalistic articles under one cover; they were read like a fascinating novel. In 1988, the collection “No Other is Given” was published in a circulation of 50 thousand copies and immediately became a “shortage”. Articles by its authors (Yu. N. Afanasyev, T. N. Zaslavskaya, A. D. Sakharov, A. A. Nuikin, V. I. Selyunin, Yu. F. Karyakin, G. G. Vodolazov, etc.) - famous for their public position representatives of the intelligentsia were united by a passionate and uncompromising call for the democratization of Soviet society. Every article conveyed a desire for change. The short preface by editor Yu. N. Afanasyev spoke about “different topics, conflicting opinions, non-trivial approaches. Perhaps this is what gives particular convincing to the main idea of the collection: perestroika is a condition for the vitality of our society. There is no other option."
The press’s “finest hour” was 1989. The circulation of printed publications reached an unprecedented level: the weekly “Arguments and Facts” had a circulation of 30 million copies (this absolute record among weeklies was included in the Guinness Book of Records), the newspaper “Trud” - 20 million, “Pravda” - 10 million. Jumped sharply subscription to “thick” magazines (especially after the subscription scandal that broke out at the end of 1988, when they tried to limit it under the pretext of a paper shortage). A public wave arose in defense of glasnost, and the subscription was defended. “New World” in 1990 was published with a circulation of 2.7 million copies, unprecedented for a literary magazine.
A huge audience was gathered by live broadcasts from meetings of the Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR (1989-1990); at work, people did not turn off their radios and took portable televisions from home. The conviction emerged that it was here, at the congress, in the confrontation of positions and points of view, that the fate of the country was being decided. Television began to use the technique of reporting from the scene and live broadcasting; this was a revolutionary step in covering what was happening. “Live talking” programs were born - round tables, teleconferences, discussions in the studio, etc. Without exaggeration, the nationwide popularity of journalistic and information programs (“The View”, “Before and After Midnight”, “The Fifth Wheel”, “600 Seconds”) was due not only to the need for information, but and the desire of people to be at the center of what is happening. Young TV presenters proved by their example that freedom of speech is emerging in the country and free debate around the issues that concern people is possible. (True, more than once during the years of perestroika, TV management tried to return to the old practice of pre-recording programs.)
A polemical approach also distinguished the most striking documentaries of the journalistic genre that appeared at the turn of the 1990s: “You Can’t Live Like This” and “The Russia We Lost” (dir. S. Govorukhin), “Is It Easy to Be Young?” (dir. J. Podnieks). The latter film was directly addressed to a youth audience.
The most famous artistic films about modernity, without embellishment and false pathos, told about the life of the younger generation (“Little Vera”, directed by V. Pichul, “Assa”, directed by S. Solovyov, both appeared on the screen in 1988). Soloviev gathered a crowd of young people as extras to shoot the last frames of the film, announcing in advance that V. Tsoi would sing and act. His songs became for the generation of the 1980s. what the work of V. Vysotsky was for the previous generation.
“Forbidden” topics have essentially disappeared from the press. The names of N.I. Bukharin, L.D. Trotsky, L.B. Kamenev, G.E. Zinoviev and many other repressed political figures returned to history. Never-published party documents were made public, and declassification of archives began. It is characteristic that one of the “first signs” in understanding the past were the works of Western authors about the Soviet period already published abroad national history(S. Cohen “Bukharin”, A. Rabinovich “The Bolsheviks Come to Power”, two-volume “History of the Soviet Union” by the Italian historian G. Boffa). The publication of the works of N. I. Bukharin, unknown to a new generation of readers, gave rise to a heated discussion about alternative models for the construction of socialism. The very figure of Bukharin and his legacy were contrasted with Stalin; the discussion of development alternatives was conducted in the context of modern prospects for the “renewal of socialism.” The need to comprehend historical truth and answer the questions “what happened” and “why did it happen” to the country and people, aroused great interest in publications on the Russian history of the 20th century, especially in memoir literature that began to appear without censorship. In 1988, the first issue of the magazine “Our Heritage” was published, and on its pages appeared unknown materials on the history of Russian culture, including the heritage of Russian emigration.
Contemporary art also sought answers to questions that tormented people. The film directed by T. E. Abuladze “Repentance” (1986) - a parable about universal evil, embodied in the recognizable image of a dictator, without exaggeration, shocked society. At the end of the picture, an aphorism was heard that became the leitmotif of perestroika: “Why a road if it doesn’t lead to a temple?” Problems moral choice people found themselves in the spotlight of two masterpieces of Russian cinema with different themes - the film adaptation of M. A. Bulgakov’s story “Heart of a Dog” (Dir. V. Bortko, 1988) and “Cold Summer of ’53” (dir. A. Proshkin, 1987) . Those films also appeared at the box office that were previously not allowed on the screen by censorship or were released with huge bills: A. Yu. German, A. A. Tarkovsky, K. P. Muratova, S. I. Parajanov. The strongest impression was made by A. Ya. Askoldov’s film “Commissar” - a film of high tragic pathos.
Appendix 7
"New political thinking" in international relations
In the mid-1980s. The new leadership of the USSR sharply intensified its foreign policy. The following traditional Soviet ones were identified: foreign policy objectives: achieving universal security and disarmament; strengthening the world socialist system as a whole, the socialist community in particular; strengthening relations with liberated countries, primarily with countries of “socialist orientation”; restoration of mutually beneficial relations with capitalist countries; strengthening the international communist and labor movement.
These tasks were approved by the XXVII Congress of the CPSU at the beginning of 1986. However, in 1987-1988. significant adjustments have been made to them. They were first reflected in M. S. Gorbachev’s book “Perestroika and New Thinking for Our Country and the Whole World” (autumn 1987). The Minister of Foreign Affairs, member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee E.A. took an active part in defining and implementing the principles of “new thinking” in the foreign policy of the USSR. Shevardnadze and Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee A. N. Yakovlev. The change in course was symbolized by the replacement of the highly experienced Minister of Foreign Affairs A. A. Gromyko with the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Georgia E. A. Shevardnadze, who previously had only experience in Komsomol and police work and did not speak any foreign languages.
"New political thinking"(NPM) in foreign policy was an attempt to implement the “ideas of perestroika” in the international arena. The basic principles of NPM were as follows:
· rejection of the conclusion that the modern world is split into two opposing socio-political systems - capitalist and socialist, and recognition modern world united, interconnected;
· rejection of the belief that the security of the modern world rests on the balance of forces of two opposing systems, and recognition of the balance of interests as a guarantor of this security;
· rejection of the principle of proletarian, socialist internationalism and recognition of priority universal human values over any others (national, class, etc.).
In accordance with the new principles, new priorities of Soviet foreign policy were defined:
· de-ideologization of interstate relations;
· joint solution of global supranational problems (security, economics, ecology, human rights);
· joint construction of a “common European home” and a single European market, which was planned to enter in the early 1990s.
As a decisive step on this path, the Political Consultative Committee of the Warsaw Pact countries, on the initiative of the Soviet leadership, adopted in May 1987 the “Berlin Declaration” on the simultaneous dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and NATO and, first of all, their military organizations.
In the second half of the 1980s. The Soviet Union undertook major practical steps to normalize interstate relations, ease tensions in the world, and strengthen the international authority of the USSR. In August 1985, on the fortieth anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, the USSR introduced a moratorium on nuclear weapons testing, inviting other nuclear powers to support its initiative. In response, the US leadership invited representatives of the USSR to attend its nuclear tests. Therefore, the moratorium was temporarily lifted in April 1987. It was returned to in 1990. On January 15, 1986, the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee M. S. Gorbachev made a statement “In the year 2000 without nuclear weapons.” It proposed a plan for phased and complete elimination nuclear weapons by the 21st century. In February 1987 in Moscow at international forum“For a nuclear-free world, for the survival of humanity,” Gorbachev called on representatives of over 80 countries to “humanize” international relations, combine morality and politics, and replace the ancient principle “if you want peace, prepare for war” with the modern “if you want peace, fight for peace.”
The course towards a nuclear-free world was consistently pursued during Soviet-American meetings at top level. They were resumed in November 1985 and became annual. Meetings and negotiations between M. S. Gorbachev and US Presidents R. Reagan and George W. Bush contributed to the destruction of the image of the enemy, the establishment of comprehensive relations between the two states and led to the signing of two treaties on military issues. In December 1987, the INF Treaty (medium- and short-range missiles) was signed in Washington. He marked the beginning of a turn from the arms race to disarmament through the destruction of an entire class of weapons. Ratified in both countries in May 1988, it led to the elimination of more than 2.5 thousand missiles by May 1990 (including 2/3 Soviet ones). This amounted to approximately 4% of the world's nuclear weapons stockpile. In July 1991, the Treaty on the Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START-1) was signed in Moscow. This was the second treaty that provided for the elimination of some nuclear weapons.
Appendix 8
FROM THE REPORT OF THE USSR SUPREME COUNCIL COMMITTEE FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS “ON THE POLITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE DECISION TO ENTER SOVIET TROOPS INTO AFGHANISTAN”
As a result of a thorough analysis of the available data, the committee came to the conclusion that the decision to send Soviet troops into Afghanistan deserves moral and political condemnation. The general international situation in which the decision was made was undoubtedly complex and characterized by acute political confrontation. In that situation, there were ideas about the intention of certain circles of the United States of America to take revenge in Afghanistan for the loss of positions after the fall of the Shah's regime in Iran; facts pointed to the possibility of such a development of events. In the official statements that followed the deployment of troops, one of the motives for the action was the desire to strengthen the security of the Soviet Union on the approaches to the southern borders and thereby protect its positions in the region in connection with the tension that had developed in Afghanistan by that time. Elements of armed intervention from outside were growing. There were appeals from the Afghan government to the Soviet leadership for help. It has been documented that the Afghan government, starting in March 1979, has made more than 10 requests to send Soviet military units to the country. In response, the Soviet side rejected this form of assistance, declaring that the Afghan revolution must defend itself. However, later this position underwent, frankly speaking, dramatic changes.
<…>The Committee states that the decision to send troops was made in violation of the Constitution of the USSR... In this context, we inform you that the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and its Presidium did not consider the issue of sending troops to Afghanistan. The decision was made by a narrow circle of people. As the Committee on International Affairs established, the Politburo did not even meet in full to discuss this issue and make a decision on it. Giving a political and moral assessment of the entry of troops into Afghanistan, it is necessary, it is our duty, to name those who, while working on the most important foreign policy issues since the mid-70s, decided to send Soviet troops into Afghanistan. This is Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev, who at that time held the posts of General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of our country, Chairman of the Defense Council and Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the USSR; this is the former Minister of Defense of the USSR Ustinov, Chairman of the Committee state security Andropov, USSR Foreign Minister Gromyko.<...>Politically and morally condemning the decision to send in Soviet troops, the Committee considers it necessary to state that this in no way casts a shadow on the soldiers and officers heading to Afghanistan. Faithful to the oath, convinced that they are protecting the interests of the Motherland and providing friendly assistance neighboring people, they were only fulfilling their military duty.<...>
Appendix 9
Social and political changes in society during the perestroika period also affected the spiritual life of Soviet citizens. Freedom of speech, religion, conscience and publicity became available to the people, all that for many years was under the strictest ban of the state leadership.
Publicity
The policy of openness was demonstrated by the general secretary Central Committee of the CPSU M. Gorbachev at the initial stage of his reign. During a visit to Leningrad, without the consent of members of the Politburo, Gorbachev began to communicate directly with the people, raising topics that were discussed only in close circles of government members.
For the first time in the history of the USSR, the policies of the top leadership were openly communicated to the broad masses. By the end of 1985, state censorship was gradually weakening; critical materials in newspapers, magazines, radio and television were not subject to prohibition, and were sometimes encouraged by the authorities.
The Soviet people had the opportunity to openly express their dissatisfaction with the work of government agencies, including the KGB, local officials and senior party leadership. With the introduction of the glasnost policy, the collapse of the official Soviet ideology began.
Socialism in the eyes of the population was inextricably linked with democracy, and not with the old communist principles, which had significantly lost their relevance. Some officials made attempts to eliminate glasnost as a phenomenon threatening communism.
However, it turned out to be impossible to stop the emancipation of the people's consciousness. A New Look to the historical past. The sharp transition from “stagnation” led to some rethinking of Soviet history by the people.
Simultaneously with large-scale preparations for the celebration of the 70th anniversary of the Great October Revolution, scandalous publications about Stalinist repressions and carefully hidden facts of the Civil War are spreading throughout the state.
For the first time, the holiday in honor of the Bolsheviks coming to power was in jeopardy. During this period, a special commission was created under the Politburo to investigate the crimes of the Stalinist regime.
By mid-1988, Stalin's political opponents, who had become victims of the totalitarian machine of the Soviet leader N.I. Bukharin, L.B., were posthumously rehabilitated. Kamenev, A.I. Rykov, G.E. Zinoviev.
The Supreme Soviet of the USSR adopted a declaration in which the forced deportation of the peoples of the Soviet Union in the 40s was recognized as political repression. In 1990, M. Gorbachev personally announced the real number of victims of Bolshevik terror, which reached several tens of millions of people.
The shocked people of the USSR received such information with great pain and indignation - there could be no question of the further authority of the Communist Party.
Literature, television and press
During the period of perestroika, cultural figures who, for political reasons, began to gradually return to the USSR long years were in forced emigration. Soviet publishing houses began to publish works by previously banned authors en masse.
The works of A. Solzhenitsyn, M. Bulgakov, I. Severyanin, B. Pasternak, M. Bakhtin, as well as books of religious content, the Koran, Bible, and Torah, became available to the general public. Print media also enjoyed unprecedented popularity; circulations of non-political publications increased tenfold during the perestroika period.
Newspapers began to print letters from readers who came to the editorial office. This trend was started by a resident of Leningrad who wrote an article for the newspaper “Soviet Russia” in which she called on the people to defend Stalin’s honor and not betray communist ideas.
The response was thousands of letters in which Soviet people expressed open criticism of Stalinism. Television played a huge role in the development of spiritual life, on which foreign television programs and films began to be broadcast for the first time, opening up the Western world to Soviet people, which had been inaccessible for a long time.
Need help with your studies?
Previous topic: Economic reforms in 1985-1991: from a planned economy to a market economyNext topic: Reform of the political system of 85-91: personnel and multi-party system
Major changes that took place in the East in XIX c., could not but affect the spiritual life and culture of Eastern society.
One of the main changes in spiritual life eastern countries At this time, new ideas and values began to emerge that went beyond traditional ideas. This process began under the influence of the colonialists and was especially strengthened by modernization traditional society. The new model of development, which began to be established in the East, objectively required the emergence of a new person - an active personality, aware of his human dignity, free from inertia in thoughts and actions, valuing freedom.
The modernization movement of the national intelligentsia became a kind of “generator” of new ideas. In the colonies, it arose largely thanks to foreigners who, in an effort to expand their social base, began to create European-style schools and encouraged local youth to leave to study at European universities. A similar policy was also pursued in Japan after the Meiji Revolution, in the Ottoman Empire during the Tazimat years, and partly in China during the “self-strengthening” policy. Representatives of the modernization movement sought to overcome the backwardness of their countries by eliminating those negative phenomena of traditional society that hindered the movement of eastern countries along the path of progress. Modernizers considered one of their main tasks to be the dissemination in the minds of people of new ideals and principles of life, which were mainly borrowed from the West, but objectively met the needs of the forward movement of eastern countries.
The modernization movement was divided into two directions: religious and secular. The religious direction was represented by a reform movement, whose representatives sought to adapt religious doctrines to the new realities of eastern countries. Reformism affected mainly Hinduism and Islam. The beginning of the reform of Hinduism was laid by R. M. Roy and K. Sen, and in the second half XIX V. was developed in the works of Ramakrishna and S. Vivekananda. The largest reformers of Islam in XIX V. there were al-Afghani and M. Ik-bal. What the reformers had in common was the call to overcome outdated dogmas and traditions, condemnation of the obedience, inactivity and inequality of people. They emphasized the outstanding role of the human mind and human activity in transforming society, and put forward ideas of struggle for the dignity of the human person.
Enlightenment became the secular direction of the modernization movement. Its emergence is directly related to the cultural influence of the West, primarily with the ideas of the French enlighteners XVIII V. Initially, the central place in the activities of educators was occupied by the propaganda of the ideas of the human mind, the dignity of the individual, its active participation in public life. In the second half XIX V. these ideas were supplemented by the propaganda of the values of freedom, constitution, parliamentarism, and a call for the liquidation feudal relations and traditional political institutions. At the end XIX V. The ideas of the nation and fatherland came to the fore in the enlightenment of the East, and a call was made for a decisive struggle against the colonialists and for national liberation.
This rise of the national idea was also characteristic of reformism. For example, al-Afghani actively promoted the ideas of pan-Islamism, calling for the unification of all Muslims in the struggle for the liberation of the Islamic world from the colonialists, and for the creation of a single Muslim state built on the principle of a constitutional monarchy. In India, S. Vivekananda also spoke out against colonial oppression and called for a decisive struggle to change the existing order.
The activities of educators influenced not only philosophical thought, but also on cultural development generally. In the most developed eastern countries, educators established the publication of newspapers, translated the works of many Western authors into local languages, and contributed to the opening of new schools, for which they sometimes wrote textbooks themselves. An important role belongs to educators in the development of the national language and in the formation new literature. For example, in India, educators abandoned the use of dead Sanskrit and switched to the use of living languages (Bengali, Urdu, Hindi), in which they wrote a whole series of works that were new in form and content. In Arab countries, educators launched widespread propaganda of the Arabic language and history and laid the foundations of a new Arabic literature. It is no coincidence that the activities of the enlighteners coincided with the beginning of a cultural upsurge in the Arab world, called “Nahda” (renaissance).
In the second half XIX V. In all eastern countries, the question of the attitude towards Western achievements and Western culture as a whole has become one of the central places in cultural life. The emergence of this problem
consciousness, which gave rise to the desire to preserve the cultural identity of the East, to prevent the development in Eastern society of a number of negative phenomena inherent in the Western way of life (extreme selfishness and individualism, the cult of money, the priority of material values over spiritual ones).
In relation to this issue, three approaches have emerged among the national intelligentsia:
1) “Westerners” were sharply critical of Eastern traditions and believed that only the complete adoption of the Western way of life and Western culture would ensure progress for the peoples of the East;
2) conservatives believed that it was necessary to isolate themselves from the West or, in extreme cases, to partially borrow those of its achievements that are vitally necessary for Eastern society;
3) supporters of the organic approach advocated the creative combination of the best achievements of two civilizations in the life and culture of eastern countries.
“Westernism” in the East prevailed in the first half XIX c., when foreign penetration was just beginning. Of the eastern countries, it was most widespread in India, where it was supported by the colonial administration. In China, on the contrary, for a long time it prevailed conservative course, relying on the support of the feudal state. In addition, the emergence of “Westernism” was significantly restrained by the belief, developed over many centuries, that China is the leader of the entire world. Only during the First World War did widespread penetration of Western philosophy, a movement “for a new culture” arose, within which an attempt was made to move away from traditional ideas and cultural norms.
In general, back to the beginning XX V. The “Westernizing” trend is relegating to second place in most eastern countries. This is clearly seen in the example of Japan, which after the Meiji Revolution took the path of extensive borrowing from Western movements. IN 70
- 90-
e years XIX V. In Japanese society, a wide debate unfolded on the issue of attitudes towards Western culture. Ultimately, the victory was won by supporters of the preservation of cultural identity,
received the support of the state, which declared Shinto, the national Japanese religion, to be the state religion of Japan. Shinto has largely become a means of preserving the identity of Japanese society. It did not have a detailed doctrine, which made it possible to fill its ritual side with new content. Shinto introduced the ideas of the nation as a large family, the moral and ethical principles of Confucianism, the cult of ancestors, and the idea of the national uniqueness of the Japanese. The state obliged the entire population of the country to study Shinto and closely monitored that the priests did not deviate from the dogma developed by the government. As a result, Japan has become a unique country that has managed to organically combine the technical achievements of the West and its experience in organizing economic life with the traditional moral values and family and everyday principles existing in the country.
It should be borne in mind that all these new phenomena in the spiritual sphere, changes in consciousness affected the beginning XX V. only the educated part of Eastern society. The consciousness of the broad masses was still based on traditional values and standards. This clearly showed the national liberation movement of the beginning XX V.
At the same time, the West influenced not only social thought, but also the culture of eastern countries in general. This influence was especially evident in literature. Here, new themes, prompted by reality, gradually began to supplant traditional religious and mythological subjects. Many writers from Eastern countries turned to historical themes, trying to better understand the present and look into the future through history. In the literature of the East, traditional forms began to be overcome. New ones have appeared literary genres: short story, drama, new poetry and novel of the European type. Prominent writers - representatives of the new Eastern literature - were Lu Xun in China and R. Tagore in India - winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature (1913).
European influence also affected the architecture of eastern countries, where in the architecture of large forms (mainly for public purposes), the European style increasingly replaced the local one. In a number of countries, attempts have been made to combine Western canons and national traditions. However, in most cases such attempts were unsuccessful.
A more fruitful synthesis of traditional norms and European rules took place in painting, where Eastern techniques were gradually combined with European rules perspective and volume. Realistic approaches appeared in the works of some Eastern artists, but in general, realism in the visual arts of the East did not become widespread during this period.
At the same time, the formation of a new national art in the East took place in XIX V. So slow. Traditional canons generally retained a dominant position, especially in those types of art that were intended for the broad masses. In fact, the process of cultural renewal in the East was just beginning.
DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS
Rabindranath Thagor (1861 - 1941)
TO CIVILIZATION
Give us back the forest. Take your city, full of noise and smoky haze. Take your stone, iron, fallen trunks. Modern civilization! Soul Eater! Give us back shade and coolness in the sacred silence of the forest. These evening baths, the sunset light over the river, A herd of cows grazing, the quiet songs of the Vedas, Handfuls of grains, grass, clothes returned from the bark, A conversation about the great truths that we have always had in our souls, These days that we spent are immersed in thoughts. I don’t even need royal pleasures in your prison. I want freedom. I want to feel like I'm flying again. I want the strength to return to my heart again. I want to know that the shackles are broken, I want to break the chains. I want to feel the eternal trembling of the heart of the universe again.
(Rabindranath Tagore. Selected. M., 1987. P. 33).
HINDUSTAN
MOAN OF HINDUSTAN
I constantly hear, Since childhood, a quiet call has been drawing me to the West: There, the fate of India dances among funeral pyres...
The master and the slave agreed that
So that the country turns into a gambling house, -
Today it is from edge to edge -
One grave is solid. They put an end to the infamy and glory of past times. The legs of the former power were broken. To old dreams
and true to visions,
She lies in the shallow Jamuna, And her speech is barely audible: “New shadows have thickened, the sunset has faded, This is the last hour of a bygone century.”
(Rabindranath Tagore. Selected. M., 1987. P. 70
- 71).
SLOGANS OF THE “NEW CULTURE” MOVEMENT IN CHINA
(from an editorial article in the magazine “Xin Qingnian” (“New Youth”))
“In order to defend democracy, one cannot but fight against Confucianism, against its etiquette and rituals, against its concepts of honesty and chastity, against the old morality and old politics. In order to defend science, one cannot but fight against religion and old art. The struggle for democracy and science is impossible without a struggle against the old traditional school and against old literature" (Qu Qiubo. Journalism different years. M., 1979. P. 151).
ASSESSMENT OF THE MOVEMENT “FOR A NEW CULTURE” BY HISTORIANS
“The content of the movement “for a new culture” went far beyond the scope of the struggle in the field of culture. It was about the struggle for bourgeois-democratic transformations in the country, for bourgeois educational ideology, against the feudal ideology of Confucianism and medieval superstitions. Fierce debate took place around the main issues: political transformation and the democratic rights of the people; superstitions, prejudices, Confucianism and old dogmas; ideological emancipation of the people; personal freedom and individual development; reform Chinese language and the creation of new literature; a new worldview and scientific method of thinking, etc. Ideological struggle was conducted with representatives of the feudal-landlord ideology, with proteges of monarchical parties and militaristic cliques, representatives of the Buddhist and Taoist religions and Christian missionaries" ( New story China. M., 1972. P. 575).
FRAGMENT OF A PROSE POEM BY CHINESE WRITER LU XIN (1881 - 1936)
Such a fighter
“...Here he passes through the ranks of ethereal beings; everyone he meets nods to him... Above the heads of ethereal creatures flutter banners with loud titles embroidered on them: “philanthropist”, “scientist”, “writer”, “eldest in the family”, “young man”, “aesthete” ... Below are all kinds of robes with embroidered on them in beautiful words: “learning”, “morality”, “purity of the national spirit”, “will of the people”, “logic”, “public duty”, “civilization of the East”...
But he raises his spear.
He smiles, throws his spear and hits him right in the heart.
All of them, wilted, fall to the ground. But it turns out that these are only robes, underneath them there is nothing. The ethereal creatures managed to escape and are celebrating victory, for now he has become a criminal who has stabbed to death a philanthropist and others like him.
But he raises his spear...
Finally, he grows old and dies among the ethereal beings. Now he is no longer a fighter, but ethereal beings are winners.
Now no one hears the cry of war: great peace...
But he raises the spear" (Lu Xun. Selected. M., 1989. P. 343
- 344).
QUESTIONS
1. Can the emergence of new ideas and values be called a modernization of the spiritual life of the East?
2. What factors influenced changes in the spiritual life and culture of the countries of the East?
3. How natural was the emergence of religious reformation in the East?
4. Trace the evolution of the ideas of Eastern enlightenment. What explains it?
5. How have the approaches of the intelligentsia of Eastern countries changed to the question of their attitude towards Western culture?
6. What influence did the West have on the culture of the East?
7. What changes have occurred in XIX V. in the culture of eastern countries?
SPIRITUAL LIFE OF SOVIET SOCIETY DURING THE YEARS OF PERESTROIKA
Ankudinova Margarita Vladimirovna
3rd year student, Department of Historical Political Science
SFU
RF, Rostov-on-Don
E-mail:
Kravets Victoria Sergeevna
scientific supervisor, Ph.D. ist. Sciences, Associate Professor
SFU
RF, Rostov-on-Don
At the turn of the 80-90s of the XX century, a new ideology arose in the Soviet Union, which entailed many transformations in the political, economic and spiritual sphere. It was at this time that dramatic changes took place in Soviet society. Popularly this new thinking was called “Perestroika”. The reforms that appeared at this time were developed on behalf of Yu.V. Andropov, and in 1985 initiated by M.S. Gorbachev. The very turning point in the system of public consciousness occurred in January 1987, when at the plenum of the CPSU Central Committee, perestroika was declared as a new state ideology. What was fundamentally new was that, in fact, for the first time in Soviet history, the main focus was not on changes in the economy, but on transformations political system, which, ultimately, should have given a powerful impetus to the socio-economic and spiritual development society.
It was at the end of the 80s of the last century that numerous works of various spheres of culture and their authors, persecuted under Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev, became available to the general public. There is a emancipation of the situation in society, liberation from ideological dogmas, as well as a critical rethinking of the past and present.
After the plenum, a new concept of glasnost was formed. It is beginning to be viewed as a period when freedom of speech, open criticism of Stalinism, greater openness of activity in the leadership appeared, when previously closed archives, poems, films, and memoirs were published. Glasnost, so to speak, revolutionized and politicized Soviet man, expanding its possibilities for public analysis to newly available information.
The Iron Curtain has opened. Spiritual pluralism and well-known democratic freedoms are emerging from a long artificial oblivion. The richest culture of the 20th century, namely literature, began to gradually “return” silver age, works by a variety of artists whose work was previously prohibited for ideological and political reasons. A literally stream of “new” works, facts, documents, and evidence from different cultural periods of Russian history poured out onto contemporaries.
At this time, the rehabilitation of victims of repression takes place. A.I. returned from the USA. Solzhenitsyn with the publication of his previously banned novel “The Gulag Archipelago”. From the end of 1986 to the beginning of 1987, literary works that were not allowed to be published during the period of Brezhnev’s re-Stalinization began to be published (“Children of Arbat” by A.N. Rybakov about the fate of a repressed young man; “The Disappearance” by Yu). The works of domestic writers of the 20s and 30s that were banned for many years are published in mass editions: “Requiem” by A. Akhmatova, “We” by E. Zamyatin, “The Pit” and “Chevengur” by A. Platonov. The works of major Russian philosophers have returned to the domestic reader, revealing the origins and meaning of Russian communism, problems of identity Russian history. Among them is N.A. Berdyaev, V.S. Soloviev, V.V. Rozinov, P.A. Sorokin, G.P. Fedotov. The works of emigrants of the “third wave” (I.A. Brodsky, V.P. Nekrasov, V.P. Aksenov) were published, for which they were deprived of Soviet citizenship.
There is sharp criticism of writers who advocated radical changes in the country (G.Ya. Baklanov, S.P. Zalygin, A.N. Rybakov), and those who advocated the preservation of the traditional path also suffered (V. Rasputin, S. Mikhalkov)
Complementing the information gaps, the media began to print great amount materials, touching on hot topics of our time, stories of the past and how people lived outside the Iron Curtain. This made a significant contribution to the revolution of Soviet minds literary critics and publicists. The realization has come that the cause of all failures lies in the system of organization of society.
Literary works were published and Scientific research Western authors, revealing the entire essence and nature of the totalitarian state.
It is worth noting that cinema and theater were also not spared publicity. In the summer of 1986, the fifth congress of the USSR Cinematography Union took place in the Kremlin, which outlined new way development of cinema and brought dramatic changes. But it’s worth saying that cinema never became the starting point of new cinematic times, where no dark streaks would occur over the next decade and a half. It only slightly opened previously closed borders and gave a new vision to long-familiar things.
Previously banned films and new anti-totalitarian works began to be released. In 1986, the film “Repentance” by T. Abuladze was demonstrated, which showed that the cinematic community was ready to rethink important events in national history. The domestic audience was finally able to get acquainted with the works of A.A. Tarkovsky, A.S. Mikhalkov-Konchalovsky, A.Yu. Herman. Cinema was one of the first forms of art to encounter such a concept as commercialization, which became a new phenomenon that significantly influenced the content of all artistic creativity.
Plays were staged in the country's leading theaters, interpreting in a new way the events of the revolution that seemed well known to everyone. civil war. The studio movement developed widely. The theatrical experiments of M. Rozovsky (theater-studio “At the Nikitsky Gates”), S. Kurginyan (theater-studio “On the Boards”), V. Belyakovich (tetra-studio in the South-West) attracted the interest of contemporaries.
New popular television programs appeared, often broadcast live. The style of television in general has also changed significantly. The programs “Fifth Wheel”, “Before and After Midnight”, “Vzglyad” enjoyed great popularity among domestic viewers. The hosts of these television programs (V.K. Molchanov, S.L. Sholokhov, O.Yu. Vakulovsky, V.N. Listyev, A.M. Lyubimov, etc.) enjoyed extraordinary popularity and also became figures in Russian politics.
Interest in history grew. The so-called “historic boom” began to occur in the country. Between 1987 and 1991. newspapers and magazines begin to publish materials from “round tables” on historical topics, various “reflections” of historians and publicists. Simplified access to archival funds led to the publication of a mass of sensational documents that became available to the general public. A significant action was the removal of the veil of secrecy from many pages of the history of the CPSU. The report of N.S. is published for the first time. Khrushchev about Stalin’s personality cult. All these transformations made it possible to rehabilitate not only those who were consigned to oblivion, but also those who had recently been subjected to merciless criticism in the pages of the history textbooks of the CPSU. This is how F.F. “returned” to history. Raskolnikov, L.D. Trotsky, N.I. Bukharin, V.A. Antonov-Ovseenko, L.B. Kamenev, A.I. Rykov.
One of the important components of the cultural events of perestroika was the rejection of the aggressive nature of the state in the direction of atheism. The tradition of Christianity, interrupted in 1917, was revived. Theological schools and seminaries began to open, and previously destroyed churches were restored. Other faiths that historically existed in Russia were also revived.
All these events largely prepared Soviet society for the continuation of the rehabilitation of victims of political repression. But, despite the scale of all the changes, not all of these transformations in spiritual life were positive. Going beyond the framework of communist dogmatism acquired a new ideological direction, the so-called bourgeois-liberal. It is also worth noting that the release of information often led to confrontation of views and political battles, which had a significant impact on the sphere of culture, social sciences and art, which negatively affected the social atmosphere.
Bibliography:
- History of Russia XX - beginning of the XXI century / A.S. Barsenkov, A.I. Vdovin, S.V. Voronkova; edited by L.V. Milova. - M.: Eksmo, 2006. - 960 p.
- Culturology: Tutorial/ Ed. Prof. G.V. Dracha. - M.: Alfa-M, 2003. - 432 p.
- Fifth Congress of the USSR Investigative Committee at the Kremlin Palace of Congresses // OLD.RUSSIANCINEMA.RU: Encyclopedia of Russian Cinema of the USSR/CIS. 2005. [Electronic resource] - Access mode. - URL: http://old.russiancinema.ru/template.php?dept_id=3&e_dept_id=5&e_chrdept_id=2&e_chr_id=30&chr_year=1986 (access date: 09.15.2015).
Proclaimed M.S. Gorbachev, the principle of glasnost created the conditions for greater openness in decision-making and for an objective rethinking of the past (this was seen as continuity with the first years of the “thaw”). But the main goal of the new leadership of the CPSU was to create conditions for the renewal of socialism. It is no coincidence that the slogan “More glasnost, more socialism!” was put forward. and the no less eloquent “We need publicity like air!” Glasnost implied a greater variety of topics and approaches, a more lively style of presenting material in the media. It did not amount to an affirmation of the principle of freedom of speech and the possibility of unhindered and free expression of opinions. The implementation of this principle presupposes the existence of appropriate legal and political institutions, which in the Soviet Union in the mid-1980s. did not have.
The focus of public attention in the first years of perestroika was journalism. It was this genre of the printed word that could react most sharply and quickly to the problems that worried society. In 1987-1988 The most pressing topics have already been widely discussed in the press, and controversial points of view have been put forward about the country's development paths.
New authoritative authors from among prominent economists, sociologists, journalists and historians found themselves at the epicenter of attention. The popularity of printed publications that published stunning articles about failures in the economy and social policy - Moskovskie Novosti, Ogonyok, Argumenty i Fakty, Literaturnaya Gazeta - grew to an incredible level. A series of articles about the past and present and about the prospects of the Soviet experience (I.I. Klyamkina “Which Street Leads to the Temple?”, N.P. Shmeleva “Advances and Debts”, V.I. Selyunin and G.N. Khanina “Evil figure”, etc.) Yu.N. Afanasyev organized historical and political readings “The Social Memory of Humanity” in the spring of 1987; they had a response far beyond the boundaries of the Moscow Historical and Archival Institute, which he headed. Particularly popular were collections that published journalistic articles under one cover; they were read like a fascinating novel. In 1988, the collection “No Other is Given” was published in a circulation of 50 thousand copies and immediately became a “shortage”. Articles by its authors (Yu.N. Afanasyev, T.I. Zaslavskaya, A.D. Sakharov, A.A. Nuikin, V.I. Selyunin, Yu.F. Karyakin, G.G. Vodolazov, etc. ) - representatives of the intelligentsia, known for their public position, were united by a passionate and uncompromising call for the democratization of Soviet society. Every article conveyed a desire for change. The press’s “finest hour” was 1989. The circulation of printed publications reached an unprecedented level: the weekly “Arguments and Facts” had a circulation of 30 million copies (this absolute record among weeklies was included in the Guinness Book of Records), the newspaper “Trud” - 20 million, “Pravda” - 10 million.
A huge audience was gathered by live broadcasts from meetings of the Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR (1989-1990); at work, people did not turn off their radios and took portable televisions from home. The conviction emerged that it was here, at the congress, in the confrontation of positions and points of view, that the fate of the country was being decided. Television began to use the technique of reporting from the scene and live broadcasting; this was a revolutionary step in covering what was happening. “Live talking” programs were born - round tables, teleconferences, discussions in the studio, etc. Without exaggeration, the nationwide popularity of journalistic and information programs (“The View”, “Before and After Midnight”, “The Fifth Wheel”, “600 Seconds” ") was determined not only by the need for information, but also by the desire of people to be in the center of what is happening. Young TV presenters proved by their example that freedom of speech is emerging in the country and free debate around the issues that concern people is possible. (True, more than once during the years of perestroika, TV management tried to return to the old practice of pre-recording programs.)
The most famous artistic films about modernity, without embellishment and false pathos, told about the life of the younger generation (“Little Vera”, directed by V. Pichul, “Assa”, directed by S. Solovyov, both appeared on the screen in 1988). “Forbidden” topics have essentially disappeared from the press. The names of N.I. have returned to history. Bukharin, L.D. Trotsky, L.B. Kameneva, G.E. Zinoviev and many other repressed political figures. Never-published party documents were made public, and declassification of archives began. Contemporary art also sought answers to questions that tormented people. Film directed by T.E. Abuladze’s “Repentance” (1986) - a parable about universal evil, embodied in the recognizable image of a dictator, without exaggeration, shocked society. At the end of the picture, an aphorism was heard that became the leitmotif of perestroika: “Why a road if it doesn’t lead to a temple?” Problems of a person’s moral choice were the focus of two masterpieces of Russian cinema with different themes - the film adaptation of the story by M.A. Bulgakov’s “Heart of a Dog” (dir. V. Bortko, 1988) and “Cold Summer of ’53” (dir. A. Proshkin, 1987). Those films also appeared at the box office that were previously not allowed to appear on the screen by censorship or were released with huge bills: A.Yu. Germana, A.A. Tarkovsky, K.P. Muratova, S.I. Parajanov. The strongest impression was made by the painting by A.Ya. Askoldov's "Commissar" is a film of high tragic pathos.
At the turn of the 1990s. There was a period of rapid growth in the historical self-awareness of the nation and the peak of social activity. Changes in economic and political life became a reality, people were seized by the desire to prevent the reversibility of changes. However, there was no consensus on the issue of priorities, mechanisms and pace of change. Supporters of the radicalization of the political course and the consistent implementation of democratic reforms were grouped around the “perestroika” press. They enjoyed broad support from public opinion that took shape in the first years of perestroika.
With their moral and civic position, people like D.S. Likhachev and A.D. Sakharov, had a huge impact on the spiritual climate in the country. Their activities became a moral guideline for many in an era when the usual ideas about the country and the world around them began to collapse.
During the years of perestroika, numerous public initiatives independent of the state were born. The so-called informals (i.e., activists not organized by the state) gathered under the “roof” of scientific institutes, universities and such well-known public (in fact, state) organizations as the Soviet Peace Committee. Unlike previous times, groups of public initiatives were created “from below” by people of very different views and ideological positions, all united by the willingness to personally participate in achieving radical changes for the better in the country.
The flow of Soviet people traveling abroad also increased sharply, and mainly not through tourism, but as part of public initiatives (“people’s diplomacy”, “children’s diplomacy”, family exchanges).
Works previously prohibited from publication in the USSR began to return to the reader. In the “New World”, 30 years after the award of B.L. Pasternak received the Nobel Prize in Literature for the novel Doctor Zhivago.
In 1990, the USSR Law “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations” was adopted, it guaranteed the right of citizens to profess any religion (or not to profess any) and the equality of religions and faiths before the law, enshrined the right religious organizations to participate in public life. Recognition of significance Orthodox tradition in the spiritual life of the country was the appearance of a new public holiday on the calendar - the Nativity of Christ (for the first time on January 7, 1991). But the process of revival of religious life was already in full swing by that time. The number of people wishing to be baptized grew rapidly at the turn of the 1990s. The level of people's religiosity has noticeably increased. There were not enough clergymen, the first centers of religious education were opened. The first religious literature accessible to the mass reader began to appear, parishes were registered and churches were opened.
Soon after the arrival of M.S. Gorbachev's leadership of the country announced emergency measures to limit alcohol consumption. The number of retail outlets selling alcoholic beverages sharply decreased, “alcohol-free weddings” were widely promoted in the press, and plantations of elite grape varieties in the south of the country were destroyed. As a result, the shadow trade in alcohol and moonshine increased sharply.