Authors

Kevork Oskanian¹;  ¹ University of Birmingham, UK

Discussion

This paper provides the theoretical underpinnings for ‘hybrid exceptionalism’ as an approach to Russian narratives and practices of Empire. I propose this adaptation of Edward Saïd’s ‘Orientalist’ postcolonial approach as a way to conceptualise discourses of hierarchy emanating from the country’s liminal position between East and West. Following Zaraköl and Bhabha, ‘hybridity’ is conceptualised as emerging from the late entry into modern international society by Russia as a not-quite-Western, partially subaltern imperial power. Following Holsti, I define ‘Exceptionalism’ as encompassing five characteristics: a civilising mission, freedom from external constraints, a hostile outside world, a need for external enemies, and a sense of victimhood. Taken together, hybridity and exceptionalism have, on the one hand, resulted in various civilising missions that have justified dominance over Russia’s ‘Own Orient’ during the past two centuries, with standard, Western-style ‘orientalist’ narratives and practices complemented by a claimed kinship with ‘oriental’ subalterns; they have, on the other hand, also legitimised ‘Empire’ in the West by constructing a civilizational difference between the West and Russia and its Western subalterns. A longue-durée analysis of Russian discourses and practices of hierarchy and domination is proposed, encompassing Tsarist Russia, the Soviet Union, and the contemporary Russian Federation.