The division of cultures on the Eastern and Western fixes not only their territorial location, but also the characteristics of the methods and methods of knowledge of the world, value orientation, the main ideological plants, socio-economic and political structures. "West" implies European and american culture, "Vostok" - the countries of Central, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, North Africa.

Western culture is focused on the values \u200b\u200bof technological development, dynamic lifestyle, improvement of culture and society. The idea of \u200b\u200bthe importance of the personality, the priority of the initiative and creativity is enshrined in constitutional forms. For the sociopomymes of Western culture, wave-like, jerk, unevenness are characteristic. The process of transition to a new leaks as breaking outdated value systems, socio-economic and political structures.

In the east, the new does not reject and does not destroy the old, traditional, but organically fits into it. Western culture is aimed at the beginning, whereas for Eastern is characterized by immersion in inner world man. Many oriental thinkers were convinced that it was possible to improve the world only by finding integrity and harmony in herself. If Western culture has gone along the way to create equipment and technologies encouraging relations with nature, then for Eastern culture, the desire for harmony with nature is characterized, development naturally. However, today we can say that Eastern cultures without losing their original principle, made many features characteristic of the Western world.

Oriental civilizations are more ancient: they arose in the IV-II millennium BC. Western type first appears in ancient Greece about 3000 years ago.

Western culture formed in Western Europe, includes stages:

• o Classical Antique Ellinsky Culture of Ancient Greece;
• o Hellenistic-Roman culture;
• o Romano-German culture of the Christian Middle Ages;
• o New European Culture. The main features of Western culture:
• o priority of a rational reasonable approach to the analysis of the world;
• o Using universal scientific concepts, intensive development of philosophy and sciences;
• o active technical and technological transformation of the world;
• o dynamism and pursuit of novelty;
• o Individualism, the domination of private property. Eastern culture has been formed in the countries of Asia and the Far East and includes subcultures:
• o Culture of the Far East - China, Japan, Korea;
• o Culture of India. Facilities of Eastern Culture:
• o Orientation on spirituality, mysticism;
• o irrationalism;
• o Community start, collectivism, lack of dominant role of private property;
• o Preserving traditions, stability.

For the eastern type of crops, the prevailing influence of mysticism and religion, for Western - philosophy and science.

Most of the inhabitants of Eastern culture are characterized by the character traits caused by religious worldview:

• o The feeling of time as a slow current river;
• o changes in life and in character accumulate slowly, gradually;
• o Lack of fussiness, commitment to material benefits; At the same time, carriers of this culture appreciate all living things, especially nature, and created a cult of loving - both by all the nature and the most small creation (Chinese miniature, the holiday of loving the blooming cherry sakura in Japan);
• o big commitment to national Traditions, Skill to combine modern and traditional.

In world culture, we can allocate three types of relations of the individual world of culture with the outside world.

• o. European Type in which the individual "I" is considered as an essential cultural value. The world of the culture of the individual is focused on the defining, maximum self-realization, on the optimal embodiment internship. And the world surrounding man, and everything cultural environment Must contribute to this.
• o. Ancient Chinese type (oriental). In history chinese culture Higher cultural value In relations with the surrounding cultural world, the subordination of a person was considered to cultural customs and traditions, the suppression of his individual "I", a sense of debt and the need to comply with a specific cultural standard. Not so much individual properties, features personal cultureHow much ability to express them in a rigidly defined fixed form. Individual world Personality cultures must self-solute in the universal whole.
• o. Indian type which is based on the understanding of the human "I" as the unconditional reality of the superior spirit, along with other natural formations and living beings. The bodily and empirical human "I" according to this appeal is subject to the ultra-sighted spirit. Human self-realization is just achieved through the denial of its empirical nature and climbing the spirit. Therefore, the world of individual culture of a person through a breaking of specific relationships with other cultures of individuals, with society, empirical world and even with its own acts is focused on dissolving in a universal spiritual substance.

Culture of Russia in the system "East - West"

Features of the culture of Russia largely identified her geopolitical position: median position between the West and East; the spatial characteristics of the "distances" and "space" as attributes of the Russian mentality; The problem of the "cultural lag" of Russia in the Middle Ages.

The famous Russian philosopher N. A. Berdyaev noted that two streams of world history are facing the West and East. Russian culture can not be considered a purely European or pure Asian: two principals have always fought in it - East and West. IN different periods His development Russian culture borrowed customs and traditions of different nations: pagan deities of Scandinavian peoples; Byzantine Christianity (Orthodoxy); french and the ideas of enlightenment; Language and customs of the English nobility.

One of the essential historical and cultural problems of Russia is the problem of cultural lag in the Middle Ages. TO beginning of XVIII in. Russia did not exist in secular literature, architecture, music, philosophy and science, while Europe by this time had already created a huge array of scientific and philosophical knowledge, had experience in all areas of culture and more progressive state device. Young Peter I, while traveling in Europe was amazed by the difference in the life of Europeans and Russians.

The culture of Russia is the culture of the Russian people who first developed at the East Slavic basis in the form of a culture of ancient Russian nationality (approximately in the VIII - XIII centuries), and from the XIV century. And to the present, represented by the Ukrainian, Belarusian and actually Russian cultures. In this initial and most characteristic of the Russian cultural self-consciousness of understanding, the idea of \u200b\u200bthe temporary, local and essential unity is russian culture and about its specific identity among the cultures of other European peoples.

In determining the concept of "culture of Russia", there are two approaches. The first insists on a sharp opposition of "Russia-Ukraine" and a much larger mixed cultural education that has developed itself in Russia. The second, especially gaining strength at the present time, is a culture of Russia as a set of many different national culturesAnyway, related to Russian culture itself. Both of these desires are subject to a certain extent due to the specifics of the Russian culture and ways to its historical development; The originality of natural conditions and sociocultural environment, as well as a common color of the historic era.

In the Christian world, Russian culture is one of the three (along with the Byzantine and Western Christian) most significant cultures.

Considering the issue about the place of Russia in world History , the specifics of it own history and culture, about the originality of her statehood, trying to delve and explain fancy patterns political history Countries and people are very often referring to the old philosophical and historical scheme "East-West". As if neither the initial concepts were understood - the elements of this classic scheme. Russia is considered belonging to either the West or East or having their own specifics, and therefore does not coincide with the West or East.

In the latter case, several independent positions are possible. For example, we can assume that Russia, as it were, fluctuates between the West and East (G. V. Plekhanov); It can be announced by its Great East-West or West-East (N. A. Berdyaev); You can predict her a great role in the merge of the West and the East based on true Christianity (Young V. S. Soloviev); It can be considered as such a "third force" (term V. S. Solovyov), which directly does not depend on either from the East, nor from the West, forming a special world, quite comparable to two first, although a kind of and unique (Eurasians).

The problem "East - West - Russia" was first announced in "Philosophical letters " P. Ya. Chaadayevwho served as a reason for the occurrence of a discussion between "Wessengers" and "Slavophiles". Considering the history of Russia, P. Ya. Chaadayev believes that it turned out to be eliminated from the World Historical Process. Russia is based on both Europe and east, but must combine these two starts. Such a "cutoff" is a consequence of the adoption of Russia Orthodoxy. The philosopher believes. That if Catholicism is deeply public phenomenon in its essence, the Orthodoxy brings up such qualities in man as humility, humility and asceticism. Expressing the idea that Russia could become a bridge between the West and East, since it has the opportunity to combine both the great beginnings of spiritual nature in its culture - the mind and imagination, P. Ya. Chadaev, thereby puts the question of the "third force" in the world stories.

Like P. Ya. Chadaev, his ideal of sociocultural development in Western Europe was seen westerns,who were absolutely convinced that Russia should learn from the West and go through the same path of development. They wanted Russia to learn European science, culture and the fruits of the age-old enlightenment. Westerners were not interested in religion, and if among them were religious people, they did not see the advantages of Orthodoxy and had a tendency to exaggerate the shortcomings of the Russian Church. Optimism of Westerners was confident that Russia will pass The path of Europe, since it is already on her threshold and all the movements of European life find a response in it.

In contrast to Wessengers, efforts slavophilov They were aimed at developing Christian world-upsion, based on the teachings of the Fathers of the Eastern Church and Orthodoxy in the original form, which the Russian people gave him. They idealize the historical and cultural past of Russia and the Russian national character. Slavophiles highly appreciated the original features of Russian culture and argued that the history and culture of Russia developed, and will develop in their own path, completely different from the way western peoples. In their opinion, Russia is designed to improve the Western Europe spirit of Orthodoxy and Russian public ideals, to help Europe in the resolution of its internal and external problems In accordance with the general Christian principles.

For almost the entire XIX century. in research literature did the idea of \u200b\u200bdeep and principled difference Russian history from the history of Western European peoples. Support on the Gegelian Triad - China, India, Middle East - and simultaneous introduction to world history Russia as its new necessary levels allowed two, purely theoretical capabilities: the preservation of three elements, but the premises of Russia as an additional link to one of them (most likely, in the third, Christian - according to its main characteristic); Or a reduction in the former circuit to two elements and the introduction of a new element in the triad - Russia.

Of the theoretical capabilities of the second, the second has an explicit theoretical priority. However, the idea of \u200b\u200bthe Russian identity dominated in Russian social philosophical thought XIX century, used the first, since Russia was presented for Russian thinkers, above all, a country of Christianity and Christian culture.

Thus, the question of Russia, its culture and place in history in relation to East - West is solved as follows. In-1, indicating the Christian character of its spiritual and cultural tradition and the European affiliation of the ethnos, society and statehood (it differs from the civilizations of the East). The 2nd, indicating on Orthodoxy and the coincidence of statehood and civilization due to the geopolitical specificity, which distinguishes Russia from the countries of Western Europe. Pure historically Russia (Together with Byzantium and Western Europe) - This is the secondary and most young Christian civilization of the Western world.

Comparative consideration of Russian culture with others, as a rule, aims to establish a fundamental interaction between them, as well as overcoming, speaking by O. Spengler, "interpro-permeability" of closed cultures of civilizations. Such a comparison is possible on three levels: 1) national (Russian and French, Russian and japanese culture etc.); 2) civilization (comparison of Russia with the civilizations of the East and Western European "Faustovskaya" or Western European civilization); 3) typological (Russia in the context of the West and East at all).

IN nationally russian culture is one of the national European cultures having a special "face", Along with all the others, starting with the ancient Ellini, from which the European civilizational and historical tradition is coming. This specificity - its huge territory and the unified state of the Russian people, and from here - the coincidence of the nation and civilization.

From Eastern civilizations, Russian is distinguished by Christianity and communications with the Highway European Base (through Greek Byzantium); From the civilization of Western European peoples - the Orthodox nature of Russian culture and the moments mentioned above.

Finally, in the widest cultural context Russia together with Western Europe is the West as opposed to the East. This is determined by the place of Russia in the dialogue of cultures. As a geopolitical force, she already saved European civilization twice: from Tatar-Mongol in the Middle Ages and from its own European "plague" (fascism) - in the twentieth century.

But can Russia, as spiritual force, become a "bridge" between Europe and Asia or, especially, between initial Christianity and future spirituality on our planet, this is a big and difficult question. When considering the place and role of Russia in modern culture, two options for reasoning are admissible: from world culture to the Russian, and, on the contrary.

For modern culture Characterized by two the most important features: cultural expansion of the West - in the situation of marginal priority and at the same time universalization of its own culture; and struggle for cultural autonomy and identityin invalid civilizations in the face of "modernization" and "westernization".

Russian culture in a new time and especially in Soviet and post-Soviet era Tested on this impact. Finding a significant desire to adopt the standards of "Westernity" and "modernism", which already twice led to the collapse of the established statehood and to the historical discontinuity between Orthodoxy and the culture.

To what extent is a culture focused on a science-materialistic ideal of universality, internally contradictory for its basis, has a perspective and the future, "the question is increasingly exciting the most serious Western thinkers. Their search - in the direction of the revival of the basic values \u200b\u200bof Christian culture - coincides with the efforts of those Orthodox thinkers and scientists, people of art, public figures and politicians who defend not the "selflessness" of Russia for himself, and the idea of \u200b\u200bits principal spirituality traditional for Russian culture.

Reflecting on the question of the place of Russia in history and in modern world, various philosophers somehow considered Russia as part of the East-West scheme. At the same time, Russia refers either to the east or west, or recognize it with a special country, not Western and not eastern.

In the history of Russian thought for last case Some independent concepts of the problem "East-West" are known:

• G. Plekhanov believed that Russia is as if between East and West, leaning on one side, then to another.
• N. Berdyaev declared her Eastos-West or the West-East.
• Young perched Great fate: Russia must unite East and West on the basis of true Christianity.
• According to Eurasians, Russia forms a special world, the "third force", quite similar to the west, and east, but independent of them.

Therefore, to navigate in all these diverse points of view and understand the true situation of Russia in the world, it is necessary to unambiguously establish the importance of the initial concepts and terms, divorce the boundaries of the concepts of "West", "East" and their correlation with each other.

In the presentation of Europeans, East has always been in a certain opposition to the West. The mysterious and unfamiliar east was a flutter from contradictions - they said, on the one hand, about its constancy and high spirituality and, on the other, about stagnation and slavery. Against the background of the "East", it was brighter to be seen by the originality of the West, in fact, in the process of thinking of the East, the conquering of Western European.

Paradigm "Vostok-West" helped Europeans to form the European self-consciousness itself. Therefore, the concepts of "East" and "West" influence our worldview - voluntarily or unwittingly, regardless of our critical or dogmatic attitude towards them.

For the first time, the theoretical concepts of "East" and "West" used in his writings philosopher G. Hegel. Under the name "East", it unites three cultural and historical formations:

• chinese, which includes China,

• indian, which includes India,

• and the Middle Eastern, which includes the ancient civilizations of Asia, North Africa: Persia, including the people of Zarathustra, Assyria, Midida, Iran, Babylon, Syria, Fihood, Jew, Egypt, as well as the Islamic world.

"West" in Hegel made up two civilizations formed in the north of the Mediterranean, Roman and Greek. It should be noted that in the system of Hegel Russia there was no place.

Thus, the "West" in the philosophy of Hegel had two meanings:

1. wide, including antique time and christian culture European peoples;
2. narrow, including only the Christian world.

These interpretations have their supporters and opponents.

"Localists" (N.Ya. Danilevsky, O. Shpengler, A. Tynby), rejecting the paradigm "West - East", considered "West" only the Western European world. E. Gusserl called Ancient Greece "Spiritual Motherland" of the West.

K. Jaspers offered a compromise point of view. He considers Western civilization of one of the many local, but notes its special role in world history, especially in the era of the new time, and indicates that Western culture is a spiritual heir to Greek, Jewish and Roman cultures.

Jaspers introduces the concept of "axial time", universal for all mankind, criticizing the Hegelian "world axis" associated exclusively with Christianity. But since Christianity itself was the basis only for Western civilization, to choose him as a boundary of this "axial time" for the whole world incorrectly. The desired versatility, and with it and the fullness of being, existed before, for example, in eastern cultures. Jaspers calls the "amazing epoch" time between the VIII and II centuries BC, when different parts Lights protruding their prophets: in China - Confucius and Lao Tzu, in Persia and Iraq - Zarathustra, in India - Buddha, in Palestine is created Old TestamentPhilosophy is actively developing in Greece. At this time, a person overcomes his local thinking and aware of himself. But people did not unite into a single formation, but several foci of world religions and political paradigms were formed.

It is worth noting that Jaspers practically does not use the concept of "East". China and India he considers as independent cultural worlds along with the West. In the widespread concept of "West", it includes not only Western Millennium II culture, but also the culture launched Egyptian, Mesopotamsk, critical-mixed civilizations, continued in the antiquity of the Greeks, Romans, Persians, Jews, completed in the Christian era of Byzantia, Russia, Europe, America and Islamic civilizations. In addition, the West in the Concept of Jaspers is considered as a cradle of ideas about freedom, democracy, philosophy, science.

Problem East - West - Russia in the history of philosophical thought

The question of Russia's place in the Paradigm "East - West - Russia" was first raised in "Philosophical letters."

• Westerners argued that Russia is part of European culture, i.e. West. Slavophiles believed that Russia is a "distinctive spiritual education."
• The third point of view was - the concept of K. Leontiev.

Greater support for the ideas of Slavophiles. Without recognizing the "East-West" paradigm, he developed the idea of \u200b\u200bthe presence of independent cultural and historical types. Russian culture, according to Danilevsky, just imagined such a special type of culture.

Almost all of the 19th century in Russian philosophical thought dominated the idea of \u200b\u200bthe "features" of Russia in a number of other civilizations, which had an impact on the formation of the national Russian civilizational and historical identity.

This process was embodied in the famous formulas:

• « The history of Russia requires another thought, another formula "(A. Pushkin),

• "My mind is not understood" (F. Tyutchev)

• "Rus, where you wear you, give an answer?" (N. Gogol),

• "Why don't we hold last words His [Christ]? " (F. Dostoevsky).

Based on the fact that Russian culture is Christian, Westerners put on the third world-historical stage slavic peoples Along with German. Slavophile, indicating cultures, opposed Russia Western Europe.

Chaadaev believed that Russian culture could combine both the mind and imagination, so Russia could become a kind of bridge between the West and East. He calls Russia "Third Sour" in history.

The introduction of Russia to the Gegelian triad "China, India, the Middle East" admits two theoretical capabilities:

1) preservation of the triad with the room of Russia "inside" of one of the elements;

2) Reducing the elements up to two and introduction to the Russian Triad instead of one of them.

Theoretical priority clearly has the second possibility. However, the idea of \u200b\u200bRussian identity dominated the idea of \u200b\u200bRussian identifiers in the XIX century philosophy, so Russian thinkers used in that epoch.

The second opportunity used in his surveys. Solovyov, offering in the "philosophical principle of whole knowledge" the formula "East-West-Russia".

Vl. Solovyov offered the idea of \u200b\u200ba triple dismemberment of history. He allocated three steps of world-historical development. Two already, according to the thought of philosopher, we have already passed. At the first stage, the "face" of mankind was East. After the Christian border and the second stage followed, where the dominant role in history was played by the West. In this scheme, neither antiquity, nor Byzantium, nor ancient Russia ll. Solovyov does not consider as significant cultural and political entities.

According to Solovyov:

• East symbolizes the "inhuman god",
• West - "godless man."

The confrontation of the West and the East is completed on the third stage, characterized by the establishment of true Christianity. The carrier of the new mentality can be only a young people who are not connected with the West or East, for example, Russia.

The concepts of the "culture of the East" and "Culture of the West" are very conditional. Figuratively speaking, the East (under which Asia usually usually understands) and the West (represented by Europe and North America) are two branches of one tree, developing each in its direction, at one time, in parallel, but in different ways. None of them towers over the other. They are inherent in some similarity, but there are enough differences. What do they differ? Let's try to figure out.

Definition

Culture of East - Culture of countries such as China, India, Japan, as well as other Asian states, distinguished resistance, traditional, unshakable.

Culture of west - Culture of Europe and North Americaembodulating a dynamic lifestyle, rapid development, including in the technological sphere.

Comparison

The man of the West, unlike the man of the East, has his mentality, its views on life, being, nature and much more. Cultures of the East and West differ in religious, philosophical, scientific and other issues. The main cultural differences between the East and the West are presented in the table.

Conclusions Site

1. The culture of the East is characteristic of sustainable historical development, The West moves forward by jerks.
2. Western culture is characterized by a dynamic way of life, the previous system of values \u200b\u200bis destroyed - another occurs. Eastern culture is distinguished by inviolability, non-resistance, stability. New trends are harmoniously embedded in the existing system.
3. IN eastern culture A lot of religions get along nearby. In Western christianity dominates.
4. Eastern culture is based on ancient customs, stuff. The West is typical of the separation of traditions.
5. For West, scientific, technological, rational knowledge of the world is characteristic. East is irrenine.
6. The man of the Western world is cut off from nature, he commands her. The man of the East is merged with nature.

• Civilization (from Lat. Civilis - "Civil") - level public Development, material and spiritual culture. Sometimes this word is called the image of a social device, culture and religion characteristic of a certain country, the region, the people.
• Sociology (T Lat. Societas - "Society" and Greek. "Logos" - "The Word") is studying the patterns of the development of society, the relationship of the individual and society.
• Latin alphabet, or Latin, developed in the IV-III centuries. before and. e. in Ancient Rome. It is based on writing many languages \u200b\u200bof the world.
• I am Cyrillic - slavic ABC, created on the basis of the Greek letter at the end of the IX - early X century. The basis of the Russian alphabet.
• The largest Russian ethnographer of the second half of the XX century. Sergey Alexandrovich Tokarev to question: "Who do you think - by Europe or Eura-Zitat?" - exclaimed: "Of course, the European!".

Russia is a country of two parts of the world: it takes East Europe and the North Asia. In the European part there are 78% of its population, and in Asian - 22%, and in Europe there are 25% of the territory, and in Asia - 75%. In culturally, Russia is a unique state. More than 85% of Slavs (Russian, Ukrainians, Belarusians, etc.) are close in culture to the Christian European world, and about 10% of the population (approximately 15 million people - Tatars, Bashkirs, Buryats, Kalmyki, etc.) are connected with Islamic and Buddhist Civilization of the East. Therefore, Russia can be called equally and the European, and Asian country.

Russian coat of arms - two-headed eaglewhich looks in both directions. Where will it send his flight double-headed bird? Will Russia work to cooperate with the East Sospars without giving up with Europe, but also without being excessive dependent on it? Or will it seek in a community of European countries, while maintaining special relations with the eastern and southern neighbors? Or maybe our country will choose a special path - not western and not eastern? To answer these questions, you must first understand what the West and East and "how much" both in Russia.

West and East

Most often under the West understand economically developed states of Western Europe and North America (USA and Canada). Sometimes in their number includes Japan, which is in cultural terms than owned by the East, and in economic and technological - closer to the West. Undoubtedly, Catholic Ireland and Italy, Orthodox Greece and Protestant Scandinavia are very different; But also undoubtedly, they belong to one type of development (and economic, and cultural). Their unity is bonded by major political and military unions: NATO, UES, "Big Seed", etc. (see Article "Russia and International Organizations").

Unlike the West of the Unified East, there is no. Simple geographical division (East is Asia, and the West is Europe) does not give anything. Muslim East (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, etc.), India, China, Buddhist countries of Southeast Asia (Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, etc.), Catholic Philippines differ from each other at no less, and sometimes even more, than from the countries of Europe. East is a bizarre mix of various economic styles, religions and cultures. Buddhist Japan occupies a special place, which, according to the type of economic and technological development, refer to the countries of the West.

So what is the West different from the East? First, in the West above the level of economic and technological development. Secondly, the culture of west is based mainly on Christian values \u200b\u200b(although this does not mean that all the inhabitants of the West profess Christianity), and the culture of the East was formed on the basis of Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. In addition, according to sociologist scientists, The West in the nature of people is dominated by such features as individualism, personal responsibility and initiative, and in the east - community, and therefore collective responsibility. Thus, the West "and" East is not so much geographical as economic and primarily cultural concepts.

And how do East and West relate in Russia itself? There are two points of view. According to one, East - Nestlavian, mainly the non-Christian population of both European (Tatars, Kalmyki, Bashkirs) and the Asian part of the country (Buryats, etc.). In this sense, Slavic peoples, wherever they live, appear part of the West, that is, the European Christian Civilization. Supporters of this point of view believe that the East and West united in Russia, and since more than 85% of its inhabitants can be attributed to the West, the country's development should go along the Western way. Another point of view denies the existence of a pan-European civilization. According to this theory, there are two Christian civilizations: one - in fact, the Western, possembly (it is also called the Atlantic, Romano-Germanic, Catholicophestanta), and the other, opposing it, is the Eastern Christ-Staean (mainly Orthodox and mainly Slavic). According to adherents of such a look, in our country the East is adjacent to the special, Slavic, world, so Russia is collected by its own path of development, not similar to any other. In the XIX century Defenders of these theories were called respectively by Wessengers and Slavophiles. The word "Slavophiles" can be translated as "loving Slavs", since the Greek verb "Filo" means "love." So what of two points of view is right? There is no answer to this question, and the disputes between Wessengers and Slavophiles do not cease so far.

Westerners and Slavophiles - an unfinished dispute

The beginning of the dispute can be attributed to the XVII century. Why not earlier? Apparently, because before the Mongol-Tatar invasion, this question did not get up at all. Ancient Russia It was included in the system of European political and economic relations. With nomads of the princes, they fought, they concluded close alliances, but in general, relations with them were stable. Later, in the Epoch of the Golden Town Iga, everything changed. We accounted for equally to defend themselves from the danger that came from the eastern frontier, and from the attacks of the Germans, Swedes, Polyakov, Danes. And only after troubled time ( start XVII c.) With all the sharpness, the question arose: Who to be Russia? With Europe, and the Asian Russia is considered only as a source of resources? Or with Asia, carrying "light of Orthodoxy" in her and roaming from the "heretical and integral" effect of the West?

The pronounced "Western" was Petr I. All his activities were aimed at the acquisition of Russia to European values \u200b\u200band passed in the fierce struggle with the old aristocracy, which did not want to part with the familiar lifestyle. "Westerns" can be called all subsequent Russian monarchs: none of them tried to restore the Dopardrov orders, and in the blood, by culture, they were much more than Western-Pents, rather than Russians.

However, is it possible to call Russian kings, and above all Peter I, authentic Wester, without quotes? They willingly adopted the external features of Western civilization (costumes, wigs, etiquettes, military statutes), but here are the socio-political foundations (personal freedom of citizens, free labor, an independent court, etc.) remained most often alien to them. The development of the country was based on the subalkal labor of serfs and serf workers, on a rigid bureaucratic management apparatus. Genuine Wessengers of the turn of the XVIII-XIX centuries. There were only writers and public figures N. I. Novikov, A N. Radishchev, M. M. Speransky and some others. Their fate most often became OPAL or reference.

However, it is unlikely to legally divide historical characters on Westerners and Slavophiles. Widely thoughtful personalities, such as A. S. Pushkin and A. S. Griboedov, could easily combine respect for Europe's achievements with love for the best features of the Russian cultural heritage.

The concepts of "Western" and "Slavophil" appeared rather late, in the middle of the XIX century. Slavophiles of that time (A, S. Khomyakov, I. S. Aksakov and K. S. Aksakov, I. V. Kireevsky, Yu. F. Samarin,) advocated the special way of the development of Russia, fundamentally different from Western. They believed that it was necessary to develop their own - Russian or "generally Slavic" - culture, to a certain extent exhauscing himself from the West. Other, non-European peoples of the country, according to Slavophilov, must be attached to Slavic, and in a religious plan - to Orthodox values.

Westerners (P.V.annenkov, V. P. Botkin, T. N. Granovsky, Kavelin, V. G. Belinsky, I. S. Turgenev) saw the path of development of Russia completely different. In their opinion, the Slavic peoples of Russia should perceive Western culture and political ideals, and then spread these ideals among other nations of the country.

And Westerners and Slavophiles equally without special sympathies treated Islam, and Buddhist and Hindu values \u200b\u200bwere not interested in them in general, or imagined purely cognitive interest. Only individual Slavophile thinkers, such as the writer and artist Nikolai Konstantinovich Roerich, it was in the conjunction of Christian and Hindu-Buddhist spirituality that the possibility of moral cultivation of humanity was seen.

It would seem that the October Revolution of 1917 decided the age-old dispute - Russia chose the path of development, based on the communist ideas that came from Europe. However, and soviet power The Western and Slavophilic point of view on the development of the country continued rivalry.

The pre-revolutionary and post-revolutionary activities of the Bolsheviks party and its leader V. I. Lenin was mainly Western. Marxism itself, idea base The Politics of the USSR, which was fully the span of Western political economy thought. However, as it was, in the era of Peter I, taking some ideas, the Bolsheviks did not try to transfer the main achievements of the West to the Russian soil - the freedom and personal independence of citizens, and others. On the contrary, in the country reigned lawlessness and terror, and the whole world was separated from Russia "Iron Curtain". It is natural that at the end of the 40s. Stalin began open company Fight with "low-fold West." Such a position can be considered the external manifestation of Slavophilism.

Eurasianism - the third path?

After the revolution, hundreds of thousands of emigrants from Russia were in Western Europe. The years spent on a foreign land for many not easy. The West was not very hospitable accepted aliens, it was not easy to join his life. In a new environment, many emigrants were especially acutely aware of their "Russian peculiarity", their difference from Europeans.

Probably, in part, therefore, the ideological and political and philosophical current called "Eurasianism" originated in the Russian emigration environment. His prominent ideologists were an outstanding linguist N. S. Trubetskaya, geographer and economist P. N. Savitsky.

Eurasians sharply criticized Western European civilization and its value. The fact that Russia has led them for a long time, they considered to be a sin, and the communist revolution is paid for him. Like Slavophiles, the Eurasians saw the future of the country in the revival of "Russian nominations", but they understood it in their own way. The originality of Russia, in their opinion, is the union of all those inhabiting her peoples, in mixing their blood, in synthesis (from Greek. "Synthesis" - "compound") of the Slavic, Finno-Ugors and Turkic-Mongolian cultures. These processes occurred during the centuries. Eurasians, unlike Slavophiles, were considered east as one of of essential factors the formation of Russian identity; They considered Russia the Orthodox-Muslim Ski Buddhist Country.

This is what Nikolai Sergeyevich Trubetskoy wrote about this: "It is significantly important for Ev-Rhodesia that it loves precisely a narrow-eyed, barless and cheese face real Russia - Eurasia, and not the fantastic Slavic beauty in the pearl Kokoshnik, which the Slavic Film Russian patriots of the pre-revolutionary period created in their imagination. "

Being convinced anti-communists, Eurasians nevertheless treated the USSR. They believed that over time, the Russian people would free from puff soviet ideology and, using the state power of the state, will perform its historical mission: Combinate and will ensure the development of all - both Slavic and non-Slavic - Nations of Eurasia. Therefore, the Eurasians welcomed, in particular, the creation of a new writing for peoples Soviet Union Based on the Russian alphabet. Such writing was believed that these peoples with Russian culture will be tightly and at the same time will turn them away from the West with his Latin, and from the writing of Muslim peoples developed before the Arab Revolution. Similar expectations were justified, however, not completely. Cyrillic turned out to be much less convenient for the languages \u200b\u200bof the peoples of the North and the Caucasus than the alphabets created on a Latin basis in the 20s. and canceled in 1938

Many leaders of the non-Slavic peoples of Russia treated and belong to Eurasianism very wary, fearing that under the guise of Eurasian peoples, they seek to recreate the state with Russian as a dominant majority.

Again at the crossroads

In the XX century, and especially after the collapse of the USSR, the ratio of the West and the East has changed in Russia, although not very much. Country of a purely western type, once part of the Russian Empire and the USSR, today completely separated - politically, economically, culturally. After October 1917, Poland and Finland were such, and then, in 1991, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia. These countries have become organic part of Europe. Independence and other republics found in the West of the Soviet Union, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova. They cannot be unambiguously called "Western", but none is not completely "eastern." Separated from Russia and Typical Eastern Republics Central Asia. And yet at the end of the XX century. Russia remains West Eastern Power.

At the turn of the Millennium, the question of what way to choose, again became one of the main in the public life of the country. Is it possible to copy the western type of state and the economy or these innovations do not fit and Russia should look for its own, nothing like a path? The centuries-old dispute of Westerners and Slavophiles, which began a few centuries ago, is still not over.

In 1991, the helm of the economy in Russia had supporters of market reforms and development of democracy. Most of them believed that the country should develop on the Western way, not forgetting, of course, about his characteristics. They argued that the laws of the economy and sociology, as well as the laws of physics and chemistry, do not know the boundaries; And only undergoing the rules for which the prosperous West lives, you can achieve the revival of Russia. However, the reforms carried out by them were accompanied by a series of failures and crises, and therefore many residents of the country were used to the idea of \u200b\u200bthe company's arrangement in the Western model.

At the same time, Slavophilic, and Eurasian ideas are popular in Russia. However, the all-Russian centuries-old dispute about the choice between the West and East by the end of the 20th century, apparently, is gradually solved still in favor of the West. Russia will probably become an increasingly European country, but while maintaining unique multinational identity.