In search of unifying meanings
Man is a social being. And his activity is determined primarily by the search for various meanings. Society is a reasonably organized group of people with common ideas, spiritual values, language, culture. For persons united on a national basis, "national ideas", "national goals" and "national spiritual values" are characteristic.
The "national idea" is realized in society as fundamental. It is she who is the main driving force of progress and stories... But at the same time, it does not become the subject of study of any of the sciences (not philosophy, law, history or sociology). Although under the influence primarily of "national ideas" such sciences are just being formed.
All definitions of the concept of "national idea" given in various sources are someone's personal opinion. Therefore, first of all, there is a need to create a clear definition of this concept.
The famous German idealist philosopher Hegel wrote in his lectures on the philosophy of history:
“There is an idea that unites society - society develops and flourishes. In the absence of such an idea, society degrades, decays, dies. Any movement in society is due to the emergence of a new idea. "
According to Hegel, the world mind and the absolute idea are the driving forces of world progress and world history. Let's take this thesis as an axiom.
The greatest Russian writer, philosopher and thinker L.N. Tolstoy in his famous work "War and Peace" considered history
"As the sum of human arbitrariness united by a common idea."
He even introduced such a concept as
"The differential of history is an infinitely small value that is a homogeneous attraction of people."
Tolstoy believed that the subject of the study of history should be the forces that set in motion the masses of the people. In particular (in relation to the work he created), he was interested in what driving forces led to the fact that the united Europe, led by Napoleon, moved to conquer Russia? And to the fact that Napoleon, with his 800 army, without losing a single battle, having captured Moscow, lost the war and lost his entire army? And which ones (contrary to seemingly common sense) contributed to the fact that Kutuzov, with more than half the size of the Russian army, won not a single battle, having lost Moscow, won the war?
According to both Hegel and Tolstoy, these driving forces were ideas approved and accepted for implementation by all members of society (in the given example, brilliantly implemented by MI Kutuzov).
For a correct understanding, let us clarify the social meaning of the existence of such an association of a reasonably organized group of people as a state. We will not go into the essence of the very concept of "state" (which is not the subject of this article), but will touch only on its main social function, which reveals the very meaning of its existence.
From the works of theorists of the science of state and law, we will refer only to one of its founders, an authoritative scientist - I.A. Ilyin (IA Ilyin "Russian legal heritage - Theory of law and state"), whose ideas are being implemented today by the Russian ruling elite in state building.
It is known that the main social function of the state is the implementation and approval of the principle of social justice in society and the resolution on its basis of all emerging contradictions. I would like to emphasize that it is precisely the observance of the principle of "justice" in society that is a need, an obligatory basic fundamental principle of its prosperous and prosperous existence. According to I.A. Ilyin, the construction of a socially just society is possible provided that the legal consciousness (which is part of the public consciousness) of the society reaches the appropriate level.
Based on the foregoing, we can conclude that the concept of "national idea" should be understood as an idea that is implemented in society as a fundamental and is the main driving force that determines the process of development of society in the direction of achieving the goals set by this idea.
It should be added that the "national idea" is a product of a dynamically changing public consciousness, which, in fact, is the sum of the worldviews of each of the citizens - members of society. The outlook of a citizen, in turn, is formed under the influence of the family, school (literature, history) and the media.
The “national idea” (as a fundamental one), the implementation of which is carried out by the elite, determines the socio-economic structure of society and the current legislation aimed at establishing an appropriate model of law and order.
Freedom and justice
Having received a general idea of what a “national idea” is, the question immediately arises of what it should be in Russia and what it is now in our country.
Let's turn to history first. The philosophers of ancient Greece (and above all Socrates) were the first to think and formulate answers to questions about the meaning of human existence. And also the principles on which society and the state should be built. They determined the goals that they (the state and the people) must achieve and realize. According to Socrates, the goal of the state is to ensure that every citizen can achieve absolute freedom. At the same time, Socrates understood freedom as an opportunity to overcome his instincts, get rid of everything unnecessary and achieve reasonable perfection.
Socrates was the first to point out that people combine two constantly conflicting opposites - soul and body. The soul strives for knowledge and virtue. The body is for comfort and bodily pleasure. Socrates argued that it is necessary to take care of the soul, improve the mind, and ignore the needs for bodily pleasures. He also pointed out that those who seek bodily pleasures cannot keep their body and soul clean. According to this Socratic rule, the society, the main value of which is material wealth, is built on the idea of consumption, on the satisfaction of physiological needs as priority ones. Such a society is vicious, with no prospects for a future prosperous existence.
This circumstance is very important, since a person's needs are always dictated either by physiological (bodily according to Socrates) or spiritual needs. According to the theory of the same I.A. Ilyin, exactly what dictates the actions of people in society (physiological or spiritual needs) is an absolute criterion in assessing their actions from the standpoint of good-bad and good-evil.
As you know, an idea is a derivative of a need. Therefore, the above rule is also true for an idea. And, as experience shows, a bad idea does not lead to good. Napoleon's idea to capture Russia was dictated by his desire for profit, for unlimited power (physiological needs) and was a bad idea. Kutuzov's idea to free the Motherland (spiritual need) in this regard was a good idea.
In addition, Socrates first introduced such an important concept as "justice", which he understood as the unconditional observance of human and divine laws. He argued that everyone should be guided by justice in their actions. Knowledge is the only good, and ignorance is the only evil. Wisdom consists in the ability to distinguish between good and bad.
On the basis of these simple and understandable Socratic postulates, the fundamental ideas for the state as an organized group of reasonable people were formulated. The essence of which is to build a just society, where everyone should be provided with the opportunity to improve the mind and self-realization, as a highly spiritualized being.
The given idea is universal for all times and peoples. And no achievements of scientific and technological progress (building a digital economy, artificial intelligence, etc.) can affect its essence, but only increase the importance of implementing its foundations.
For Russia, the "national idea" can and should be defined as follows: building a socially just state based on the spiritual values of the Russian people, where everyone will be given the opportunity for self-improvement and self-realization as a highly spiritualized person.
And this idea, according to the author, has no alternative.
It should be added that building a socially just society is not the end point of the development of society, but an endless process of its constant improvement.
In the above definition of "national idea", some provisions require clarification. In particular, the following.
The concept of "justice". It is a multifaceted concept. They are more often associated with the concept of what is due or with the distribution function of material goods. But justice is primarily an evaluative category, according to which any phenomenon, event or fact will be given a positive or negative assessment by the society and the subject (this definition is the author's). And this assessment will be decisive in the choice of further behavior, in the development of norms that regulate social relations. The criterion for such an assessment is exclusively morality.
I will note that the ideologist of our elite I.A. Ilyin endowed the concept of justice with a slightly different meaning. He wrote:
"Justice requires that the law maintain equality and balance among people, as this is necessary for everyone to lead a dignified existence."
"Fair law (regulator of social relations - Auth.) Is the right that correctly resolves the clash between natural inequality and spiritual equality of people, taking into account the former, but always starting from the latter."
Fairness (according to I.A.Ilyin) I leave without comment. And I invite each reader to independently comprehend the above definition. And this is very important. Because this is how the ruling elite understands the term "justice" and implements it in society.
"Realize yourself as a highly spiritualized person." It means to fulfill the mission entrusted to a person, related to the meaning of his existence. The idea of the meaning of human existence, according to the author of the article, is best expressed in the novel The Count of Monte Cristo, in the words of one of his heroes, Abbot Fario, who said:
"God created man free so that man could create what God does not know."
A person can be absolutely free only spiritually, since self-improvement, knowledge and creativity have no boundaries. Thus, the mission of man, associated with the meaning of his existence, is creativity based on the process of cognition. In turn, creativity should be understood as the process of creating a new reality from everyday material. Let me draw your attention to the fact that the above thought by A. Dumas is organically combined with the ideas of Socrates.
The concept of "spiritual values". These are the basic ideas about freedom, justice and human dignity, formed in the process of the historical development of society, on the basis of which any judgments that determine the actions of people are built.
Let me emphasize that the spiritual values of the Russian people were formed over the centuries in the constant struggle against the invading empires. All the greedy world empires that came to Russia (Khazars, knight-dogs, Tatar-Mongols, Rzeczpospolita, Swedish Empire, Ottoman Empire, French Empire headed by Napoleon, Hitler with European allies, Empire of Japan), without exception, crashed against the Russian state. Under these conditions, the main spiritual values of the Russian person became: courage, readiness for self-sacrifice for the sake of society and a high idea, a heightened sense of justice.
In the Russian Federation, many top officials have declared and are claiming the absence of a national idea. This in itself testifies to the reluctance of the national elite to announce such a feasible idea due to its unattractiveness. Or about a complete lack of understanding of what it is.
Russian President V.V. Putin called the national idea of the Russian people “patriotism”.
The theme of patriotism I.A. Ilyin paid special attention. And there is every reason to believe that the announced V.V. Putin, such a national idea is associated with the teachings of I.A. Ilyin. From the point of view of I.A. Ilyina (I.A.Ilyin "Theory of Law and State", Chapter 10 "On Patriotism"),
"Patriotism is a necessary and true manifestation of the will to the spirit."
However (according to the generally accepted definition)
patriotism is a feeling of love for the Motherland, a readiness for self-sacrifice for the sake of it.
And feeling, you see, cannot be a national idea as a driving force in the development of society. Feeling can only be a necessary and indispensable condition for this movement or development.
Thus, things should be called by their proper names. Patriotism as a national idea is a common manipulation.
The absence of a sane "national idea" creates a spiritual vacuum that cannot be filled by various manipulations. This turns society (according to the above axiom according to Hegel) into a society of unprincipled and unprincipled people - consumers. That, unfortunately, can be traced in the Russian Federation.
But, as in the well-known saying - a holy place is never empty. That is why, being in constant search for various unifying meanings, a person finds them in other ideas. (Alas, sometimes including extremist or fanatically religious).
There is an obvious crisis. And it is connected with the unwillingness of the ruling elites in Russia to form a positive national idea that would be accepted and approved by the overwhelming majority of citizens.
And, as a consequence (according to Hegel), if there is no “national idea” (or the formulated idea is unattractive to the population), then there is no (and is not foreseen) a dynamically developing, prosperous and prosperous state.
In fact, in Russia today the liberal idea is being implemented as a national one.
At present, it is the liberal idea, as the basic one, that determines the direction of state building and the current legislation. The main provisions of the liberal idea are enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation: a person, his rights and freedoms are the highest value (Art. 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). The main declared (article 7 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation) task of the Russian state is today
"Creating conditions that ensure a dignified life and free human development."
Note that the concepts of "creating conditions" and "decent" are vague evaluative categories (if you do not take into account the concepts - minimum wage, minimum pension, minimum subsistence level, etc.), which reduces the meaning of this constitutional norm to nothing binding declaration. This is evidenced by the total poverty in Russia.
Nevertheless, the Constitution of the Russian Federation provides for the procedure for the implementation of this liberal national idea as follows: the country's leadership takes measures to sell state property, attract investors - effective owners who must create new enterprises, build factories and plants, restore the economy, provide every citizen with a job with a decent salary, to provide the necessary contributions to the budget, including for the implementation of such a national project as the fight against human poverty (recall, the highest constitutional value) (Article 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation).
And the state will provide such an investor-owner with freedom of economic activity (Article 8 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation), transfer land and other natural resources to him in private ownership (Article 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation), recognize and protect his property (Article 8 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). The investor's activity has a specific name - entrepreneurial activity, the essence of which is making a profit. Thus, in accordance with the liberal idea, a society is being built, where the main actor is this very investor - the effective owner with his capital and income. And the main goal of his activity is making a profit.
In a state with such a liberal idea, power is formed on the principle of personal or clan affiliation with certain financial and ruling elites. That is why in our country, a journalist, and not a scientist (like Korolev), heads the space industry, a successful entrepreneur (furniture dealer) heads aviation engine building, etc. etc. The attitude of citizens towards such persons when they are appointed to leading positions is not taken into account, which discredits the power itself in the eyes of citizens, but this circumstance is indifferent to the power itself. And this is not fair.
Such a fundamental principle for society as "justice" is not defined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation and is implemented on the basis of I.A. Ilyin (which, according to the author, are erroneous).
“Justice” and “national idea” are interrelated concepts. The liberal idea implemented in society is unattractive, has nothing to do with the concept of "justice". And, as a result, it is not acceptable for the Russian society, which is quite obvious.
Thus, the legal conscience of Russian society needs to achieve an understanding of what “justice” is in essence, as well as the urgency of including provisions on “justice” in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. On the basis of justice (the archetype of the Russian-folk matrix of truth), a new “national idea” should be formulated, which will inevitably entail the creation of a new socio-economic model of the country's future (form the desired “image of the future” of Russia) and determine the further path of development of Russian civilization.
I would like to ask the reader the following questions:
1. What is the liberal idea from the standpoint of the criterion "good - bad"?
2. Does the liberal idea correspond to the spiritual values of the Russian people?
3. What is the role of an ordinary citizen in a liberal society, with all his legally protected rights, especially in conditions of total poverty in the Russian Federation?
We leave them unanswered in the text. In the hope that each reader will answer them for himself. And we believe that everyone (according to Socrates) has enough wisdom to distinguish bad from good when answering.
Instead of conclusions
In conclusion, I would like to note that the elite of Russian society today is in a painful creative search for answers to the following three main questions:
How, in the conditions of a liberal idea unattractive for the citizens of Russia, to formulate another unifying, generally acceptable "national idea" that would not allow, firstly, to shake the power of the current elite, and secondly, would not allow society to slide into a spiritually amorphous union of consumers, the main whose purpose of existence will be material wealth?
How, under flourishing liberalism, can we educate patriots who are ready to selflessly serve the Motherland in the face of a real external threat from countries that are ready to plunder its wealth?
How to implement a national project to combat human poverty (the highest constitutional value) while maintaining the growth of the wealth of the oligarchy and their own adopted regulations regarding the pension reform, the labor code and others, and at the same time preserve its attractiveness for voters as highly spiritualized individuals , showing the will to spirit (according to I.A.Ilyin), and thereby preserve their power?
I believe that these 3 questions have become acute now and require immediate answers not only in Russia, but in all countries without exception. Including for the leader of liberalism - the United States.
And we will certainly get answers to them in the foreseeable near future.
We will talk about the image of the future in the next article.
To be continued ...