Powder barrel of the national question
For centuries, the national question has been and is especially crucial for the definition of such concepts as the state and the population. It is the impersonal term “population” that often does not allow a reasonable approach to questions about who we are. Even 25-30 years ago, the population of our country for the most part often did not think about the question of what ethnic group it belongs to. The phrase "Citizen of the USSR" could overshadow any nationality. Today, literally everyone is trying to determine for themselves the version of their own identity, thanks to which they can position themselves on the external arena.
Let us approach the issue of considering national identity with historical points of view. If today one wonders about who the Russians are, then not everyone can give a clear and unambiguous answer. Is Russian the one who lives on the territory of modern Russia? No. Is Russian the one for whom Russian is the main language of communication? Also wrong. Then, perhaps, Russian is a person whose ancestors lived in Russia until 1940 (as in one of the former USSR countries)? Also complete nonsense. So who is Russian?
Turning to our own history, we can say that the Russians are not even a separate nation. This is a kind of kaleidoscope, reflecting a colorful picture, which includes details of various shapes and colors. One cannot speak of our nation as something monolithic. Even when they were born, Russians, according to one version, are a Finno-Ugric tribe that became titular when the new state was born. According to another version, the representatives of the tribe living along the coast of the Ros River were originally called Russians. It turns out that the initial stage of the emergence of our ethnic group is a mystery, according to which it is not clear whether we are more Slavs or Varangians. We will not exaggerate an early historical topic, since it does not even seem obvious to historians, but try to figure out how important it is to classify oneself as a Russian ethnic group today.
Historical examples show us very strange for today's understanding of the national essence of the situation. At different stages of its development, our country followed the path of all-consuming assimilation. Well, tell me, would someone talk about non-Russianness, for example, Bagration or Catherine II. You can begin to fall into lengthy arguments about the national identity of these people, but the story itself put everything in its place. To a normal person today, in principle, it does not matter that Bagration is Georgian, and Catherine in general, Sofia Augustus Frederick, is from Prussia. The main thing is not at all. They deserve the title to be Russian in their ministry. Today we remember those glorious deeds that these and many other people glorified Russia.
Therefore, when they talk about what nationality this or that person lives in our country, this is the shortest way to the emergence of endless and senseless strife. The national question during its existence in itself has grown into thorns, but on this topic, many people also try to play in their own interests.
Today in Russia there are quite a few organizations that are trying to find out the ethnicity of a person. Most often, such clarifications fall into the plane of accusations of all those whom these people regard as non-Russian. In our country, the Jews, the Germans, the Chukchi remain forever guilty ... At the same time, the people who put these stigmas do not seem to be aware of the fact that they are also mixed in their blood ... The principle by which we sometimes trying to determine the national identity of the person. For example, if a person was born and lived all his life in Moscow, while his parents were also born and lived all their lives in Moscow, but the older generation - someone came to the capital from Belarus, someone decided to stay after military service, being originally from Kazakhstan. Can you call this person Russian? If we all try to pass through a meaningless ethnic sieve, the “box” with the Russians will be empty. Well, even if you burst, there are no people in our country who have their ancestry from the very Slavic or Finno-Ugric tribes, which later were not mixed by other nations.
In such a situation, the national policy of our state needs serious revision. A big plus for maintaining mutual trust and respect is the strategy according to which it was decided to exclude the notorious “nationality” column from the passport.
I remember how quite funny situations arose in Soviet times when a person named Azat Marabyan or Solomon Breyfus could have written “Russian” in his passport. However, by and large, it did not bother anyone. Well, Russian and Russian ...
Today, many are trying to catch the fish in the murky waters of nationalism. Someone under the slogan "Russia is for Russians!" Is trying to "clean" our country from people of other nationalities. Someone declares that in Russian - power. But let me see if these statements do not look like an exact repetition of all currently known nationalist slogans. We all remember very well what the similar appeals brought about (only with an emphasis on a certain Aryan nation) in Germany in the 30-40 of the 20-th century.
Even more dead-end can be considered the issue of titular nations. If they say that the titular nation in our country are Russians, then how should the residents of, for example, the North Caucasian republics react. I do not want my nation to make me in the eyes of other people a kind of imperial element that sleeps and sees itself at the head of the whole system built. I think that the issue of the titular nation disappears when a Russian homeless person is put near the Kursk railway station or a Tatar professor, a Jewish engineer or a Buryat alcoholic. A nation will not make a person a person, if its element is a narco-grate or a basement of a high-rise building. A nation is so ephemeral education that all the arguments about the superiority of one ethnic group over another are truly empty. The Chechen is not better than the Russian, the Bashkirs are not worse than the Udmurt - this is already time to realize those who still aim at the target of the national question.
The main thing is that no national identity gives the right to feel superior to others. Our people at all times were distinguished by the fact that they could unite with other nations and thus develop their culture, religion, and philosophy. No artificially created boundaries could ever prevent him from doing so. Let us hope that even now the main function of the Russian people - to unite - will remain the defining element of our identity.
Information