IMPERIAL TRADE FROM PETER 1-ST TO MODERN RUSSIA HOW A THREAT FOR UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35546/kntu2078-4481.2024.2.42Keywords:
empire, Peter I, civil service, military-industrial complex.Abstract
The article analyzes the leading features of Russian imperialism described by the Russian writer-historian in exile Boris Akounin. Analogies with the Soviet practice in the projection on modern Ukrainian realities are given. It has been found that the imperial traditions have their genesis in the Mongolian system of governance of the times of Genghis Khan, and even the borders of the Russian / Soviet empire approximately correspond to the territory captured by the Khans. It is emphasized that it is from Peter I that not only the official declaration of the Russian Empire as such, but also the administrative concept of «Muscoviteness» (according to the terminology of Pavlo Shtepa) originates, which connects the Mongolian genesis and the Finno-Ugric mentality. The system of state administration in Russia at that time and its heredity in subsequent centuries were analyzed, when even with a change in the (official, but formal and fake) state system, its essence did not fundamentally change. It is concluded that imperial features are a threat to Ukrainian state-building: firstly, due to their heredity as rudiments in the management system (in particular, centralization of power, command-administrative style); secondly, due to the constant threat from the Russian state, no matter what it is called («empire», «union», «federation»), in all spheres of life – cultural (especially linguistic), economic (especially energy), religious (influence of the Moscow church), informational (expansion of fake propaganda), etc.; thirdly, because of the specific military threat that we feel every day, because even Peter I turned the entire state into a war machine – a military-industrial complex for the production of weapons. That is, everything is aimed at obtaining a power (military) advantage, at capturing new territories and holding them. This is the imperial essence of Russia, which every Ukrainian should know, as well as understand those rudiments in himself and level them.
References
Штепа П. Московство, його походження, зміст, форми й історична тяглість. Ч. 1. Торонто: Вид. С. Стасишина, 1968. 345 с.
Масенко Л. Т. Українська мова у ХХ сторіччі: історія лінгвоциду. Київ: КМ Академія, 2005. 399 с.
Могильницька Г. Міфотворчість як обґрунтування історичного мародерства. Броварі: Українська ідея, 2009. 184 с.
Дзюба І. Микола Хвильовий: «Азіятський ренесанс» і «Психологічна Европа». URL : https://dt.ua/CULTURE/mikola_hviloviy_aziyatskiy_renesans_i_psihologichna_evropa.html
Демченко В. М. «Ординська» ґенеза постімперського державного управління (на матеріалі роману Б. Акуніна «Щаслива Росія»). Теорія та практика державного управління і місцевого самоврядування : електр. зб. наук. 2018. № 1. URL : http://www.irbis-nbuv.gov.ua
Акунин Б. Азиатская европеизация. История Российского государства. Царь Петр Алексеевич. URL : https://re.mybook.ru/author/boris-akunin/aziatskaya-evropeizaciya-istoriya-rossijskogo-gosu/