Discussion
Russia’s Philosophy and the Idea of Empire
The current administration of the Russian Federation is often accused of an attempt to restore the Soviet Union as a global power, or, alternatively, the ambition to bring to life the pre-Soviet Russian Empire. Arguably, for those in power in Moscow the difference between these two options is marginal: both their foreign and their domestic policies are driven by the desire to make post-Soviet Russia once again the centre-piece of a huge centrally governed political and economic space with sufficiently large buffers on all sides. In this paper, I will label this Russia’s Imperial Ambition.
Russia’s philosophical tradition, while influenced by Western thinkers and currents on many points, has developed as a self-reflexive tradition in its own right since the first decades of the 19th century. This tradition, while generally critical of the subsequent tsars, secretaries-general (of the CPSU), and presidents, if only because their administrations tended to either ban or repress or ideologically encapsulate independent thought, has always had to deal with the aforementioned Imperial Ambition as an unavoidable part of their situation. Often, one can perceive two variants, one militant, the other benevolent, of what, in this paper, I will label the Idea of Empire.
This raises several questions:
- What is the argumentative matrix of philosophers in Russia when it comes to Empire?
- Is “imperialism” as an philosophical motif “worse” than “nationalism” - and if so, how and why?
- What are the possible “antidotes” in Russia’s philosophical tradition against the Imperial Temptation?
Without suggesting any immediate link between the ideas of philosophers and the priorities of commanders-in-chief, the paper will explore and tentatively answer the above questions.
Dr. Evert van der Zweerde
Professor of Social and Political Philosophy, Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands
