Ethnosocial memory as a form of preservation and transmission of national identity. Historical memory. Problems of historical memory of Russia Stages of development of historical memory
Mother tongue is much more than a means of communication.
It is the basis of physical health, mental abilities, correct worldview, and success in life.
And endless reforms of the Russian language are destroying this foundation of national security.
Such surprising conclusions were reached by a famous specialist in the history of language, chief researcher of the Central state library(formerly "Leninka"), Doctor of Philology, Professor Tatiana MIRONOVA.
“In my scientific works and public lectures, I prove,” says Tatyana Leonidovna, “that every person has a linguistic genetic memory.”
And a child - he doesn’t just grab words out of thin air, he seems to remember them.
All three of my children at a certain age, somewhere from two to three years old, “extracted” ancient language forms from themselves.
For example, they talked with the “yats” for a month and a half or two. (I heard this well, because I am a language historian.) That is, they seemed to be recalling the ancient language. The most mysterious thing was where the child picked up words that he had never heard anywhere: they are not in the speech of his parents, in kindergarten he doesn’t walk, we don’t turn on the TV or radio for him. And suddenly - a whole stream of words comes out of him, which he seemed to remember.
- Who remembered them?
- The ancestors remembered. The linguistic genetic memory of each person contains the basic concepts of self-awareness of previous generations.
Let's start with the main thing: IN THE GENETIC CODE OF A RUSSIAN PERSON THERE IS A KEY CONCEPT “CONSCIENCE”.
It is embedded in us by the thousand-year-old Orthodox consciousness and the entire linguistic culture of the Russian people.
The same can be said about other concepts of our self-awareness. When they are “remembered,” supported, developed, a person lives according to the laws of his ancestors, fulfills his destiny on earth and passes on his experience to his descendants in the form of wave hereditary memory.
And vice versa, if he tries to drown out this memory with a way of life that is unnatural for a Russian person, then his abilities are curtailed, HE BEGINS TO DEGRADATE, becomes a burden to himself and others, WORSE THE HERIDATED PROGRAMS OF HIS KIND.
Now this danger threatens many compatriots.
After all, in Russia some wise men through means mass media they are trying to deprive the people of the fundamental concepts that are stored in the memory of their ancestors, thereby dooming them to degeneration and assimilation.
The concepts of “CONSCIENCE”, “FEAT”, “SACRIFICE”, “MINISTRY” and so on were removed from the media.
As a result, the older generation found itself in a foreign language environment, in a foreign society. People of this generation live in constant conflict with the surrounding reality and with themselves: one thing is inherent in them, but something completely different is happening around them, to which they cannot adapt.
No less stressful is the fact that they do not recognize themselves in their descendants. Such conflict undermines people's health, provokes illness and premature death.
Professor Gundarov showed this very convincingly in his works: THE MAIN REASON FOR THE EXTINCTION OF OUR PEOPLE IS NOT PHYSICAL CONSUMPTION, BUT A MORAL CRISIS.
“But this conflict is also experienced by people of the younger generation. After all, their genetic memory contains concepts that make up the spiritual core of our people, but THIS MEMORY OF THE ANCESTORS IS SUPPRESSED BY THE MEANS OF MASS DECEPTION.
- Absolutely right. You cannot betray your ancestors with impunity: this leads to drug addiction, alcoholism, and suicide.
Moreover, research by ethnopsychologists has shown that an alien environment has a depressing effect on all the child’s abilities, even on physiological development.
If, for example, a ten-year-old Chinese child is placed in a Russian environment, he will become stupider and get sick more often. And vice versa, if a Russian child is placed in a Chinese environment, then he will wither there.
- And here, right in their homeland, Russian children are immersed in an English-speaking environment: almost all the songs on radio and television are in English, most of the media promote American values. They started teaching at school English language from first grade. By adopting a foreign culture, are young people dooming themselves to degeneration?
- This phenomenon is new and not fully studied. But it seems that the ethnopsychologists are right.
That is, a foreign environment is a dangerous thing. And not only for the child.
If we thoroughly studied the fruits of upbringing in exile, we would discover a lot of instructive things.
After all, it is known that in the first generation of Russian emigrants there were many talented and even brilliant people who glorified their names. But these were people who were formed in Russia, who preserved the faith and traditions of their ancestors abroad.
And in the second and third generations, who have adopted a foreign culture and forgotten their own, there are very few famous people. It is clear that the race of Russian emigrants is degrading and, as it were, dissolving into another ethnic group.
- It turns out that BETRAYAL TO FAITH, TRADITIONS, AND THE MEMORY OF AN ANCESTORS INEVITABLY MAKES A PERSON STUPID, SICK, COWWIND, AND TURN HIM INTO A NUMBER? And vice versa, is following the behests of ancestors good for health, mind and soul?
- This has been known for thousands of years.
THIS IS THE BASIS OF ANY NATIONALISM: HONOR YOUR PARENTS, WHO HONORED THEIR OWN, AND SO ON - THEN YOU WILL HAVE ALL THE BENEFIT, INCLUDING HEALTH.
Photo by Reuters
From the story of a front-line soldier: “When you had to attack at night in order not to get lost from the direction, they lit fires behind us.”
Discussion of the topic requires answering a number of questions. What is the memory of a people as opposed to the memory of an individual? What is a people and how is its memory formed? What is its role in creating the image of the desired future?
The answer to the first question is usually based on the idea accepted in psychology, according to which an individual’s memory is his ability to retain perceptions and ideas after the moment of experience, as well as to be their repository. And if we accept the definition of a people as a set of individuals, then we need to understand how a collective memory is formed from a set of individuals.
From the above definition of memory, its central place in the life of both the individual and the people is obvious, and it is also clear that without the assistance of memory in the process of thinking, we cannot go beyond the objects directly given to us, as well as construct images of the desired future. In connection with the problem of longevity, we can talk about the indefinite preservation of the content of the historical memory of the people. However, maintaining it in “working condition” requires the efforts of the individual, society or government.
The term "people" can be interpreted in several aspects. In ethnic, the simplest terms, a socio-biological community of people is called a people. The cultural aspect implies the existence of people in a community in which it is customary to be guided by culturally developed and recognized meanings and values, patterns of behavior and habits. In this case, the people are spoken of as a cultural community, for example, superior to others in “civilization” - including quality of life, degree of education, traditions and behavioral patterns, education, etc. In the case when the people or government consider themselves as a political unity, as citizens, they speak of a nation.
Individual self-awareness (as opposed to collective consciousness) has its sources from personal knowledge and personal experience. Both become memory over time. Individual memory as part of a person’s self-awareness is always subjective, primarily due to the initially unique qualitative characteristics of people. In addition, all together and each individually people live in the world of culture and are involved in it to varying degrees. And here lies the cardinal question: how, on the basis of the individually diverse (variable), does that “uniformity” (invariant) arise, which we call collective memory?
The process of creating collective memory occurs both spontaneously and purposefully. In the case of spontaneity, the mutual “adjustment” and leveling of the memory of many individuals occurs due to the existence of people in the field of culture as part of communities, which presupposes their free dialogue, mutual influence on each other, as a result of which collective memory is developed.
But there is another way to create collective memory, when individual memory is purposefully transformed - for example, by the authorities. This is a more complex case: here freedom and chance are relegated to the background, and, on the contrary, a goal is set in accordance with which they try to give the content of collective memory a strictly defined (sometimes even contradictory) content.
Let us turn to the concept of “power”. There are many definitions of it. But if we highlight what they have in common, then to rule means to make decisions for another. In the case of the formation of collective memory, the government may seek to change the memory of many individuals so that they become the owners of a constructed collective memory with a unified content that best suits the goals of the government. Moreover, goals do not necessarily have to be selfish. They can be altruistic and good. However, unlike the process of free memory formation, in this case the scope of freedom is narrowed or even abolished altogether. What difficulties does the government encounter in this case?
First of all, this is the original (biological) diversity of people, which affects the content of their memory. Further, when it comes to the emergence of personal memory on the basis of individual experience, people always deal with a part of some common object (case) and, with a reasonable approach, are aware of partial knowledge and, accordingly, the partiality of their memory. They are also ready to adjust their individual perceptions and ideas, in order to give personal experience a holistic and coherent, collective character. But people also, importantly, have the right and expect this to happen of their own free will and through free participation.
At the same time, in the process of transforming individual memory into collective memory, individuals not only have a readiness to connect parts into a whole, but they are also included in a discussion and competitive process that is opposite in nature. Each individual desires the most complete acceptance of his own private and, possibly, greater adjustment (levelling) of someone else’s. This is due to the fact that people are not guided solely by individual perceptions or freely accepted leveling collective influences. Through upbringing and education they are immersed in the world of culture, in the world of meanings and values. The meanings and values of culture change the perceptions and ideas through which an individual receives personal experience. And they also act as a support that prevents an individual from adjusting his personal experience (personal memory) under the influence of the “averaging” action of other individuals in the process of developing an integral collective memory. That is, in the case of free coordination among themselves of their individual memory, people rely on their cultural potential and compete with its help.
It is this natural readiness to harmonize individual parts for the sake of the whole that power uses when it sets the goal of creating a popular memory that is pleasing (convenient) to it. Power, as a group of managing individuals who intend to make decisions for others, strives to give this process a character consistent with its own interests. Carrying out the work of preserving its imperious status quo with the help of memory, the authorities go further, also solving the problem of developing a common image of the desired future for the community.
Pursuing its goals in the formation of people's memory, the government is making efforts to work in several directions. First of all, it needs to change that collective folk memory, which contains knowledge about past culture. In this memory, it is necessary to either replace the content (perhaps even partially destroying it), or give new content to individual meanings and values existing in the culture, or shift the emphasis, or, finally, do it all together.
As an example of a partial change in folk memory through a change in cultural meaning, I will cite the case of “reformatting” the image of a famous character in the novel A.S. Pushkin " Captain's daughter» nobleman Shvabrin. As we remember, when the fortress was captured by the rebels, this officer betrayed his oath and went over to Pugachev’s side. For Pushkin, Shvabrin is a traitor. But in Stalinist Russia his behavior was given a different interpretation. It was interpreted as the desire of the best part of the Russian aristocracy to support the people who rebelled against the autocracy. Thus, one famous literary critic noted that “in the image of a rebellious aristocratic officer - probably not without an analogy with the heroes of December 14 - Pushkin wanted to substantiate his cherished thoughts about the proximity of the best Russian people not to the imperial throne, but to the masses of the people.”
Often, when creating the popular memory it needs, the government needs to change people’s individual perceptions and ideas, individual memory. Let us remember the story of the remake of the famous novel by Alexander Fadeev “The Young Guard”. Having become acquainted with real events, as they appeared in the stories of living witnesses of the Donbass underground, the writer created the first version of the novel. However, it did not satisfy the then party leadership, and Fadeev, for the sake of the task at hand, had to remake the novel, introducing into it the party leadership of the Young Guards that did not exist in reality. Unable to withstand the pressure of the power millstones, the writer said in his suicide letter that he could no longer live his former life and that he did not trust people in power, “for one can expect even worse from them than from the satrap Stalin. He was at least educated, but these were ignoramuses. My life, as a writer, loses all meaning, and with great joy, as a deliverance from this vile existence, where meanness, lies and slander fall upon you, I am leaving this life.”
Through two procedures - changing cultural meanings and manipulating individual memory - the government creates an official history that suits itself and takes the next step towards achieving the main goal - reformatting the consciousness of the people. And not only the current one, but, more importantly, the next generations. This problem is solved in the commemoration procedure. Commemoration is a way of consolidating an old community on new foundations or even creating a new one, including the subordination of the people to power based on its needs and objectives, for which new versions (interpretations) of past events, images, and personalities are used. Such is the general outline technology of power manipulation of the historical memory of the people.
Powerful manipulation of people's memory is one of the modern forms slavery: after all, a person is deprived of the right to make his own decisions, to lead himself. This is a crime against freedom and morality.
However, the authorities do not always need to overcome the resistance of the people. Sometimes people accept her willfulness of their own free will. In this case, we are dealing not only with governmental violence, but also with the individuals’ own immaturity. Immanuel Kant noticed this when he said that only with the help of enlightenment does a person emerge from the state of minority in which he finds himself through his own fault. “Minority is the inability to use one's reason without the guidance of someone else. A self-inflicted minority is one the cause of which is not a lack of judgment, but a lack of determination and courage to use it without the guidance of someone else. Sapere aude! – have the courage to use your own mind! - this is, therefore, the motto of the Enlightenment.
Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why so many people, whom nature has long since freed from the guidance of others (naturaliter maiorennes), still willingly remain minors for the rest of their lives; It is for these same reasons that others so easily assume the right to be their guardians.”
In the centuries since Kant, this has become clear. Not only education - the starting point of citizenship - is a condition for a person to emerge from the state of minority. It must necessarily be accompanied by enlightened civic action.
In the context of what has been said, it is natural to think about the real situation in Russia. The creation of a people with a “new” consciousness and, accordingly, with a new collective memory is one of the long-standing and even traditional tasks solved in our country by legitimate autocratic power, by those who intend to seize it or actually established it. At the beginning of the 19th century, during the reign of Nicholas I, they tried to transform the consciousness of the people in accordance with the formula “Autocracy. Orthodoxy. Nationality." For this purpose, philosophy, the main teacher of man in freedom of thought, was expelled from universities, in particular. The mouths of the brave souls who tried to speak were stuffed with censorship gags. Pyotr Chaadaev, the author of Philosophical Letters, was declared crazy; Pushkin’s works were personally reviewed by the emperor. At the end of the 19th century, commoners and revolutionary democrats predicted and actually worked to develop the consciousness of “new people”, by whom the high values of culture were vulgarized or discarded. People “from the underground” flocked to the forefront of life, pushing aside the touching “little people” who had previously displaced the best of the nobles - people of honor and dignity. The Soviet government then worked hard to create the “communist man.” However, even she failed to unite Makar Nagulnov and Stepan Kopenkin into a national whole. Does not shy away from such activities and modern power. The range of its actions is wide: from attempts at “moral” correction of domestic classical literature through the elimination of the “depraved” Katerina Kabanova and Anna Karenina from school courses to the idea of dividing highly professional academic institutions into temporary creative teams.
What is common in attempts of this kind is the adaptation of culture to the momentary mercantile or status goals of power; ignoring the highest social goals - improving the quality of life and the quality of the person himself; absolutization of the role of the administrator-bureaucrat in the improvement of man; neglect and reduction to zero of personal freedom and self-organization of individuals.
Embedded in context cultural development the memory of the people is the foundation of the desired future. First of all, this applies to spiritual culture as a complexly organized set of meanings, values, ideas and attitudes developed and assimilated by members of the community. It is formed in general history and is passed on from generation to generation through the upbringing of children, the education system, religious practices, the work of the media, and in everyday relationships between people.
In transitional periods of development (this is exactly what our society is going through), it is necessary to understand that not only the state, but also the citizens themselves, recognizing the imperfections of socio-political, economic and cultural life, are called upon to tune in to positive changes. It is important to approach reality not in an aggressively negative way, but creatively and constructively, focusing not so much on the question “Who is to blame?”, but on the question “What did we do wrong and how can we redo the wrong thing?” The living collective memory of the people helps to quickly find the necessary images of the desired future.
The situation with culture and associated folk memory in Russia is specific in comparison with other countries. Indeed, in themselves they represent enormous wealth that would help to inspire and help in building a better tomorrow for more than one nation. However, for many, due to negligence, laziness and lack of curiosity, this gold reserve, like the fabulous city of Kitezh, remains invisible. We are also hindered by our innate self-confidence and complacency, which are greater the less we are involved in high cultural models. As a result, society in a vicious circle reproduces an archaic, extremely centralized, corrupt system of government and public life, and the memory of the people easily becomes the subject of selfish manipulation. Today the past has become a field of intellectual struggle. And often they try to solve the problem either by forcibly imposing the “only true” understanding of history, or by avoiding answering questions that supposedly “traumatize” the public consciousness.
Such options for the formation of people's memory are not only flawed, but also dangerous. And not only because it is still impossible to leave pressing questions unanswered for a long time. What is more dangerous is the cultural degradation of the people, since subterfuge and manipulation are impossible without taking public consciousness beyond the boundaries of culture, without transforming the mass consciousness of the people into barbaric consciousness, in which we have true knowledge and are always right “we are heroes”, and falsifiers and liars “they are villains” .
Work to activate the values and meanings contained in Russian culture and demanded by modern times should be considered as the most important technology for the creative construction of people's memory, an honest understanding of the present, and the formation of realistic and responsible ideas about the desired future. And this work can only be accomplished through the joint efforts of the active part of the thinking people and the authorities who are equally capable of thinking.
RESOLUTION OF THE ACADEMIC COUNCIL OF THE INSTITUTE OF PHILOSOPHY RAS
dated 05.12.15 based on the results of discussion of draft documents
“About the program of fundamental scientific research...”; “Plan for the structuring of scientific organizations”; “On approval of methodological recommendations for the distribution of subsidies”
Having discussed the texts of these draft documents, the Academic Council of the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences believes that they are aimed at a radical change in the organization of science and are unacceptable for two main reasons. Firstly, it is assumed that now the tasks of scientists will be assigned by a bureaucratic body not directly related to science. What to research and what discoveries to make in the next year and in the next five years for physicists, chemists, biologists, what sociologists, psychologists, philosophers should do, should now be decided not by scientists, but by officials. Secondly, this is the personnel composition. According to the documents, the bureaucratic contracting body representing the state will recruit leading scientists every five years on the basis of purely formal, scientometric criteria that have nothing to do with the preservation of scientific schools or the creation of growth points and breakthrough areas in science.
Procedurally, the draft of the new Basic Scientific Research Program (PFNR) was presented in violation of current legislation: Federal Law No. 253 “On Russian Academy sciences...", according to Art. 17 which the draft of such a Program should be presented by the Russian Academy of Sciences, and not by the ministry. The proposed structuring plan was created for the PFNI project, which has not yet been approved and, moreover, contradicts the approved and currently operating Program of Basic Scientific Research state academies Sciences for 2013–2020.
The proposed changes, as stated by the authors of the document, are being implemented “in order to develop interdisciplinary scientific research.” However, the documents do not have a clear idea of the nature of interdisciplinary research and their place in the system of scientific organization. Interdisciplinary research does not acquire the status of a new discipline, does not imply the formation of corresponding “interdisciplinary specialists” and exists within the framework of special forms of organization that do not cancel or duplicate existing scientific and organizational forms in which the development of scientific disciplines occurs.
The new version of the PFNI and methodological recommendations for the distribution of subsidies claim to fundamentally change the management system of fundamental science in the country by eliminating scientific self-government and ignoring scientific and disciplinary competencies. It is envisaged to create a new bureaucratic body with broad powers - a coordinating council of the fundamental research program, which will determine priority directions for the development of science, approve the rubricator, the volume of allocations for the implementation of promising projects, etc. In paragraph “c” of § 2 ch. VIII Program directly states that the topics of scientific projects included in the state assignment will be determined “directly by managers of budget funds based on significant tasks of socio-economic development.”
The content of the Program is presented formally, in the form of a rubric of areas and areas of available (modern) knowledge, but not key problems requiring research. Thus, in Appendix No. 1 (Rubricator), philosophy is presented by an arbitrary set of areas and areas of knowledge that do not reflect the entire spectrum of priority fundamental research in the field of philosophy and, in some cases, are poorly formulated. In particular, the listing “philosophy in the socio-cultural and spiritual space of Russia, logic and philosophical languages, philosophical problems of interdisciplinary research, issues of social philosophy, philosophy of religions, history of philosophy" demonstrates a purely formal approach to the formation of a rubricator, while in 2014, in a number of areas of knowledge, new ones were proposed, adapted to modern research rubricators. These rubrics underwent expert and public discussion, and were adopted in detailed and short versions. In this case, the rubricator proposed in the PFNI project completely excludes such important areas of research in the field of philosophy as epistemology, philosophy of science and technology, ethics, aesthetics, political philosophy, complex problems of the study of man, etc. By the way, without taking into account the results of these areas, it is impossible to qualifiedly determine the main priorities in the philosophical and humanitarian sphere.
We agree with the assessment of the RAS trade union, according to which the transition to a new system of forming state assignments according to the methodology recommended by the Ministry of Education and Science will lead to a reduction in the number of researchers by approximately 3–4 times (or to a hidden reduction - the transfer of employees to part-time work): within government tasks will be provided wages no more than 30% of employees. Paragraph 7 of the draft guidelines establishes that “the amount of financial support for leading researchers should be at least 15% of the total subsidy,” but this percentage has no rational justification.
Within the framework of the “Structuring Plan” project, as a “new look for the network of scientific organizations”, instead of generally understandable institutions, poorly distinguishable “centers” are being introduced - national, federal, regional, thematic, as well as research and scientific. For socio-humanitarian knowledge, ambiguous structures have been proposed - “higher schools”. Firstly, we believe that it is categorically wrong to contrast the socio-humanitarian sciences with other types of fundamental research that are carried out within the framework of the natural and technical sciences. Secondly, we believe that the current system of academic institutions has not outlived its usefulness; moreover, it can and should play a decisive role in the modernization of domestic science.
Noting the fundamental shortcomings of the documents presented for discussion and speaking out against their adoption, the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences supports common-sense ideas about the need to develop a network organization of science. RAS institutes actually play the role of coordinators, network hubs in established, constantly developing and restructuring network relations in the cultural and humanitarian field. No network is possible without support points that play the role of network nodes. This role must be maintained, supported and strengthened in the light of the ideas and requirements of the documents presented for discussion. It is and only existing academic institutions with appropriate internal reorganization that can successfully play the role of such nodes. This follows from the gigantic personnel potential that they have accumulated and is confirmed by all recognized ratings and monitoring of publication activity. They are able to organize - and in fact have been doing this for a long time - scientific research at all levels, from the highest (world) academic level to the level of popularization of science; play the role of a dessiminator (network distributor) of experience and knowledge through a wide network of horizontal connections with universities and other academic institutions; Conduct extensive popularization work through lectures and other types of networking with a wide audience.
It is quite obvious that the implementation of the measures proposed in the documents will not only not bring benefit to Russian science, the state and society, but will have extremely detrimental social and cultural consequences, and will seriously and permanently disorganize the work of academic institutions. The proposed changes are aimed at strengthening centralization and bureaucratic control where autonomy, self-government and minimizing administrative costs are required. The time has come to abandon administrative-command methods in science management and fundamentally change the very style of communication with scientists.
The resolution was adopted unanimously at a meeting of the academic council on May 12, 2015.Zh.T. Toshchenko
HISTORICAL CONSCIOUSNESSAND HISTORICAL MEMORY.
ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT STATE
Zh.T. Toshchenko
Toshchenko Zhan Terentievich- Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor,
editor-in-chief of the journal "Sociological Research", head. Department of Theory and History of Sociology of the Russian State University for the Humanities.
The article offered to the reader is the fruit of reflection on the results of sociological research conducted in Russia in the late 80s and 90s, which revealed previously unknown information about a special - historical - cross-section of public consciousness and some forms of its manifestation. The point is that among the numerous problems that began to worry the population of our country, a specific form of social consciousness and behavior of people, covering the knowledge, understanding and attitude of people towards the historical past, its relationship with the realities of today and its possible reflection in future. A more detailed consideration of this phenomenon made it possible to form an idea of historical consciousness, of historical memory, which turned out to be very stable characteristics of people’s way of life and which largely determined their intentions and moods, indirectly exerting a very powerful influence on the nature and methods of solving social problems. However, in fairness, it should be noted that in the 80-90s, during the years of intensive development of sociology and its analysis of many aspects of social existence, data on the state and problems of historical consciousness were recorded casually, incidentally and taken into account insofar as they could not be ignored when characterizing political and ethnosocial processes: even with episodic fragmentary data, they helped to clarify the essence of the changes taking place in society.
It was during these years that sociologists were faced with the need to interpret such a phenomenon of social consciousness as historical memory. As a result of a thorough, step by step, study of its various aspects and forms of manifestation, this concept began to be taken into account more purposefully, in more detail, and gradually received both theoretical justification and empirical interpretation. On this basis, the first experiments in independent sociological analysis of historical consciousness, its contradictory, specific essence, as well as the peculiarities of the functioning of historical knowledge of both the population and specialist historians, including future ones, appeared. students.
WHAT IS HISTORICAL CONSCIOUSNESS AND HISTORICAL MEMORY
If we characterize the essence and content of historical consciousness, we can say that it is a set of ideas, views, perceptions, feelings, moods that reflect the perception and assessment of the past in all its diversity, inherent and characteristic both for society as a whole and for various socio-demographic, socio-professional and ethno-social groups, as well as individuals.
In sociology, unlike philosophy, it is not the theoretical and everyday level of social consciousness that is studied, but the actually functioning consciousness expressed in the positions of specific people. Since sociologists turn to people themselves for information, they are faced with the fact that each individual object of scientific research - a person, group, layer, cohort - represents a very bizarre combination of some scientific and everyday (everyday) ideas about history in general, the history of Russia , the history of his people, as well as the history of his city, village, and sometimes his family. Especially often, significant historical events concerning the country, social strata and groups become the object of close attention. individual, some problems in the life of the people.
Historical consciousness as if “spilled”, covers both important and random events, absorbs both systematized information, mainly through the education system, and disordered information (through the media, fiction), the orientation towards which is determined by the special interests of the individual. A significant role in the functioning of historical consciousness is played by random information, often mediated by the culture of the people around a person, family, as well as, to a certain extent, traditions and customs, which also carry certain ideas about the life of a people, country, state.
As for historical memory, it is a certain focused consciousness that reflects the special significance and relevance of information about the past in close connection with the present and future. Historical memory is essentially an expression of the process of organizing, preserving and reproducing the past experience of a people, country, state for its possible use in people’s activities or for returning its influence to the sphere of public consciousness.
With this approach to historical memory, I would like to draw attention to the fact that historical memory is not only actualized, but also selective - it often emphasizes certain historical events, ignoring others. An attempt to find out why this happens allows us to assert that actualization and selectivity are primarily related to the significance of historical knowledge and historical experience for modern times, for currently occurring events and processes and their possible impact on the future. In this situation, historical memory is often personified, and through the assessment of the activities of specific historical figures, impressions, judgments, and opinions are formed about what is of particular value for the consciousness and behavior of a person in a given period of time.
Historical memory, despite a certain incompleteness, still has the amazing feature of retaining in the minds of people the main historical events of the past, right up to the transformation of historical knowledge into various forms of ideological perception of past experience, its recording in legends, fairy tales, traditions.
And, finally, it should be noted that this feature of historical memory occurs when in people’s minds there is hyperbolization, an exaggeration of individual moments of the historical past, because it practically cannot lay claim to a direct, systemic reflection - it rather expresses an indirect perception and the same assessment of past events.
EVENTS IN THE MIRROR OF HISTORICAL MEMORY
Data from sociological studies of the last decade show sufficient stability in assessing the historical past, although data possible for comparison are based on various sociological studies carried out by different sociological organizations using different methods.
Thus, within the framework of the all-Russian study “Historical consciousness: state, development trends in the conditions of perestroika” (May - June 1990, head candidate of historical sciences V.I. Merkushin, number of respondents - 2196 people) the most significant events for the fate of people were named:
- the era of Peter I (opinion of 72% of respondents),
- Great Patriotic War (57%),
- Great October Socialist Revolution and civil war (50%),
- years of perestroika (38%),
- the time of the fight against the Tatar-Mongol yoke (29%),
- period Kievan Rus (22%).
The most recent economic events - perestroika and liberal reform - are rejected - they are assessed positively by 4 and 3.2% of respondents, respectively.
Consequently, despite certain fluctuations in the official policy of the Russian government in the 90s and numerous attempts to revise the history of Russia, in the consciousness and historical memory of the population they continue to remain as the most significant periods when Russia underwent serious and sometimes cardinal changes - the period of reforms of Peter I and Catherine II, abolition of serfdom, Russian revolutions of the 20th century.
A somewhat different situation arises when people evaluate the events of the 20th century, because here short-term historical memory is triggered, when many of its real participants are still alive and the events of history are still part of a person’s personal life and therefore are not freed from their individual perception, their specific understanding and explanation . This perception is influenced by official and semi-official interpretations of events, literary and everyday assessments of the activities of government and public figures, many of which have been revised many times in relation to the ongoing changes in the political life of the country. But - and this can be attributed to paradoxes - the main parameters of mass attitudes in relation to the most important events of the 20th century. remain unchanged. In other words, historical consciousness exhibits a certain stability and consistency - it was little influenced by the fluctuations - sometimes sharp - that occur in official propaganda. The phenomenon of rejection of hasty conclusions about certain events is a subject of special discussion. But it is obvious that attempts to influence historical memory for the sake of political and ideological interests, to change historical consciousness, by and large, fail.
Let's look at this in more detail. Thus, in studies of the early 90s, the most important event of the 20th century. The Great Patriotic War is recognized, taking first place (57% of respondents) compared to the October Revolution (second place, 50%). This order has not changed in the assessment of these events in subsequent years, despite the enormous social changes in the political and economic structure of the country, which once again confirms that there is no automatism in the influence of social life on public consciousness. Research by the All-Russian Center for Public Opinion Research (VTsIOM), which covered the entire population of Russia using a representative sample, showed that in 1989 the most outstanding event of the 20th century. Great Patriotic War (Second world war) was named by 77%, in 1994 - 73% of respondents. In other studies, including regional studies, the phenomenon of the Great Patriotic War is also highly valued by historical memory. This opinion requires, in our opinion, special explanation.
The Great Patriotic War is assessed by historical memory as the most significant event, firstly, because this memory is connected with the history of each family, because this event affected the most significant and intimate aspects of people’s personal lives. Secondly, this event determined not only the future of our country, but also the whole world, and therefore its assessment is based not only on a conscious, but also on an intuitive recognition of the role of this war in the history of all mankind. Thirdly, the Great Patriotic War, as rightly stated by Doctor of Historical Sciences, Head. Department of VTsIOM L.D. Gudkov, became “a symbol that acts... as an important element of positive collective identification, a point of reference, a yardstick that sets a certain optics for assessing the past and partly understanding the present and future”. The fact that this event became a symbol for the entire people, all its layers and groups, is evidenced by the fact that the significance of this war for the history of the people was noted by 70% of boys and girls under the age of 25 and 82% of people over 50 years of age. This means that the experience in the assessment of the older generation has been transformed and acquired symbolic significance for subsequent generations.
This indicator is strengthened by the fact that in the conditions of modern ideological and political confusion, victory in the Great Patriotic War has become virtually the only positive reference point for the national self-awareness of the current Russian society. And although in the 90s numerous attempts were made to disavow the results and events of this war, they were rejected by historical memory. Attempts to revise the meaning of the battle of Moscow and Stalingrad, attempts to de-heroize the exploits of Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya, Alexander Matrosov and others were not only not accepted in the scientific community, but were also rejected by mass historical consciousness.
In the same way, “research” such as V. Suvorov’s books is not perceived and does not find a response - at best, they become the property of a group of people who are not so much thirsting for truth as looking for a reason to express their ambitions, gain fame, create a sensation, gain popularity and money. National self-consciousness itself seems to be defending itself from these attacks and does not want to indulge in anything that could humiliate national dignity, the history of the country and the history of one’s self. By and large, this is a refusal to support the revision of what unites the people and the refusal of which can turn into a major spiritual and then political catastrophe.
As for the October Revolution, it appears in historical consciousness as a significant milestone, as a starting point that marked a turn in world history. However, as a significant event, its assessment along the “positive-negative” axis seriously changed in the 90s: the number of people who critically assessed the results and results of the revolution increased significantly. According to VTsIOM, in 1989 the October Revolution to the most important events of the 20th century. 63% attributed it, in 1994 - 49% of respondents.
However, while recognizing the role of this event, people evaluate this event ambiguously. In the mentioned study led by V.I. Merkushin (1990), 41% of respondents assessed the October Revolution as the first successful socialist revolution in history, 15% - as a popular uprising, 26% - defined it as a spontaneous confluence of circumstances that led the Bolsheviks to power. In addition, 10% assessed the October Revolution as a coup carried out by a handful of intellectuals, and 7% as a Bolshevik conspiracy. This ambiguity of assessments continues to persist today, because there are political forces in society that want to erase many pages of history associated with the existence of Soviet power, to present Soviet history as a kind of failure in the development of Russian society.
As for other significant events in the life of Soviet (Russian) society in the 20th century, various events were named as the most important in different years. But under the influence of the political situation and public mood, these assessments changed significantly, sometimes radically. Thus, according to VTsIOM, the most important events of this century were the mass repressions in 1989 - 23%, in 1994 - 16%, the war in Afghanistan - 12% in 1989 and 24% in 1994, and the beginning of perestroika 23 and 16%, respectively.
After 1991, many people began to name the collapse of the USSR as one of the most important events (in 1994 - 40%). In other studies and in other contexts, up to 70% regretted it, which is comparable to the figure of 71% who voted to remain in the Soviet Union in the March 1991 referendum.
In other words, from the events of the 20th century. We are united and related mainly only by our assessment of the Great Patriotic War. Such unanimity is also evident when assessing our scientific and technical achievements, such as the flight of Yuri Gagarin and space exploration, which is noted by almost every third respondent.
However, the ability of people and their social consciousness to competently judge the historical past, to correctly reproduce and evaluate historical events is seriously questioned. In the study by V.I. Merkushin, along with the population, experts were also surveyed - 488 teachers of historical disciplines in schools, technical schools and universities, who were skeptical about the ability of many people to think critically and make informed conclusions (see. table 1).
Table 1
Assessment of the level of historical thinking of people (in% of the number of respondents)| High | Average | Short | Difficult to answer | |
| The ability to reproduce the historical past, feel the era | 2 | 28 | 61 | 9 |
| Ability to navigate historical space and time | 1 | 24 | 65 | 9 |
| The ability to reveal cause-and-effect relationships in history | 1 | 14 | 78 | 6 |
| Ability to freely operate with historical facts | 1 | 21 | 70 | 7 |
| Ability to determine the reliability of historical facts | 1 | 16 | 67 | 15 |
These costs of historical thinking are especially clearly manifested when the historical consciousness of individual peoples is examined, when, when assessing the past, events that determined their fate are updated in their memory. Here there is an amazing interweaving of rational and emotional perception, a zealous assessment of turning events in the life of one’s people and their consequences. Thus, when studying the public opinion of the population of the North Caucasus on a number of problems of socio-political development in the course of sociological observations, it was noticed that many phenomena and events last century still excite people's minds and attract the close attention of cultural and scientific figures. The Caucasian War of 1817-1864 left the deepest mark on the memory of these peoples. As it turned out, this memory concentrates not only information that is open and accessible to everyone, but also latent sources - such as family traditions and legends, stories, folk songs, official and unofficial place names.
A special study conducted by the department of philosophy and sociology of the Adyghe Republican Institute of Humanitarian Research in 1995 showed that 84% of all respondents, including 95% of the Circassians, had some information about the Caucasian War. Moreover, this event is not just a memory of the past - about 40% (55% among Circassians) believe that this event is closely intertwined with the socio-political reality of our time. In this regard, in our opinion, it should be especially emphasized that in the mass, actually functioning consciousness, quite diverse characteristics of the causes of this war are manifested. Contrary to some “scientific” and pseudo-scientific statements that the autocratic policy of Russia is to blame for everything, in the mass consciousness only 46% of respondents adhered to this position, while 31% blamed Turkey and 8% - local feudal lords.
We are becoming eyewitnesses to the fact that historical memory, as well as the fruits of some historical research, is used in current political and ideological polemics and is biased by various political forces.
Now artificially created models of interpretation of the past are marked by ethnocentrism, emotional overtones and, being supported by mass consciousness, stimulate thinking by analogy; their authors try to explain modern problems from the “methodological” positions of conceptual and ideological archaism, which sometimes strangely coexists with a variety of scientific theories. Many specific, but very important for individual peoples, events become a very significant factor in both public consciousness as a whole and their historical memory, involving representatives of other peoples currently living in a given territory (events of the past) in explicit and sometimes invisible discussion in the history of Tatarstan, the fate of the statehood of Tuva, the historical past of the divided Lezgin people, etc.) Therefore, the correct placement of emphasis in the interpretation of historical events contributes, first of all, to the rational, friendly coexistence of peoples. Otherwise, wariness, prejudice, and negative clichés appear (“empire,” “chauvinistic policies,” etc.), which tend to persist for a long time, escalate social tension and give rise to conflicts.
HISTORICAL PERSONS
Let us emphasize once again that when identifying judgments about historical figures, it is not so much the personality as such that is assessed, but the totality of those actions that influenced the course of history and which brought fundamental changes in the lives of millions of people. In this sense, it is clear that the assessment of the reforms of Peter I as the most outstanding event in Russian history correlates with the assessment of Peter himself, whose activities were positively assessed in the early 90s by 74% of the population. In the same study, from the same perspective, the results of V.I.’s activities were highly assessed. Lenin (57% opinion), G.K. Zhukov (55%), Alexander Nevsky (28%).
Other studies conducted at a later time also show a certain stability in the assessment of historical figures, primarily Peter I, Catherine II, Ivan the Terrible, Alexander II. Of course, in assessing the significance of certain figures, a certain bias appears, namely, closeness and involvement in the life of the 20th century. makes certain adjustments, although they are different in essence. Thus, when assessing G.K. Zhukov, despite the criticism of his actions, the doubts that were expressed in a number of publications, his personality is becoming more and more heroic, acquiring features of a national scale, turning into a symbol of national pride and infallibility (holiness, as it would have been said in past centuries) .
When assessing such figures of the 20th century as V.I. Lenin, I.V. Stalin, for all the importance of these figures (their role is recognized by the majority of the population), the assessment of their activities falls into both positive and negative. This emotional and value assessment of political figures closely correlates with personal experience, individual perception and their personal acceptance or rejection. For how significant this is, see table 2(VTsIOM poll, January 2000).
Table 2
Assessments of Russian political figures of the 20th century.
- what this or that figure brought - more positive or more negative
(in % of the number of respondents)
| Positive | Negative | |
| Nicholas II | 18 | 12 |
| Stalin | 26 | 48 |
| Khrushchev | 30 | 14 |
| Brezhnev | 51 | 10 |
| Gorbachev | 9 | 61 |
| Yeltsin (March 1999) | 5 | 72 |
| Yeltsin (January 2000) | 15 | 67 |
It is obvious that such assessments, as in the assessment of historical events, are directly influenced by a personal understanding of contemporaries who stood at the helm of power, or information that is associated with short-term memory, formed in a significant part of the population under the influence of the environment. And if the assessment of previously functioning personalities is close to memories (public opinion cannot be blamed for ignorance of the behind-the-scenes mechanisms of power), then all responsibility for the difficulties that Russia is now experiencing is transferred to contemporaries. And the fact that in January 2000 public opinion changed somewhat in relation to Yeltsin (as well as the analysis of some other data) allows us to assert that Yeltsin’s departure is not perceived by people as a change of persons (scheduled or early - this is not so important), but as a sign of the end of a certain sad and contradictory era for people who are inclined to forgive something like they forgive an accomplished, but already irreparable loss. And at the same time, as the data of this study show, 46% of respondents believe that the outgoing president should not have been given security guarantees, since he must be held accountable for illegal actions and abuse of power.
And yet, these and similar assessments of historical figures of the past, despite some apparent chaos, still, at the level of mass historical consciousness, capture the role and significance of the most outstanding figures of the past. The information circulating in society at the level of this consciousness, in principle, corresponds to what is adhered to both in historical science and in the process of teaching in universities, secondary specialized and general educational institutions. And this is their greatest merit. The characterization of media efforts in the field of historical knowledge stands somewhat apart. For the most part, they follow established concepts, and if they distort some historical facts or events in the process of presentation, then in most cases they do not change overall rating historical past. Some cases of gross violation of history, despite all the apparent interest of readers, pass almost without a trace, without affecting the deep layers of memory.
The historical preferences of people look more substantive and clear when assessing outstanding figures of the 20th century. according to certain parameters, according to those spheres of social life in which they acted. Thus, in 1999, the Russian Independent Institute of Social and National Problems conducted a survey on who Russians consider “the best” among military leaders and scientists in the outgoing century.
As for the military, G.K. was in first place. Zhukov, on the second - K.K. Rokossovsky, in third - S.M. Budyonny (21%). Among the ten most outstanding military figures in Russia of the 20th century. entered M.N. Tukhachevsky (17%), K.E. Voroshilov (15%), M.V. Frunze (15%), I.S. Konev (13%) and V.K. Blucher (8%). It is noteworthy that the top ten outstanding Russian commanders included the White Guard Admiral A.V. Kolchak (12%) and the hero of the First World War, General A.A. Brusilov (7%).
As for scientists, the survey participants recognized the “father of Soviet cosmonautics” S.P. as the most outstanding. Queen (51%). In second place is the great Russian space theorist K.E. Tsiolkovsky (39%). The top ten also included one of the creators atomic bomb I.V. Kurchatov (28%), inventor of the legendary machine gun M.T. Kalashnikov (25%), biologist and breeder I.V. Michurin (17%), physiologist I.P. Pavlov (16%), geneticist N.I. Vavilov (15%), aircraft designer A.N. Tupolev (13%), physicist P.L. Kapitsa (13%) and literary critic D.S. Likhachev (14%).
Analysis of these opinions allows us to conclude that this information quite clearly shows the assessments contained in scientific and popular science publications, although they do not set the task of determining the rating of historical characters.
A characteristic feature of historical consciousness at the end of the 90s was a departure from ideological assessments and recognition of the role and significance of the activities of a particular individual without necessarily correlating it with the interests of certain class or political forces. In this regard, the data of a VTsIOM survey on the personality of Stalin, conducted in the fall of 1999, are indicative.
32% of Russian citizens believe that he was a cruel, inhumane tyrant, responsible for the destruction of millions of innocent people.
Exactly the same number believe that no matter what mistakes and vices are attributed to him, the most important thing is that under his leadership Soviet people emerged victorious in the Great Patriotic War.
“We still do not know the whole truth about Stalin and his actions,” 30% of respondents are convinced.
In our opinion, this characteristic reflects the inconsistency, ambiguity, and sometimes paradoxical nature of assessments of the activities of specific historical figures. But it is precisely such assessments that are the most effective and objective in comparison with some research “works” in which the authors set a predetermined goal to prove one or another version. For this reason, they select only the material that confirms their ideas and excludes all information that may be questioned. And now we are witnessing publications about Lenin, Stalin, Nicholas II, and other historical characters, in which their lives are “examined” from positions directly opposite to what was written 20-50 years ago. But if earlier the authors of such “works” set the task of exalting (or denigrating), selecting the appropriate texture and ignoring everything that contradicts positive (negative) information, then in the 90s, with the same zeal and subservience, facts and information of a directly opposite nature were selected in order to prove other provisions, other attitudes. In this situation, public opinion data becomes very interesting, as it more fully, comprehensively and objectively characterizes the contradictory nature of the lives and activities of many historical figures.
PERSONAL HISTORICAL MEMORY
A huge layer of historical consciousness is represented by information that relates to the perception of what is connected with the life of an individual and his immediate environment. The idea of the faces of national heroes, geniuses, talents and their activities is stored in the cumulative historical memory, as in a kind of museum - they are known from textbooks, scientific and fiction literature. But there are only a few of them.
The memory of millions and millions of others is stored in the storerooms of this museum, in the memory of only loved ones, relatives, and friends. But these are millions of bricks in the foundation of our historical memory, nameless workers and witnesses, without whom History itself and, most importantly, our involvement in it, are unthinkable. I am deeply convinced that a person cannot fully feel like a citizen of a country if he not only does not know major events, milestones of its history, but also the pedigree of his family, the history of his city, village, his region in which he was born or lives.
Unfortunately, most Soviet people(Russians) has a very rough knowledge of their family tree, often no further than the third generation, i.e. his grandfather. This is evidenced by data obtained in a sociological study in 1990. To the question “Has a pedigree been compiled in your family?” only 7% gave a positive answer. To the question “What do you see as the reasons for poor knowledge of your family history?” 38% said that there was no one to tell about this, and 48% claimed that this issue was indifferent to the family and was treated with indifference.
This alienation from personal involvement in history and disregard for one’s roots is also manifested in the fact that only 14% stated that they knew the history of the origin of their surname (20% claimed that they knew partially). The culture of attitude towards family heirlooms is also low. So far, it is limited to the storage of such material media that have a short history: 73% claimed that they have photographs of grandparents (note that 27% did not even claim this), 38% - that there are such memorabilia as orders , medals, certificates of honor, award signs. 15% spoke about letters from the front and other family heirlooms, but only 4% of respondents spoke about diaries, manuscripts, and correspondence.
How to characterize this personal slice of historical consciousness, historical memory? In our opinion, we can talk about its poor development, that it is of low quality, and I dare say, it undermines the foundations of higher feelings - patriotism, pride in one’s country, readiness to defend it and defend its interests.
In this regard, I will allow myself one personal memory. While on my first foreign tourist trip in 1959 - and this was the GDR, in accordance with the program, I was placed for two days with a family of German peasants in Saxon Switzerland. My surprise was great when in the evening the head of the family (note - a peasant) showed me a book of records in which the genealogy of this peasant family was kept from the 17th century. Judging by these records, it was an uninterrupted chronology of a peasant family that successfully survived into the 20th century. and, given the professions of this peasant’s son and daughters, he intended to continue this impressive tradition further.
Unfortunately, in our country such traditions were either lost (for noble and merchant families) or were not cultivated (for peasant and bourgeois families). Why this happened is a topic for a separate conversation, although in the sociological literature we already have the first experiments (based on the biographical method) of a detailed analysis of the history of a number of families in several generations, which gives a imaginative, living history of the country, painted in all colors, through the history of the family.
Knowledge of family ancestry is closely intertwined with the history of one's people. National self-identification has always played a huge role in people’s personal behavior, but its importance has especially increased during the transition period. In a study by V.I. Merkushin, the question “Will you experience pride in your Motherland, your people, your city, your team?” First place was taken by the assessment of one's ethnicity - 62% of respondents said so.
The question of family history is accompanied by information about the history of their city (village), which is not much higher than the indicators of knowledge about their ancestry: 17% of people said that they know this history. True, another 58% claimed to know something about the history of the city (village), but this, firstly, applied more to the townspeople, and secondly, the effect of presence worked here - knowing something does not mean the satisfaction of this knowledge.
Also indicative is the fact that it registers not just a contemplative attitude towards history, but also a desire to contribute to the preservation of its values, its objects and symbols. According to available information, only 4% of people are directly involved in the restoration of historical and cultural monuments. Another 33% said that they contribute to this process, in particular, by contributing some funds to their recovery. In other words, people’s civic activity in relation to their historical past is still low.
Associated with personal historical memory and historical consciousness is a renaissance of interest in the folk spirit, a craving for the cultural and spiritual heritage of the past. Restoring the memory of undeservedly forgotten names is perceived positively (opinion 58%). 85-91% actively support the revival of folk crafts, traditional medicine, folk festivals, and fairs.
HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE - WHAT IS IT?
I’ll start with the data from the already mentioned study by V.I. Merkushina. To the question “Are you satisfied with the quality of history education at school?” Only 4% of respondents gave a positive answer. Even every second teacher (48%) recognized the level of history teaching at school as low. But historical consciousness, historical memory, which objectively reflect at least the main milestones in the development of the country and people, cannot be formed without historical information being presented systematically, completely, without the predominance of emotions and attempts at falsification, when historical facts are replaced by all sorts of versions generated more by fantasies and arbitrary ad-libs.
Meanwhile, the desire for historical knowledge is significant. Interest in the past is dictated by the desire to know the truth about the past (opinion of 41% of respondents), the desire to broaden their horizons (30%), the need to understand and know the roots of their country, their people (28%), the desire to know the lessons of history, the experience of previous generations (17% ), the desire to find answers to pressing questions in history (14%). As we can see, the motives are quite convincing, quite clear and, in a certain sense, noble, since they meet the need of people to be citizens of their country in the full sense of the word. This includes the motives of identification (to be together with one’s country, one’s people) and the desire for objective knowledge, because this, according to 44% of respondents, allows for a better understanding of modern times, and according to another 20%, it helps in making the right decisions. 28% of the population see historical knowledge as the key to raising children, and 39% believe that without knowledge of history it is impossible to be cultured person. People’s self-assessment of their knowledge of history is noteworthy (see. table 3).
Table 3
Degree of assessment of historical knowledge (in% of the number of respondents)Note: the missing percentage (per line) refers to those who abstained from any answer
Now let’s compare these data with the judgments of experts - history teachers, teachers of historical disciplines in universities and technical schools, who answered similar questions in this study. 44% of them recognized the level of knowledge among the population on the history of Russia as average or low. In the history of their people, 25 and 63% are average and low, respectively, in general history - 20 and 69%. It is noteworthy that, in our opinion, such data quite accurately reflect the real situation with the “main” stories.
It is also worth recognizing that the history of one’s country, one’s people will always be “closer” to the hearts, feelings, social values and mood of people. Moreover, interest in different eras (stages) in life is not the same (see. table 4).
Table 4
Most interesting topics in the history of Russia (in% of the number of respondents).
| Population | Students | |
| Life of outstanding scientists, generals, cultural figures | 48 | 51 |
| History of Ancient Rus', formation centralized state | 37 | 33 |
| Life and work of kings, khans, princes | 29 | 32 |
| Life, way of life, customs, traditions, oral folk art | 27 | 40 |
| History of the peoples of our country | 22 | 13 |
| History of Soviet society | 20 | 6 |
| History of religious movements and teachings | 17 | 12 |
| History of the liberation and revolutionary movement | 10 | 1 |
Everyone is called upon to respond to these needs - the education system, the family, the media, fiction, and science. This is an important task, because, according to 80% of historian teachers, the most terrible misfortune is not so much bad, insufficient or one-sided historical knowledge, but the distortion of this knowledge, the dominance of outdated dogmas. “Innovative” searches, for example, the works of Academician A.T., also cause considerable harm. Fomenko and his adherents and co-authors, which question the entire system of scientific knowledge developed by many generations of historians. Published in editions of hundreds of thousands compared to the meager number of scientific historical works, these works pretend to replace previous historical knowledge with arbitrary versions and conjectures. One thing that saves us now - and this may be reflected in the mentioned stability of historical consciousness - is that, as test surveys show, this information is considered by readers as a special type of fantasy and adventure on a par with detective stories and not at all science fiction in bright covers that fill the shelves at bookstores. ruins.
In conclusion, I would like to note one remarkable fact: Currently, there is a process of formation of a very interesting scientific discipline - historical sociology. Based on this objective need, the journal Sociological Research brought to public attention many events of the past that still concern people today. This was reflected in the materials of B.N. Kazantseva about the “unknown” statistics of the standard of living of the working class (1993, No. 4) and about the problems of employment of the urban population in the mid-60s (1996, No. 5); A.A. Shevyakov about the All-Union Census of 1939 and the “secrets” of post-war repatriation (1993, No. 5 and No. 8) and Soviet food aid to people's democracies (1996, No. 8); V.P. Popov about the demographic situation in Russia in the 40s and after the Great Patriotic War (1994, No. 10; 1995, No. 3-); about the passport system in the USSR (1995, No. 8-9); V.N. Zemskova about prisoners in the 30s (1996, No. 7) and the repatriation of Soviet citizens and their future fate (1995, No. 5-6). Since 1998, the magazine began to publish a special section “Historical Sociology”, where materials were published in which attempts were made to reconstruct many historical events based on documents characterizing mass historical consciousness (letters to authorities, career histories, events of the 20-40s years, monetary reform, protest movement through the eyes of contemporaries, etc.). A set of problems lying at the intersection of history and sociology makes it possible to approach the characteristics of historical consciousness and historical memory as part of social consciousness in all their contradictory development, and at the same time take into account the relative independence of this phenomenon and its specific forms scientific knowledge.
All this allows us to conclude that, as this analysis shows, it becomes obvious that without a certain level of knowledge, understanding and respect for the historical past, it is impossible not only to be a citizen, but also to form a new Russian statehood, Russian civil society.
Literature
1. Historical consciousness: state and development trends in the conditions of perestroika (results of sociological research). - 2. Economic and social changes: monitoring of public opinion. - Newsletter. 1997, No. 5, p. 12. 3. Ibid., p. 13. 4. Ibid., p. 12. 5. See Historical consciousness: state and development trends in the conditions of perestroika, p. 97. 6. Khunakhu R.A., Tsvetkov O.M. Historical phenomenon in modern refraction. - Sociological Research, 1995, No. 11. 7. See Historical consciousness: state and development trends in the conditions of perestroika, p. 96. 8. Levada Yu. Opinions and moods. January 2000 - Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 9.II.2000. 9, 10. Komsomolskaya Pravda, December 21, 1999. 11. See Historical consciousness: state and development trends in the conditions of perestroika, p. 93. 12. Kozlova N.N. Peasant son: experience in biography research. - Sociological Research, 1994, No. 4; hers. Horizons 13. See: Myths " new chronology"Academician A.T. Fomenko. (Materials of a scientific conference at Moscow State University). - New and Contemporary History, 2000, No. 3. 14. See Afanasyev V.V. Historical sociology. Barnaul, 1995; Ivanov V.V. Introduction to Historical Sociology. Kazan, 1998.
Newsletter of the Center for Sociological Research AON. M., 1991, p. 96.
everyday life of the Soviet era: a voice from the choir. M., 1996: Chuikina S.A. Reconstruction of social practices. - Sociological research,
2000, № 1.
Ethnocultural problems and the development of national self-awareness are currently acquiring special significance and depth of socio-philosophical understanding. This is due to the socio-economic, socio-political and historical-cultural processes that are currently taking place in the country.
In the conditions of renewal of social life, the dynamics of the development of national self-awareness are expanding, interest in understanding the cultural classical heritage is deepening, and a new phenomenon is being developed in the sphere of spiritual culture. Understanding is underway now spiritual heritage among all peoples, powerful layers of national culture are returning. All this has a great influence on the formation of national identity and contributes to the development of spiritual and moral values.
The structure of national identity, for many scientists and in to a greater extent For ordinary people, is perceived as a unity of awareness of national identity, commitment to national values, the desire for sovereignty.
National identity includes belonging to a given community, love for one’s native language, national culture, commitment to national values, a conscious sense of national pride and awareness of common interests. These structural components national identity are in constant dialectical development. This is what Ch. Aitmatov wrote, discussing the role native language in the fate of the nation: “The immortality of a people is in its language. Each language is great for its people. Each of us has our own filial duty to the people who gave birth to us, who gave us their greatest wealth - their language: to preserve its purity, to increase its wealth.”
An important aspect of national self-awareness is people’s awareness of their individuality, of belonging precisely to this, and not to another national-ethnic, socio-political community - a nation and nationality.
Under the conditions of authoritarianism in the USSR, the existing system caused the degradation of national consciousness, the rupture of historical thinking and national self-awareness, had a negative impact on the development of ethnic culture, infringement of national self-awareness, its atrophy occurred against the background of the supposed prosperity and well-being of all the peoples of the country.
The level of national self-awareness must be considered in its variability. Thus, according to the results of sociological research in the Republic of Bashkortostan, there is a qualitative and quantitative growth of national self-awareness. And the factors of this growth are not only the productive activity of the creators of national ideas and views, but also their wide prevalence in the mass consciousness.
A special place in the formation of national identity belongs to historical figures, whose activities determined the fate of the people and statehood. In our country there were many destinies covered with falsification, deliberate distortion of the lives and personalities of outstanding politicians, military men, revolutionaries, scientists and even heroes of the Great Patriotic War. Our people are now learning the truth about most of them, and they are beginning to take their due place in their historical memory.
The development of national self-awareness as a structural element in the system of social consciousness is a complex, long-term, contradictory process. The above facts and provisions, our sociological research, indicate that national consciousness is focused on the formation of a civic position, responsibility for the fate of one’s own small Motherland, patriotism, a sense of love for one’s ethnic group and national values in the name and for the benefit of one’s people. Various destructions in moral and political issues and national relations will have their own specific consequences. The self-awareness of peoples must develop in a favorable socio-political environment, in a civil state in which the principles of civilization and democratic approaches to resolving national issues are observed.
Azamat Suleymanov, Bashkortostan
The end of the twentieth century provided the republics former USSR the historical opportunity to gain freedom and restore national statehood. A revaluation of the value system, an increase in interest in the past, the culture of peoples, and in the formation and development of national identity led to the actualization of historical memory in the mass consciousness.
The need to study ethnosocial memory is largely due to the fact that this phenomenon itself is extremely ambiguous. On the one hand, it can be used to incite ethnic and group hostility and the emergence of interethnic tension; on the other hand, it can strengthen good neighborliness and cooperation between peoples. The inconsistency in the manifestation of ethnosocial memory is due to the bias of this phenomenon: power structures, various political and social groups always strive to impose their own understanding of historical memory on society.
Appealing to the memory of the historical and social past is an important need of society, since it also contains great educational potential. Historical memory ensures the connection of generations, their continuity, creates conditions for communication, mutual understanding and certain forms of cooperation between people in various spheres of social activity.
Social memory is a complex and multicomponent phenomenon (historical memory of the people, cultural memory, political memory, etc.), which is a prerequisite for the existence of society and is based on the accumulation, storage and transmission of socially significant information. Ethnosocial memory, as a subsystem of social memory, determines a specific form of accumulation and transmission of socio-ethnic experience.
The ethnic factor is one of the determinants of social memory. We can talk about the ethnic component of social memory only in the case when ideas, knowledge, and assessments of the historical past on the part of an individual, group, or society are based on events and phenomena that reflect their specific ethnic specificity.
The formative factor of ethnosocial memory is that the latter acts as a way of recording, preserving and transmitting information from the accumulated experience of a national community both within one generation and between successive generations. The factor of translation of ethnosocial memory is very significant, but the importance of the accumulative function cannot be diminished in any way , its role as a synthesizer of socio-cultural experience.
As an initial definition in the study of the ethnic determination of sociomemory, we use the following: the component of the content of ethnosocial memory is facts, stories that characterize the uniqueness of the historical path of the people, the totality of cultural and material assets underlying ethnic identification.
The main functional characteristic of ethnosocial memory is the preservation and transmission of the self-identity of the national community. The information accumulated by ethnosocial memory is transmitted from one generation to another through the institution of upbringing and education, the mechanism of social inheritance, and this is what ensures the self-identity of the national community.
Ethnosocial memory represents one of the most complex socio-psychological formations in the system of the spiritual appearance of a nation. Deposited layer by layer in language, culture, customs, rituals, psychology, ethnosocial memory makes itself felt in ideas about native land, in awareness of national interests, the attitude of the people to material and spiritual values. Ethnosocial memory reflects both heroic and dramatic events in history, both national pride and national grievances.
Ethnosocial memory can be represented as the “core”, the center of the spiritual appearance of a nation. In studies of complex evolutionary systems within the framework of synergetics, scientists noted that information about the past of the system is usually stored in its central part. Ethnosocial memory represents a kind of “national genetic code” that stores information about the history, stages of development, living conditions and ethnic potential of the nation. Coding the cultural and social experience of an ethnic group in memory is a multifaceted process. It occurs both in the sphere of intellectual-spiritual and material-productive activity. Components of culture, in order to become part of the core of the spiritual image of a nation - the cultural gene pool of the people - must pass the test of time and become values for the community. In the event of the destruction of this “national genetic” code, similar to the processes of violation of human heredity, we can talk about the disappearance of the ethnic community
In turn, ethnosocial memory can be modeled as an integral two-component phenomenon, consisting of an ethnic core and a social belt. The first component contains the “original substrate” of the ethnos, i.e. those elements that laid the foundation of the ethnic community as a special integrity. The ethnic core is highly stable and has little variability. If the ethnic core includes both the memory of sociobiological and the memory of historical development, then the social belt is limited only by the memory of historical development. This social belt performs the function of an “information filter” of the national community, passing through numerous information flows and selecting information that is significant and valuable for this community.
In other words, the ethnic core of ethnosocial memory stores a certain set of ethnic parameters, and their use serves as a means of self-identification and demonstration of one’s belonging to a given ethnic group. The social belt of this phenomenon is another matter, since not so much diachronic, but synchronous connections are important for its existence.
The social memory of peoples is often limited by personal experience different generations. People are usually unable to remember as the most important those events that occurred before the beginning of their lives.
The promotion of the ethnic component to the center of ethnosocial memory testifies not to the primacy, relatively speaking, of ethnic memory over social memory in this phenomenon, but to the fact that the ethnic side of national memory is much more stable
During periods of socio-cultural crises and the rise of national movements, historical experience and knowledge are updated, and the historical history of peoples intensifies. In ethnosocial memory social groups, social movements find justification and support for their national demands. However, the appeal to ethnosocial memory is not determined by the phenomenon of memory itself, but primarily by specific national interests. Various political and social forces see in historical memory what they want to see. National memory is always selective, because there is a subjective factor, i.e. facts and events are reproduced through the prism of the interests of the individual and various social groups.
When considering the role and place of ethnosocial memory in modern national processes, objective problems are revealed that have not yet received a specific interpretation. This is, first of all, the problem of the “volume” of historical memory: what to “take” from the past, how to approach the assessment of acute events in the life of a particular ethnic community. There is, perhaps, no people whose fate was prosperous and happy, in whose history there would be no interstate wars and interethnic conflicts, injustices and grievances. Appeal to the historical heritage poses an urgent need to restore the true equality of the rights of all peoples to manifest their historical memory in various forms. Analysis of past events should be carried out from the standpoint of national tolerance. This means determining, first of all, what, in the course of historical contacts, enriched peoples and brought them together, and not what separated and quarreled them. Apparently, the appropriate way is to cultivate a complete, truthful, concrete history, not as the memory of only one people, but also as the memory of all peoples.
In recent years, the memory of historical events and phenomena of the past has become a powerful source for public sentiment and expression of the national self-awareness of peoples. Using the potential of the ethnosocial memory of each nation, accumulated by national identity, and putting this potential into action for the benefit of progress is a complex and responsible task for society.
We also recommend
The relationship between man and nature
Contemporary heroes. Heroes of Russia. Work for courageous people
Temple of the Tikhvin Icon of the Mother of God on Ave.
The miraculous icon of St. Nicholas of Zaraisk St. Nicholas of Zaraisk with life
How to smoke cheek meat at home
Receiving a property deduction through an employer