http://thesydneyglobalist.org/archives/360 An Undergraduate International Affairs Magazine Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:27:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 http://thesydneyglobalist.org/archives/360/comment-page-1#comment-5 Stary Fri, 21 Nov 2008 06:36:51 +0000 http://thesydneyglobalist.org/?p=360#comment-5 Russia is neither "East" nor "West". As Europe, China, India, Muslim countries, Russia is a civilization, the Russian Civlization. As such it has its own culture, mentality, history, values, political structure, etc. Therefore, the political and civic terms such as "freedom", "democracy", "civil society", "human rights" have different merit and even meaning in the Russian culture. It is meaningless to adopt Western model of political system to the Russian soil: it was designed only for the Western, mostly protestant civilization. As the authors of this article correctly stated it is valid only for countries with the Westernized population such as Chechs or Polish. But not in Russia. From this point of view, Andrej Illarionov (and other pro-Western politicians such as Kasparov, Gozman, Nemtsov, Yavlinsky) is fundamentally wrong: it is impossable to implement the Western nodel of society into Russia without killing Russia. That's what the leaders of International Bol'sheviks (most of whom were not ethnic Russian and did not care about Russia but World Communism) tried to do in 1917-1926: implement in Russia the Western theory of Marxism. But in fact, they used Russia as the tool and "woods" for the World Communist Revolution. Note that the Russian "free-market reformers" of 90-s are called in Russia "bol'sheviks". Anyway, the authors deserve good "mark" for being bold and intellegent to challange traditional Western cultural and political "Eurocentrism".... Good job! Russia is neither “East” nor “West”. As Europe, China, India, Muslim countries, Russia is a civilization, the Russian Civlization. As such it has its own culture, mentality, history, values, political structure, etc. Therefore, the political and civic terms such as “freedom”, “democracy”, “civil society”, “human rights” have different merit and even meaning in the Russian culture. It is meaningless to adopt Western model of political system to the Russian soil: it was designed only for the Western, mostly protestant civilization. As the authors of this article correctly stated it is valid only for countries with the Westernized population such as Chechs or Polish. But not in Russia.
From this point of view, Andrej Illarionov (and other pro-Western politicians such as Kasparov, Gozman, Nemtsov, Yavlinsky) is fundamentally wrong: it is impossable to implement the Western nodel of society into Russia without killing Russia. That’s what the leaders of International Bol’sheviks (most of whom were not ethnic Russian and did not care about Russia but World Communism) tried to do in 1917-1926: implement in Russia the Western theory of Marxism. But in fact, they used Russia as the tool and “woods” for the World Communist Revolution. Note that the Russian “free-market reformers” of 90-s are called in Russia “bol’sheviks”.
Anyway, the authors deserve good “mark” for being bold and intellegent to challange traditional Western cultural and political “Eurocentrism”…. Good job!

]]>