It's all the fault of the Pope. How scientists are looking for the roots of "Russophobia"
“Anger and envy of everything Russian drives these people. After all, only in Russia, at war and not only, Russians, Chechens, Buryats, Tatars, Ossetians, Bashkirs and Yakuts can call each other brothers. But the Ukrainians and the British can’t, they didn’t deserve it, they don’t have such a right, ”this is not a post in Odnoklassniki and not even a quote from Vladimir Solovyov’s program. Before us is the final paragraph of a scientific article in the specialty "Philosophy, Ethics, Religious Studies" from the journal "Education and Law". The journal is respected, included in the list of the Higher Attestation Commission (HAC), it is possible to publish dissertations for a candidate's or doctoral degree in it. But the author Evgenia Makoeva is already a candidate of philosophical sciences. And also a police lieutenant colonel and a teacher at the Krasnodar University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
If you enter the propaganda phrase "special military operation" into any database of scientific publications, it will return more than a thousand scientific papers published in the last year. Some authors are the usual victims of censorship. When you write an article about the Russian economy in 2022, and the word “war” threatens with a prison term, you cannot do without the notorious “SVO”. But at least half of the works are devoted to the “special operation” as such: its necessity, its public benefit, and how against its background it is necessary to deal with those who disagree. While some Russian scientists opposed the war, went to rallies and signed petitions, others have perfectly integrated into what is happening and are trying to make science out of it.
“After the start of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine on February 24, 2022, a stunning flurry of Russophobia from Western countries hit our country,” a group of authors from the Department of Philosophy of the Ural State Agrarian University states with surprise. The reason for such a reaction of foreigners is not clear to them.
The reaction of the West seems strange to Alexei Ilyin from the Omsk State Pedagogical University:
“The Russian leadership “only” annexed Crimea, helps the Donbass fighting against Ukrainian Nazism, and limited the criminal US interference in the affairs of Syria. This turned out to be enough to turn on the full power of the pseudo-information project “Russophobia”.
The work was written back in 2021, but the author foresaw the problem.
It is noteworthy that scientists give completely different answers to the general question. Ural philosophers published in the same journal "Education and Law" the work "Modern Russophobia: Mental Origins". Already from the name it is clear that the matter is in mentality. “An important ideological source of Russophobia in the collective consciousness of the West is colonial thinking,” the authors explain. There is also confirmation – a quote from Sergei Lavrov's interview with the Arabic edition of Russia Today. The second pillar of Russophobia besides colonialism is xenophobia. It is not the Romans who are to blame, but the Pope and the Crusades. But the Europeans became definitive Russophobes when they "began to seep information about what a big country Russia is and how many diverse natural resources it contains." All this is rooted in the mentality, has become "archetypes of the collective unconscious." And it is no longer possible to completely overcome Russophobia, since it sits so deeply, the authors bitterly state:
“But you can put it under control, eliminate its socially dangerous manifestations by introducing economic counter-sanctions against unfriendly European countries.”
Professor Alexei Ilyin comes to a different conclusion in his work “Russophobia of the West: Essence and Causes” (“News of Higher Educational Institutions. Sociology. Economics. Politics”, VAK list).
“We understand Russophobia not as an ideological position resulting from an irrational fear of Russia. That is, the clinical factor here does not matter. Russophobia acts as a means of cynical and rational geopolitical ambitions,” the scientist is convinced.
Where the Urals remember the Slavophile Aksakov, the theoretician of civilizations Danilevsky and Hegel, Ilyin quotes Barthes, Deleuze and Baudrillard.
“The Russophobic narrative, repeating itself, introducing superlatives, falling into a doubling spiral, becomes more true than truth, more real than reality,” he states. And it leads to a simple conclusion: “The question “Why do they treat us this way?” is of little relevance. It is more appropriate to ask the question “Why do they treat us like that?”. And he answers it simply: they are afraid. And so they spend "huge amounts of money on instilling hatred for the Russian Federation."
In general, there is no consensus among Russian scientists on the issue of Russophobia, but there is a broad academic discussion. Hundreds of scientific articles have been devoted to the topic since the mid-2000s. On Russophobia of the West in general and of individual countries in particular, coursework, diplomas and dissertations are defended. In these texts, classics are often quoted: Tyutchev (it was he who coined the very word "Russophobia"), Pushkin's "Slanderers of Russia" and Prilepin.
On the periphery of large scientific disputes about the essence of Russophobia, individual scientists explore their own private issues. For example, Professor Marina Ryabova from Kemerovo State University last year published in the VAK journal “Philological Sciences. Issues of theory and practice” study “Russophobia as a communicative strategy”:
“As we can see, the set of cognitive features of the concept RUSSOPHOBIA in the English language consists of such meanings as demonization; denial of all Russian culture, its most prominent representatives and Russia; barbarism as a special mentality; the ideology of fascism as a source of Russophobia; vicious anti-Russian sentiments, which are based, as a rule, on fake delusional inventions; Hollywood movie propaganda; vandalism, attacks on citizens and Russian establishments; attempts and calls for the overthrow of the legitimate government of the Russians, bringing the President of Russia to justice as a war criminal.
"Democratic" Russia vs. "Ukronazis"
The sentiments of Ukrainians are no less a mystery to Russian scientists. Why "the new authorities of Ukraine, now glorifying the fascists Bandera, Shukhevych and their followers, have become intolerant of the historically established norms of life, as well as the will and religion of the inhabitants of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions," Doctor of Historical Sciences Volodymyr Kiknadze asks in the article "Ukrainian nationalism: from origins before denazification in the course of a special military operation of the Russian army” (“Science. Society. Defense” VAK).
The historian's conclusion is clear:
“Under the slogans of independence, independence, Ukrainian radical nationalists, ukronazis, throughout the history of their movement, pursued the goal of selling native Ukrainian Ukraine (Ukrainian – native mother Ukraine) to foreign colonialists in order to become a privileged collaborationist caste of overseers of compatriots.”
The extensive list of references includes several Ukrainian pamphlets from the 1990s and early 2000s, an interview with Bastrykin, articles by TASS, Facebook by Maria Zakharova, and even one post on Pikabu.
References include an interview with Bastrykin, articles by TASS, Facebook by Maria Zakharova, and a post on Pikabu
But the end is near, the historian is convinced, because “the ability of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to resist is based on the fear of reprisals by neo-Nazis. Their representatives are embedded in all military units … In 2022, Russia, giving the lives of its faithful sons for the liberation of Ukraine from nationalism, destroying and capturing neo-Nazis, revealing the truth about their crimes and criminal plans, creates the conditions for the final eradication of Nazism.
Ukraine provides no less rich material for research by Russian scientists than Russophobia. Since the mid-2000s, students have been defending dissertations on the so-called "Maidan technologies". Scientific journals publish articles about "Ukrainian neo-Nazism" and "deconstruction of the Russian world." The conclusions rarely differ from the conclusions of Kiknadze: the best solution is a forceful one.
In this vein, the work published in the VAK journal "Social and Humanitarian Knowledge" is interesting – "Special military operation in Ukraine in the context of the theory of just war." The author, an adjunct of the Alexander Nevsky Military University, Dmitry Nekrasov (an adjunct is the same as a graduate student, only in military universities), argues that Russia's attack on Ukraine is "justified."
The point here, the young scientist explains, is that there is a “just cause,” and not even one. Nekrasov refers to these as the expansion of NATO and the non-recognition of the annexation of Crimea by Ukraine: “the blocking of the water canal, the work of Ukrainian provocateurs on the territory of the peninsula, the complete blockade of Crimea with the mainland by the Ukrainian authorities along the land border.”
Finally, an important criterion for a "just war", according to the adjunct, is the ability to successfully end it. “The plan proposed by the General Staff for conducting a special military operation in Ukraine was carefully thought out, it was carried out and continues to be carried out, which will ultimately lead to the fulfillment of all the tasks set. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated this.
“The use of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, including combat, with the aim of de-radicalizing the world order is strategically defensive, that is, non-offensive, even if geographically carried out beyond national borders,” Philip Trunov from the Institute of World History of the Russian Academy of Sciences quotes the same idea on the pages of the VAK magazine “ Social and humanitarian knowledge”.
The article is called “Practical Criteria for Democracy” – and not by chance, because the author substantiates the democratic nature of the military invasion:
“The special military operation of the Russian Federation should be viewed as a forced, graduated use of force, ultimately aimed at reducing the degree of tension in the realities of the new Cold War. This is precisely what the officially set tasks for the denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine are aimed at, convincingly confirming in practice the democratic character of Russia and its foreign policy.”
"The People's Narrative of Suffering". How scientists analyze Z-publics
The title "Network solidarity as a response to collective trauma (on the example of Russia's special military operation in Ukraine)" can be misleading at first. One would think that Natalia Zimova and Yegor Fomin of the Lomonosov Moscow State University's Higher School of Modern Social Sciences would be talking about the traumatic experience of the current war. But it doesn't:
“The event that unites Russian society regarding the NWO is the traumatic experience of the Great Patriotic War, which reproduces the folk narrative of suffering through the memories and experiences of the fascist invaders and the spread of Nazi ideology. In this analogy, the Nazis who need to be denazified are the bearers of modern Ukrainian ideology.”
But all their work is not about trauma, but about solidarity. And the main tool is the analysis of the posts of the social network VKontakte for the first two months of the war.
Among the sources are the publics “Donbass is the heart of Russia!”, “TEAM FOR VV PUTIN AND RUSSIA!”, “Polite People | Peacekeepers | Special Operation Z” and the like.
On this rich material, the authors study the features of social solidarity. And the first of them is “increasing confidence in social institutions, the national leader and the top leadership of the country.” As follows from the article, Russians are imbued with love for the authorities "through the archetypes of the family and family traditions."
Putin in this family acts "in the role of a father-protector, protector of the people." Paired with him is Prime Minister Mishustin. He "plays the role of a prudent family manager who saves, calculates and distributes the family budget."
And here is the confirmation of solidarity from Z-publics:
“People, Russia!!! We must unite and become one family!!! More than ever, we must support our dear soldiers and our President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin!!! Stop blaming our power! Now is not the situation to express your dissatisfaction!
The second element of cohesion is "the formation of a single symbolic sign system." These are, of course, the letters Z, V, O, which "express aspiration, strength, energy."
In addition, the war "reveals new features of civil society." Corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, scientific director of the Vologda Scientific Center of the Academy, Honored Worker of Science of the Russian Federation Vladimir Ilyin came to this conclusion. He devoted a great deal of work to this in the VAK journal Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast.
The text of the article contains its own original sociology, Dugin's abundant quotes and references to Mikhalkov's "Besogon TV", in particular, to the release "The snow will come down, and we will see who … crap where." According to public opinion monitoring data, from February to October 2022, the share of Vologda Oblast residents who positively assess the president’s activities increased from 48% to 59%. An important merit here, according to the scientist, belongs to the state media.
With their direct participation, “new features of civil society began to take shape in the Russian Federation. And this is manifested not just in good intentions or, as they say, "on paper", but in the specific deeds and actions of ordinary citizens, representatives of non-profit organizations, businesses, and authorities. The Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation S. Shoigu noted that "a large number of volunteers come to the military commissariats."
The main result is the support of the population of the United Russia party in the last elections. This is how civil society declared itself.
Honored Lawyer of the Russian Federation, Professor of the Moscow State Linguistic University Sergey Inshakov saw a high anti-corruption potential in the attack on Ukraine. He published an article about this in the VAK Russian Journal of Economics and Law.
The situation, according to the honored lawyer, is simple. The country reached its highest anti-corruption potential under Stalin, then it dropped, but it was still high until Gorbachev ruined everything. It was only with Putin's rise to power that corruption finally began to decline. Putin tried desperately, but he was hindered. He started the war not only to fight corruption, but "there are many reasons to believe that V.V. Putin's unsuccessful attempts to raise Russia's anti-corruption potential to a high level were also among the factors."
True, it is precisely because of corrupt officials that the war is not going as well as Putin would like:
“Gradually, the outlines of the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905) and the first Chechen campaign (1994-1996) began to appear more and more clearly. The following facts can be cited as an illustration. Quartermaster theft of military property and food in the Manchurian army became a symbol of corrupt denial of military successes.
After these generalizations, the author draws an optimistic conclusion: "The essence of the new reality is that Russia is faced with a tough alternative: either the country's political elite will be purged from above of corrupt officials and persons oriented towards foreign interests, or it will be done from below."
Inexperienced soulless egoists. How Scientists Condescendingly Study Dissenters
The Center for Social Security and Riskology of the Institute for Socio-Political Research of the Federal Scientific Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences also conducted its own research on the topic of the consolidation of society. The results can be seen in the VAK journal “Science. Culture. Society".
This time, they did not study VKontakte publics, but interviewed 206 experts from 25 regions of the country. People spoke in favor of mobilizing the economy up to the transition to a planned economy, and for purging the administrative elite of those who "avoid publicly showing their personal support for a special military operation." Much sadder, according to the authors of the work, are the results of another part of the survey. In it, experts were asked how, in their opinion, representatives of different social groups relate to what is happening.
The first question was about supporting the course of confrontation with the West. Of course, the leaders, according to expert assessment, are officials, managers of state-owned companies and media workers. But scientists, educators and IT let us down. Bloggers are the biggest concern. “This is an environment that directly affects the mass consciousness and is capable of introducing negativism into society in relation to the new course of Russia,” warns the Institute for Social and Political Studies.
With the support of the war is even worse. Although officials, state capitalists and propaganda workers are all in favor, scientists and bloggers again showed insufficient fighting spirit. But the entrepreneurs are the worst:
“We are concerned about the low assessment by experts of the level of support for the goals of a special military operation by those employed in medium and small businesses.”
Even the high confidence of Russians in victory is noted by less than half of the respondents. Finally, Russians do not unanimously condemn those who publicly disagree with the war. Moreover, 30.5% of experts were sure that such views have high support in society.
Those who disagree with the official line arouse a keen scientific interest among Russian scientists. «Следует признать, что причины, специфику и, главное, последствия весьма неоднозначной реакции молодых россиян на инициированные СВО процессы ученым еще только предстоит выявить», — констатирует профессор кафедры политических наук Саратовского университета Александр Казаков. Он решил сконцентрироваться на частном вопросе — роли медийного сопровождения войны, чему посвятил работу в еще одном издании из списка ВАК — «Известиях Саратовского университета».
Несогласные с официальной линией вызывают у российских ученых живой научный интерес
Ученый цитирует разные опросы общественного мнения, свидетельствующие о меньшей, чем у пожилых, поддержке войны молодежью и большем желании скорейших мирных переговоров с Украиной. Исследователь видит две группы причин. Первые фундаментальные, которые быстро не устранишь.
Во-первых, виновата неправильная культурная и образовательная политика после распада СССР. Засилье западных ценностей, идеологический вакуум, а в итоге «материальные ценности стали более значимыми, чем духовные. Важность многих вещей начала измеряться не общественным благом, а их стоимостью». И теперь молодежь оказалась неспособна оценить общественное благо войны с соседями.
Исковерканная молодежь оказалась неспособна оценить общественное благо войны с соседями
Вторая фундаментальная причина — молодежь не смотрит телевизор и не читает газеты. Вместо этого молодые люди, не имея «богатого жизненного опыта», идут в интернет. И там становятся «уязвимыми перед лицом всевозможных манипуляций со стороны враждебно настроенных к нашей стране политических акторов».
На других фронтах еще можно кое-что исправить. Для этого надо освещать войну оперативнее и достовернее и подстроиться под молодежный формат. Сделать так, чтобы сводки Минобороны «озвучивал (или хотя бы комментировал) человек, известный и авторитетный именно в молодежной среде».
Профессор Уральского федерального университета имени Б. Н. Ельцина Анатолий Меренков видит причину недовольства войной не в интернете и образовании, а в эгоизме. Его статья в «Вестнике Удмуртского университета» так и называется: «Культура эгоизма в условиях специальной военной операции».
За отправную точку взяты слова Путина об американском эгоцентризме и сетования Захара Прилепина на то, что российские артисты не поддержали войну:
«Они молча предают тех, кто воюет, погибает ради сохранения независимости, свободы нашей страны. Практика показывает, что изменить сознание и поведение таких людей крайне сложно. Требуется постоянно заниматься борьбой с самим собой, но природный и приобретенный в течение жизни эгоизм не позволяет это сделать».
Заслуженный деятель науки РФ заведующий кафедрой уголовного права и криминологии ОмГУ им. Ф. М. Достоевского Михаил Клеймёнов в марте 2022 года провел собственный онлайн-опрос 286 респондентов в Омске и Санкт-Петербурге. И написал на его основе статью «Евромайдан: криминолого-правовой анализ» для «Вестника Омского университета» из списка ВАК.
Несмотря на то что опрос проходил на фоне войны и военной цензуры, больше четверти респондентов согласились с тезисом, что «Украина — самостоятельная и самодостаточная нация, более близкая по своим корням и менталитету к Западу, чем к России».
По мнению профессора Клеймёнова, это означает, что «в России существует довольно представительная категория граждан, мыслящих мифологическими категориями».
Половина опрошенных не осудили тех, кто после начала войны уехал за границу. Чем продемонстрировали «атрофию совести — того нравственного чувства, которое называют в отечественной православной традиции „внутренним оком“ — Божиим гласом в человеческой душе». Наконец, 37,5% «не замечают (или не хотят замечать) очевидного факта заведомой лживости западной пропаганды».
Что этому противопоставить? Во-первых, патриотическую пропаганду, а во-вторых — уголовное преследование:
«Императивом современной ситуации является принятие правовых мер в отношении коллаборационистов. Диапазон этих мер широк. Задача правоохранительных органов — пресекать преступную деятельность лиц в публичном пространстве».
Вернуть смертную казнь, следить за родственниками уехавших. Как ученые предлагают подавлять инакомыслие
Как именно уголовно преследовать тех, кто против войны, — отдельная сфера научного исследования. Александр Ваторопин и Игорь Тепляков из Уральского института управления — филиала РАНХиГС изучают этот вопрос в рамках гранта «Когнитивные интернет-технологии как фактор формирования экстремистского поведения молодежи: механизмы воздействия и профилактика», который им выделил Российский фонд фундаментальных исследований. В журнале «Образование и право» они опубликовали статью «Молодежный экстремизм в России в контексте специальной военной операции».
Ученым повезло — пока они работали над грантом, предмет их научного интереса стал только шире:
«Следует учитывать, что после начала СВО были приняты некоторые нормативные акты, которые позволяют довольно широко трактовать в новых условиях понятие „экстремизм“… По сути, теперь любое публичное высказывание против спецоперации может быть расценено как экстремистское действие и соответствующим образом наказано. В дальнейшем мы будем исходить из этой широкой трактовки экстремизма».
А проявления «экстремистской деятельности» многообразны, предупреждают ученые:
«Среди них стоит обратить внимание на такие достаточно изощренные действия, как написание ложных жалоб на владельцев заведений, размещающих у себя символы СВО (Z, V, O и т. п.): обвинения в антисанитарии, нарушении правил пожарной безопасности и т. д.; написание ложных доносов на сторонников спецоперации с целью их дискредитации в глазах органов власти и последующего несправедливого наказания, что должно настроить людей против существующего режима».
Кто же такой «типичный представитель молодежного политического экстремизма в современной России»? Александра Гармажапова, глава «Свободной Бурятии»:
« Данная организация, кроме своей основной (сепаратистской) деятельности, сегодня на своем сайте открыто выступает против СВО и призывает бурятов не участвовать в ней».
Генерируют молодежный экстремизм извне. В основном — спецслужбы стран НАТО и СБУ:
«В качестве каналов используются популярные у российской молодежи соцсети, а также СМИ-иноагенты. Очевидно, что все это необходимо учитывать при организации противодействия молодежному экстремизму в нашей стране в условиях проведения СВО».
Но опасность представляют не только спецслужбы НАТО и СМИ-иноагенты. Чтобы понять это, достаточно прочитать работу «Несистемная оппозиция — современная угроза общественной безопасности» профессора Академии управления МВД России Леонида Грищенко:
«Именно на потенциал несистемной оппозиции был расчет у западных спецслужб при подготовке к военным действиям на Донбассе, которые планировалось начать в марте 2022 года. Сегодня мы получили неопровержимые доказательства».
«Сегодня любые просчеты и малейшие недостатки при проведении специальной военной операции на Донбассе используются Западом для нагнетания русофобии и продуцирования различного рода пропагандистских клише, что незамедлительно подхватывает несистемная оппозиция внутри страны».
Справиться с этим должны помочь слежка, «сбор и обобщение исчерпывающих сведений о родственниках, друзьях, бывших коллегах по учебе, работе и т. д. руководителей и активных членов несистемной оппозиции». Вообще, по мнению автора, нужно создать банк объединенных данных обо всех оппозиционерах в России и за рубежом.
Нужно создать банк объединенных данных обо всех оппозиционерах в России и за рубежом
Есть и еще один способ — «выявление в рядах протестующих фигур, готовых к началу диалога с представителями государственной власти… Для этого нужно перестать воспринимать всю активизировавшуюся оппозицию как единое целое, действующее под управлением враждебного внешнеполитического игрока».
Заведующая кафедрой уголовно-правовых дисциплин Иркутского юридического института — филиала Университета прокуратуры Российской Федерации Яна Васильева предлагает с врагами не церемониться и вернуть смертную казнь. В статье, опубликованной в ВАКовском «Вестнике Финансового университета», она погружается в историю высшей меры наказания и в нынешнее законодательство, ограничивающее ее применение.
Оно, по мнению Васильевой, «не отвечает действующей обстановке и формирующейся преступности на фоне проведения специальной военной операции, что, безусловно, необходимо устранить». Формирующиеся преступники — это защитники Украины:
«Приверженцы неонацистских группировок украинского праворадикального движения ежедневно совершают особо тяжкие преступления как в отношении граждан России, так и против мира и безопасности (например, при обстрелах Запорожской АЭС), наказание за совершение которых может соответствовать цели восстановления социальной справедливости исключительно через назначение смертной казни».