Неудобный юбилей: Итоги переосмысления «мифа основания» СССР в официальном историческом нарративе РФ
The article analyses political decisions about commemoration of the centenary of the Revolution of 1917 in Russia. On the basis of the official documents, statements of the politicians and publications of media the author reveals the process of re-interpretations of the Revolution of 1917 in the Russian official historical narrative. This event is crucially important for development of the post-Soviet historical narrative as far as this event once had played a role of “the foundational myth” of the Soviet regime
The article analyzes major trends in the official politics of history in the context of the other problems involved in construction of national identity in Russia during the last twenty years. It traces the main shifts in political usage of the national history in 1990-2000s focusing on discourse analysis of seventeen annual presidential addresses. It argues that due to the series of choices of the ruling part of the Russian political elite the spectrum of symbolic moments that could be used as the pillars of the new Russian identity was essentially narrowed. As a result the Great Patriotic War became one of the key moments of the politics of history.
In this article is made an attempt to reconstruct the attitude of the historian A.N.Savin to the situation in Russia in 1917 and after that, to analise his political views and ideas.
The article analyzes the frames of representation of collective identity of macro political (national) community the “constitutes” the Russian state in electoral rhetoric of Vladimir Putin. Following the patterns of representation of Us and Others in the seven articles, published during the campaign in the major newspapers, the author reveals the dynamics of the campaign. A special attention is devoted to the public reaction to the article about “national question”.
This article couples framing analyses with social identity issues to provide a critical discourse analysis of the Sochi Olympics opening ceremony, along with the various media depictions surrounding it. Moreover, it explores the idea of 'derzhava' as a rediscovered political narrative/frame in Russian symbolic politics. We argue that images and symbols alluding to different events in the past and present play significant roles in the social construction of people’s identities. Our lives are largely dependent upon what we tend to forget, and what we still remember. As the first impressions of the Sochi Olympics Games pass away, we are finally able to see what stayed hidden, and what was deliberately left in light. Relying upon the research on the connection between collective memory and social identity, we examine several Sochi Olympics events, seeking to identify what the organizers of the Games wanted us to remember, and what was meant to be forgotten. What symbols and signs were deliberately and repeatedly manifested to evoke Russian national pride? What was left behind the scenes in order not to revive traumatic collective memory of the past? An analysis of two frames – “the frame of commemoration” and “the frame of obliteration” - helps to shed light on the veiled elements of new Russian social identity construction today. In addition, our analysis helps to explain how the Sochi Olympics became a springboard for launching a more forceful symbolic politics commensurate with new Russian power ambitions.
In chaper 6 Olga Malinova focuses on the interface between macro-political identity and official symbolic policy in post-Soviet Russia. Identity policy is an integral aspect of symbolic politics and Malinova describes such identity construction in Russia from the start of the century to the present through a reading of the presidential addresses of Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev.
The article deals with the processes of building the information society and security in the CIS in accordance with modern conditions. The main objective is to review existing mechanisms for the formation of a common information space in the Eurasian region, regarded as one of the essential aspects of international integration. The theoretical significance of the work is to determine the main controls of the regional information infrastructure, improved by the development of communication features in a rapid process.The practical component consists in determining the future policies of the region under consideration in building the information society. The study authors used historical-descriptive approach and factual analysis of events having to do with drawing the contours of today's global information society in the regional refraction.
The main result is the fact that the development of information and communication technologies, and network resources leads to increased threats of destabilization of the socio-political situation in view of the emergence of multiple centers that generate the ideological and psychological background. Keeping focused information policy can not be conceived without the collective participation of States in the first place, members of the group leaders of integration - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Currently, only produced a comprehensive approach to security in the information field in the Eurasian region, but the events in the world, largely thanks to modern technology, make the search for an exit strategy with a much higher speed. The article contributes to the science of international relations, engaging in interdisciplinary thinking that is associated with a transition period in the development of society. A study of current conditions in their relation to the current socio-political patterns of the authors leads to conclusions about the need for cooperation with the network centers of power in the modern information environment, the formation of alternative models of networking, especially in innovation and scientific and technical areas of information policy, and expanding the integration of the field in this region on the information content.
This special publication for the 2012 New Delhi Summit is a collection of articles by government officials from BRICS countries, representatives of international organizations, businessmen and leading researchers.
The list of Russian contributors includes Sergei Lavrov, Foreign Minister of Russia, Maxim Medvedkov, Director of the Trade Negotiations Department of the Russian Ministry of Economic Development, Vladimir Dmitriev, Vnesheconombank Chairman, Alexander Bedritsky, advisor to the Russian President, VadimLukov, Ambassador-at-large of the Russian Foreign Affairs Ministry, and representatives of the academic community.
The publication also features articles by the President of Kazakhstan NursultanNazarbayev and internationally respected economist Jim O’Neil, who coined the term “BRIC”. In his article Jim O’Neil speculates about the future of the BRICS countries and the institution as a whole.
The publication addresses important issues of the global agenda, the priorities of BRICS and the Indian Presidency, the policies and competitive advantages of the participants, as well as BRICS institutionalization, enhancing efficiency and accountability of the forum.