{"title":"Using Images of the Soviet Past in the Discourse of United Russia and CPRF","authors":"E. Meleshkina, Ivan Fomin","doi":"10.30570/2078-5089-2022-106-3-80-104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the study of the specificities of the use of the Soviet past in the rhetoric of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and the United Russia. Based on the analysis of the texts of the leaders and functionaries of these parties, the authors reveal the goals of addressing the Soviet heritage, the distinguishing features of its interpretation, the invoked discursive strategies and macrosemantic structures. The authors show how interpreting the Soviet past and establishing its connection with the present and future of Russia serve the tasks of political identification of the party and legitimization of its position. According to the authors’ conclusion, the specifics of the studied parties’ appeal to the Soviet legacy is largely determined by the position they occupy in the country’s political system, as well as the history of their creation and development. With the help of the references to the USSR and certain aspects of its existence, representatives of the United Russia are trying to legitimize the current political course. By focusing on the achievements of the Soviet period, they demonstrate the historical continuity of the current political regime and its orientation towards stability; while by noting the shortcomings of the Soviet system, they highlight how current regime is different and emphasize its successes. Representatives of the United Russia use analogies with political organizations of the past to self-identify as a force that supports and largely ensures the course towards strengthening the Russian state, as well as to present the non-systemic opposition and external players as forces that undermine its stability. The main purpose of referring to the Soviet past in the texts of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation is to demonstrate the continuity of the party in relation to the Soviet period, with the latter being interpreted mostly positively. At the same time, the appeal to certain events of the past allows communists to criticize the current domestic political course, present themselves as an opposition force and support the actions of the Russian government in the international arena.","PeriodicalId":47624,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Philosophy","volume":"98 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Political Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2022-106-3-80-104","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The article is devoted to the study of the specificities of the use of the Soviet past in the rhetoric of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and the United Russia. Based on the analysis of the texts of the leaders and functionaries of these parties, the authors reveal the goals of addressing the Soviet heritage, the distinguishing features of its interpretation, the invoked discursive strategies and macrosemantic structures. The authors show how interpreting the Soviet past and establishing its connection with the present and future of Russia serve the tasks of political identification of the party and legitimization of its position. According to the authors’ conclusion, the specifics of the studied parties’ appeal to the Soviet legacy is largely determined by the position they occupy in the country’s political system, as well as the history of their creation and development. With the help of the references to the USSR and certain aspects of its existence, representatives of the United Russia are trying to legitimize the current political course. By focusing on the achievements of the Soviet period, they demonstrate the historical continuity of the current political regime and its orientation towards stability; while by noting the shortcomings of the Soviet system, they highlight how current regime is different and emphasize its successes. Representatives of the United Russia use analogies with political organizations of the past to self-identify as a force that supports and largely ensures the course towards strengthening the Russian state, as well as to present the non-systemic opposition and external players as forces that undermine its stability. The main purpose of referring to the Soviet past in the texts of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation is to demonstrate the continuity of the party in relation to the Soviet period, with the latter being interpreted mostly positively. At the same time, the appeal to certain events of the past allows communists to criticize the current domestic political course, present themselves as an opposition force and support the actions of the Russian government in the international arena.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Political Philosophy is an international journal devoted to the study of theoretical issues arising out of moral, legal and political life. It welcomes, and hopes to foster, work cutting across a variety of disciplinary concerns, among them philosophy, sociology, history, economics and political science. The journal encourages new approaches, including (but not limited to): feminism; environmentalism; critical theory, post-modernism and analytical Marxism; social and public choice theory; law and economics, critical legal studies and critical race studies; and game theoretic, socio-biological and anthropological approaches to politics. It also welcomes work in the history of political thought which builds to a larger philosophical point and work in the philosophy of the social sciences and applied ethics with broader political implications. Featuring a distinguished editorial board from major centres of thought from around the globe, the journal draws equally upon the work of non-philosophers and philosophers and provides a forum of debate between disparate factions who usually keep to their own separate journals.