Russians as a “state-forming peoplе” or “state-forming people” as Russians (response to the article by V. A. Achkasov “Why do Russians need the status of a ‘stateforming people’?”)

Abstract

The article disputes the point of view that the introduction of the term state-forming people into Article 68 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation is a legal nonsense and has only the consequence that it irritates the ethnocratic elites of the national republics that are part of Russia. From the author’s point of view, the Russians have never asserted themselves as a state-forming people. The culture of the Russian people was inclusive, which allowed it to include the most important elements of the culture of other peoples. Slogan “Russia for the Russians”, popular among modern Russian nationalists and nationalists of the early 20th century, turns out to be borrowed, and its initial understanding was associated with the assertion of the need for Russia’s development and as a reaction (!) to the actions of the ethnocratic elites of the outlying territories of the country. In Soviet times, it was the Russians who brought a lot of good to the peoples of the RSFSR and the union republics. An analysis of the current state in terms of the formation of the Russian nation has shown that, according to sociological studies, it is regions (where Russians are the majority) who are more positive about the idea of the Russian nation and are ready to form it. On the contrary, residents of national republics are more inclined to emphasize their regional identities to the detriment of their general civic identity. The author agrees with a number of political scientists who argue that the basis of the nation is the development of civil society, and only if a developed civil society appears in Russia, the project of a general civil Russian nation can be successfully implemented.