The opinion that “Russian world” is a system of
shared values of traditional society that is
opposed to individual liberal one is rather
widespread. For instance, G. Zaporozhtseva
(former citizen of Kyiv, now she is a political
émigré) in the article “On the ways of returning
Ukraine to the bosom of the Russian world”
considers Maidan to be the event caused by mass
hysteria premised by existential crisis of modern
liberal society’s crisis (Zaporozhtseva, 2016,
p.122). Maidan is an antithesis of “Russian
world” as it made the atmosphere of unity by
means of happy-enzyme, and this can explain the
euphoria of tens of thousands of people which led
to dreadful political consequences – falling out of
the unified civilizational oykumena.
In the article written N.Ovchinnikova,
Y.Kovalchuk (by the “citizens of LRR-DPR”)
“On the cultural fronts of the Russian spring” ‒
“Russian world” is treated as a changing factor of
the conception of the world. The authors, who are
contemporaries of the events an 2014, state that
“Russian world” is a project that “changed the
essence of life” for Russian speaking people in
the east of Ukraine because “among members of
people's volunteer corps there were anarchists,
communists, neopagans, monarchists, socialists,
skinheads, “professional Russians” and others”,
in the minds of which “there was real chaos. And
even those, who were devoted to personal
persuasions from now and then, lost his or her
belief…” (Ovchinnikova, & Kovalchuk, 2016,
p.49-50).
In our opinion, to understand the essence of the
“Russian world” as a cultural project it is
necessary to consider its role in gaining and
keeping of Putin regime’s power. From this
viewpoint the three-volume edition “Project
Russia” by anonymous author is demonstrative
(2008-2009). The edition was marked by
extralarge number of printed copies and multiple
reprints, that indicates he order from ruling
stratum of the RF. In that anonymous work they
proposed to unite elements of inheritance and
appointment by election in order to unite “the
best qualities of monarchy” and “the best
qualities of Soviet system” (Anonymous, 2008,
p. 344). The advantages of the mentioned above
proposition were as follows: 1) to achieve the
maximum authority of regime; 2) to liquidate the
disadvantages of monarchy; 3) to form real
elitism by means of participation of only
privileged people in elections. The main pledge
of success in advancement of RF’s project as a
“New kingdom” was going to be the ability to
orientate modern people to take decisions by
“heart”, being supported by Orthodox tradition,
not by “stomach”, based on democratic
postulates, because “the tsar authorities is the
power of secular institution in the person of Tsar
and spiritual institution in he person of Patriarch,
and these two institutions balance each other”
(Anonymous, 2008, p.346).
H. Pirchner in his work “Post Putin: Succession,
Stability, and Russia's Future” distinguished such
stride that became the ground for Putin’s power
and his supporters (Pirchner, 2019, p.90-99).
First of all, this is the strengthening of KGB
former structures letting them control private
business (e.g. FSB (Federal Security Service).
Secondly, it is the centralization of power in the
frames of FSB and FIS (Foreign Intelligence
Service), power restrictions for regional
governors, appointing of President
representatives in regions. President
representatives started to control patronage
service in their regions – including the right to
appoint the chiefs of militia in those regions. In
the same way the consolidation of power is
supplied by the Law “About Political Parties”,
which restricts the number of parties recognized
by the state. It is quite significant that in 2004 the
elections of regional governors were abolished.
Since 2000s, there have been taken some
measures concerning the prohibition for civil
servants to have assets abroad. Since 2018, they
have made structures of prior collection of
information about dissidence among military
men.
Thirdly, political influence of oligarchs was
restricted by criminal prosecutions and giving
preference to those who supported the Kremlin.
Fourthly, it is the suppression of mass media by
means of intimidation, physical persecution and
criminal homicides amid the creation of FSB
structures that make federal supervision over
radio and TV.
Fifthly, high emphasis was placed on the
upbringing of young people that implies two
directions. The first one is the system of
measures pointed to form beliefs and ideas
concerning history, where the role of I. Stalin is
presented as an essential condition for the victory
in the Second World War, but repressions (e.g.
activity of GULAG (Directory-General for
camps, the unified camp system of the USSR.
The full name is the Directory-General of forced
labour camp and correctional labour settlements)
practically isn’t explained. And the network of
nationwide organizations (similar to the Soviet
Young Pioneers and Young Communist League)
based on putinism have been made.