From Past to Future: The Soviet Union and the Russian Empire in Discourses of Rupture and Continuity

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 Q4 Arts and Humanities RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY Pub Date : 2022-09-03 DOI:10.1080/10611967.2022.2144674
Alexei I. Miller, N. V. Trubnikova
{"title":"From Past to Future: The Soviet Union and the Russian Empire in Discourses of Rupture and Continuity","authors":"Alexei I. Miller, N. V. Trubnikova","doi":"10.1080/10611967.2022.2144674","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the still highly politicized question of rupture or continuity between the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, elements of continuity are not hard to find, nor should this be a surprise, since a new state arose in the same geographical space and made use of the economic, intellectual, and demographic resources inherited from the Russian Empire. At the same time, the Soviet Union could not have been more different than the Russian Empire. It rejected a number of key elements of the sociopolitical project that underlay the nationalizing tsarist empire and introduced radically new political and social principles for organizing that space. In particular, the Bolsheviks purposefully engaged in dismantling the tsarist efforts to build a great ethnic-Russian nation to stand at the center of the Russian Empire’s nationalities policy. The irreversible disintegration of post-Soviet space into separate nationalizing states became possible only toward the end of the twentieth century. At the same time, the imperial nature of the modern post-Soviet Russian core permits us to say that the imperial logic has survived. This is where we can find an element of inescapable continuity. We present studies of “continuities” and “ruptures” in modern academic discourse and in an updated format, gravitating toward “empirically nuanced” tools for analyzing multiple historical temporalities.","PeriodicalId":42094,"journal":{"name":"RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY","volume":"60 1","pages":"369 - 381"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10611967.2022.2144674","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT In the still highly politicized question of rupture or continuity between the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, elements of continuity are not hard to find, nor should this be a surprise, since a new state arose in the same geographical space and made use of the economic, intellectual, and demographic resources inherited from the Russian Empire. At the same time, the Soviet Union could not have been more different than the Russian Empire. It rejected a number of key elements of the sociopolitical project that underlay the nationalizing tsarist empire and introduced radically new political and social principles for organizing that space. In particular, the Bolsheviks purposefully engaged in dismantling the tsarist efforts to build a great ethnic-Russian nation to stand at the center of the Russian Empire’s nationalities policy. The irreversible disintegration of post-Soviet space into separate nationalizing states became possible only toward the end of the twentieth century. At the same time, the imperial nature of the modern post-Soviet Russian core permits us to say that the imperial logic has survived. This is where we can find an element of inescapable continuity. We present studies of “continuities” and “ruptures” in modern academic discourse and in an updated format, gravitating toward “empirically nuanced” tools for analyzing multiple historical temporalities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从过去到未来:断裂与连续话语中的苏联与俄罗斯帝国
摘要在俄罗斯帝国和苏联之间仍然高度政治化的断裂或延续问题中,延续的元素并不难找到,也不应该令人惊讶,因为一个新的国家出现在同一地理空间,并利用了从俄罗斯帝国继承的经济、智识和人口资源。与此同时,苏联与俄罗斯帝国的区别再大不过了。它拒绝了作为国有化沙皇帝国基础的社会政治项目的一些关键要素,并引入了全新的政治和社会原则来组织这个空间。特别是,布尔什维克有意推翻沙皇建立一个伟大的俄罗斯民族的努力,使其成为俄罗斯帝国民族政策的中心。直到20世纪末,后苏联时代的太空才有可能不可逆转地解体为单独的国有化国家。同时,现代后苏联俄罗斯核心的帝国主义性质允许我们说,帝国主义逻辑得以幸存。在这里,我们可以找到一个不可避免的连续性元素。我们在现代学术话语中以更新的形式对“连续性”和“断裂性”进行了研究,倾向于使用“经验细致入微”的工具来分析多重历史时间性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Russian Studies in Philosophy publishes thematic issues featuring selected scholarly papers from conferences and joint research projects as well as from the leading Russian-language journals in philosophy. Thematic coverage ranges over significant theoretical topics as well as topics in the history of philosophy, both European and Russian, including issues focused on institutions, schools, and figures such as Bakhtin, Fedorov, Leontev, Losev, Rozanov, Solovev, and Zinovev.
期刊最新文献
Concluding Russian Studies in Philosophy: An Eye Towards the Future The Concept of Perfection in Lev Karsavin’s Religious Metaphysics Variants of Images of the Future in the Work of Lev P. Karsavin Lev Karsavin: Russian Religiosity and Russian Revolution The Metaphysical Path: Lev P. Karsavin’s Philosophical Experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1