The scientific-practical Law Journal
“Almanac of Law” Volume 13 (2022), 346-353 p.
DOI: 10.33663/2524-017X-2022-13-55
Khudoyar L. V. The imperial paradigm of the “Russian world”
The article attempts to investigate the origins and genesis of the Russian imperial paradigm over the past 500 years. In particular, pay attention to the role of Ukraine in the imperial paradigm of the “Russian world”. The stages of transformation and the main historical and modern components of Russia’s imperial paradigm are highlighted.
In his articles, the author reached the following conclusions: The imperial paradigm of the “Russian world” began to take shape at the end of the 15th – during the 16th century. Its genesis continues to this day. Over the past 500 years, its components have hardly changed, mostly only the means and methods of their implementation have evolved. The main historical and modern components of the imperial paradigm of the “Russian world” are: the historically formed imperial consciousness of the ruling elite and the population; the despotic repressive power of the rulers; deindividualization and slave mentality of the people; the hierarchy is not of vassals, but of the sovereign’s slaves; the ideological concept “Moscow - the Third Rome”, on the basis of which the messianic idea of the divine election of the Russian people was formed (later the concept of “messianicity” became a secular construct, and the religious concept of “messiah” was replaced by the secular image of “autocrat”); aggressive expansionist and aggressive foreign policy; the concept of world distribution and the idea of world domination; the principle of “legitimate influence”, which was understood as the legal, inalienable right of Russia to ensure its own ideas about security (preemptive conquests, determined not by the needs of the economy or the development of new lands, but by the idea of ensuring the country’s security on its distant approaches); the right of zaymanshchyna, which was interpreted as belonging to Russia on lands where a Russian set foot for the first time without taking into account the rights of the autochthonous population; the “superiority” of Russians over other Slavic peoples; the idea of an “eternal” enemy; selective observance of norms of international law, universal human and Christian values in relation to other “unfriendly” nations, which can and must be destroyed; the destructive nature of the legal order, in which there are no moral assessments of behavior, inhumane principles and illegal ways of solving the tasks set by the authorities operate; distorted religious beliefs; cult of the personality of the ruler; the idea of destroying advanced civilizations; the idea of “sinlessness” of the Russian population and lack of guilt for illegal acts; xenophobia and conservatism. This list is far from exhaustive.
The main “theses” of the imperial concept of the “Russian world “ in relation to Ukraine are: Russians and Ukrainians are a single people; the Ukrainian language does not exist, it is Russian corrupted by Polonisms; The Orthodox Church of Ukraine cannot exist; Moscow – the Third Rome; gathering the “Russian world” is a joint matter of the Russian state and the Russian Orthodox Church; leveling Ukraine’s course towards the EU and NATO; creation of a single economic and humanitarian space with the Russian Federation; denazification; forcing Ukraine by all means, including military aggression, to integrate with Russia.
Key words: Russian imperial paradigm, “Russian world”, Ukraine, Russia, Moscow – the Third Rome.
References
1. Krom M. M. Rozhdeniye gosudarstva: Moskovskaya Rusʹ XV–XVI vekov. Moskva: Novoye literaturnoye obozreniye, 2018. 256 s.
2. Bahan Oleh. Rosiysʹkyy imperializm: dzherela i tsili. 8 kvitnya 2020. URL: http://ukrpohliad.org/analytics/ rosijskyj-imperializm-dzherela-i-tsili.html
3. Presnyakov A. Ye. Obrazovaniye velikorusskogo gosudarstva: ocherki po istorii KHÍÍÍ-KHV stoletiy. Pg.: [b.i.], 1918. VÍ, 458 s.
4. Holovchenko Volodymyr. Vytoky ahresovnosti zovnishnʹoyi polityky Rosiyi. Kyyivsʹki istorychni studiyi. Naukovyy zhurnal. 2016. ¹ 2. S. 68–75.
5. Torhovetsʹ O. «A Rosiya – luchshe vsyekh». Tyzhdenʹ. 2011. 30 (195). URL: http://tyzhden.ua/Politics/26881
6. Danylevych Mykola. Henezys ideyi «Moskva – Tretiy Rym». Ideya Rymu v istoriyi skhidnoslovʺyansʹkoho svit. Trudy Kyyivsʹkoyi dukhovnoyi akademiyi. 2009. ¹ 10. S. 219–233.
7. Rudyachenko Oleksandr. Feofan Prokopovych – Skhidnoslovʺyansʹkyy Konfutsiy. URL: https://www. ukrinform.ua/rubric-culture/2716669-feofan-prokopovic-shidnoslovanskij-konfucij.html
8. Myronenko O. M., Horbatenko V. P. Istoriya vchenʹ pro derzhavu i pravo: navch. posib. Kyiv: VTS «Akademiya», 2010. 456 s.
9. Hubar K. A. Vnesok Kyyevo-Mohylyansʹkoyi akademiyi ta Kyyivsʹkoyi dukhovnoyi akademiyi u vitchyznyanu yurydychnu osvitu, nauku i praktyku (1615–1920 rr.). Kyyiv: Tsentr uchbovoyi literatury, 2016. 240 s.
10. Feofan Prokopovich. Slovo o vlasti i chesti tsarskoy… Sochineniya. Pod. red. I. P. Yeremina. Moskva– Leningrad: izdatelʹstvo Akademii nauk SSSR, 1961. 307 c.
11. Ohloblyn Oleksandr. Hetʹman Ivan Mazepa ta yoho doba = Hetman Ivan Mazepa and His Era. Nʹyu-York; Paryzh; Toronto: Vyd. Orh. Oborony Chotyrʹokh Svobid Ukrayiny, Ligy Vyzvolennya Ukrayiny. 1960. 406 c. URL: http://litopys.org.ua/coss3/ohl.htm
12. Gertsen A. I. Byloye i dumy. Moskva: Det·skaya literatura, 1972. 576 s.
13. URL: https://commons.com.ua/uk/marks-i-engels-pro-rosijskij-imperi/?fbclid=IwAR3QAR2hf_POSHE981R jRNoylgRlDFlwxPWQ2IImCtiTn0dwDwsXJs-yIwk
14. Shporlyuk R. Imperiya ta natsiyi / Per. z anhl. Kyiv: Dukh i Litera, 2000. 354 s.
15. Vystupleniye Svyateyshego Patriarkha Kirilla na torzhestvennom otkrytii III Assamblei Russkogo mira. 2009. 3 noyabrya. URL: http://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/928446.html
<< Back
