The article addresses one of the fundamental issues in the theory of revolutions -the problem of classification of revolutions. The existing approaches distinguish revolutions depending on their self-proclaimed mission-theory (formational, modernization, and civilizational) and peculiar features -alleged driving forces, ideological vector, etc. The author proposes to rely in systematization on the phenomenon itself, rather than on the theoretical basis that this phenomenon should correspond to. From our point of view, a comparative analysis of revolutions based on their algorithm allows determining their sort and type. We propose an approach to comparative analysis of revolutions which is based on two criteria related to the subject of research, namely: an algorithm of a revolution (stages, phases, and developmental vector) and the problems it resolves. Based on these principles, the author concludes that there are two sorts of revolutions, each of which is further subdivided into three types.
The article examines the figure of Vladimir Ulyanov-Lenin, whose 150th birthday anniversary was celebrated in April 2020. With all the discrepancy of public opinion on Lenin, this political figure is part of world history: Lenin became one of the most considerable historical persons of the 20th century and had a rather strong impact on the historical process. The author sees the aim of comprehending the Russian Revolution in (1) the abolition of the unnecessary mythologization of its leader, which not only hinders the understanding of his personality, the situation and events of that time, but also will constantly produce a rejection reaction that will continue to create the irreconcilable groups of “admirers” and “haters”; (2) an adequate scientific analysis that will evaluate the political leader logically, not emotionally, in the conditions of historical realities. In the author’s opinion, the problem of the attitude to Lenin eventually becomes the problem of the discontinuity of perception of own history in Russia and in the countries of the former Russian Empire and USSR. It is the problem of political culture and culture of society in general. The problem of attitude to Lenin in many respects is the problem of transferring modern realities and “post factum” evaluations to another historical environment. From scientific positions and public evaluation, it is necessary to understand that Lenin objectively became the most successful politician of the contemporary history. Few historical figures can be compared with him in terms of the impact on world history. It is due to Lenin that the Russian Revolution became what it became: the third great revolution in the world, an equal to the Great French Revolution in importance and scale. The Russian Revolution became a new model of imitation, replacing the French predecessor, gave a different way of modernization, more imposing for the revolutionaries of Latin America, Africa and Southeast Asia. Lenin is strongly distinguished against the background of all leaders of the previous revolutions in terms of morals, justice and goals. The leader’s sacralization, his subsequent ousting (due to his inconsistency with myths people themselves created), or initially negative attitude to a head of the state are features of an undeveloped political culture which will change with the maturing of society.
This article is devoted to the analysis of exogenous factors in the formation of the historical memory of Russian society about the Soviet era. The author refers to those components of the Russian information and cultural space that are created and broadcast into the consciousness of Russian society with direct influence and interest of foreign entities external to Russia. On the basis of facts and texts, conclusions are made about the systematic and consistent nature of attempts to influence the historical memory of Russian society in order to radically transform Russian national-historical consciousness and a sense of historical identity. The diversity of such effects is also noted. Despite the long and cumulative nature of attempts at external influence on the Russian memorial culture and social memory, a high degree of stability of the collective memory of Russian society should be stated. Not least, this is achieved thanks to the thoughtful historical policy of the Russian state over the past 15-20 years.
The article addresses one of the fundamental issues in the theory of revolution -the problem of modernization in revolutions. The Modern history took several centuries in the history of mankind and formed a modern society. The transition to the state of Modern society was a revolutionary transition for humanity and often passed through precisely socio-political revolutions. The article is devoted to determining the key modernization consequences of revolutions and is based on an analysis of the sixtyfour revolutions of the XVII-XX centuries and several dozen examples of countries that avoided this socio-political phenomenon. The key problem is to include in the mandatory modernization processes of all revolutions, which structural elements are primary, and which were the result of changes launched by revolutions. The author is looking for answers to questions: what is modernization and how to consider various modernization processes? Are modernization processes integral and characteristic of the phenomenon of revolution? do revolutions necessarily lead to modernization and in what areas? The main conclusion: modernization, if we mean by it the transition from a traditional, rural, agrarian society to a secular, urban, industrial society, was an integral result of all the revolutions that formed modern civilizations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.