Savitsky Vadim Leonidovich Biography

Tsymbursky, and today's moderate Westerners, Eurasians, and right -wing Russian conservatives can see their own here. It is clear why the concept-model of the “island of Russia” is of genuine interest: against the backdrop of other concepts and constructions “competing” with it, it looks most preferable, since it is deeply and comprehensively substantiated. As they say, the author invested in his brainchild to the maximum ...

Author Vladimir Ryabtsev published: in this case, we want to present a monograph of three authors who came out in Rostov in Rostov on the Don: M. Rozin, V. Ryabtsev, S. Tsymbursky in the light of his views on Russia's duality experience of modern understanding. ” According to the authors themselves in the annotation to their book: “The work is dedicated to the memory of one of the most striking political thinkers, humanitarian scientists and publicists of post-Soviet Russia-Vadim Leonidovich Tsymbursky and goes to the summer of his death.

The object of consideration of the authors is the original views of V. Tsymbursky on the cyclicism of Russian history in connection with the cycles of global development. The direct subject of analysis is the geochronopolitical concept of the cycles of “abduction by Russia of Europe” developed by V. Tsymbursky, which took a significant place in the vast legacy of the scientist who has gained the glory of the Russian Huntington.

” For our part, we will note that this work is the first in Russian literature as an appeal to those aspects of critical geopolitics Vadim Tsymbursky, which became available as a result of publishing the heads of his doctoral dissertation “Morphology of Russian geopolitics and dynamics of international systems of the XVIII-XX centuries”. The book was published with the financial support of the ISEPI Foundation, and many of its chapters were first posted on our website in years.

The fragment of the monograph published by the RI is the introductory chapter to it. Today, few people will surprise people according to which the disintegration of the Soviet Union was a cardinal shift in the power fields of world politics, became a truly largest geopolitical disaster of twentieth century, which opened the era of post-clipolarity. It was after what happened to the USSR and automatically with all its extensive sphere of influence that a series of events began, which marked the entry of the world community in the strip of deep transformation of its structure.

It was at this time that a new large -scale territorial redistribution of the world, which lasts to this day, was subjected to the most serious test for the strength of the entire world order that developed in the post -war period. Yes, of course, nothing forever, and the imperial systems are not an exception to this universal rule of life. But, as world practice shows, they go into oblivion differently.

What happened in the beginning of the 10ths with the once great Soviet power fits in one of the two scenarios of the departure of the empires from the world arena, which were convincingly demonstrated by the political history of the 20th century. Under these conditions, there is a more or less painless transformation of the previously unified political organism into the totality of sovereign and quasi-vegetable states, while maintaining a single cultural and political field and a friendly or at least neutral attitude of new subjects on the world stage towards the former imperial center.

Something similar happened, for example, with the British Empire, the "dissolution" of which began in the city In another case, the spontaneous self -deduction of imperial structures of power and management, which is inevitably accompanied by a recession, or compression of political space and infranationalism, that is, fragmentation of this very space, its scattering into fragments.

In this case, the center inevitably loses control of the situation, complex internal conflicts arise between self -determining ethnic groups and territories, many of which recall the precedents of its former statehood and mutual resentments; There are conflicts that are quickly internationalized and dragged into components of regional tension [1]. Is it surprised that something similar became a reality in a situation of the collapse of the “Kremlin empire,” as the Soviet Union Aburakhman Autodekkhanov once called a large political scientist-emigrant?

A somewhat strange education called the CIS appeared in the Moscow space controlled by Moscow, but real “waves” of separatism and sezessia, on the one hand, irredentism, on the other, arose. Moreover, it is important to note, unlike other world precedents, the disintegration of the Soviet Union had one negative feature. It was due to the fact that, perhaps, nowhere and never in the world such complex “multi -component”, as the American political scientist Lenidt Leiphart, imperial systems would say with such rapid speed without military interference from the outside, and the speed of this process was one of the fundamental causes of a high degree of tension in the peripheral zones and their subsequent fragmentation.

The drama of the line of the line - xRussia did this by and large rashly, wanting to get into the market-democratic “paradise in the person of its pro-Western elite, from which, in the end, nothing good came out. However, many of our liberal-western people still consider the path chosen then the only true path. If you use the well-aimed language of F. Dostoevsky, then it can be said that for these “hard-faced” home-grown Westerners the “symbol of faith”-one and ...

for all times: in Russia, everything “will be converted to Europe and without any specialness”. Although, as the great writer emphasized, it is clear to any normal, sane and familiar to the Russian specificity as God's day, that “our history cannot be like the history of other European peoples, especially its slave copy” [2]. Moreover, in the wake of the euphoria of the “Westernism” of those years of the Russian Federation, it almost received what the Soviet Union received from it: the collapse of its own fragile state “body” in a situation of a sharp intensification of the National Separatist forces on the outskirts of the country and even an attempt to exit the armed secession and its composition of Chechnya [3].

They believed that the new state they created have no obligations to the past [4]. The main thing for that generation of politicians and the expert public serving them was at any cost to connect with the forces of the Euro Atlantic and create with them the “united West” [5]. Serious experts, without falling into Alarism, took up the weighing of the minuses and pluses of what happened to the country, the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the new geostation of Russia in a global context [6].

Of course, at that time there were such researchers and analysts who considered the new state of the Russian Federation outside the framework of the USSR a natural continuation of the continuous political tradition of the Russian state, whose sovereignty dates back to G. according to this logic, we should not recognize the historical and legal rupture with the Russian Empire to G., after all, as we know, nor the Soviet Union officially legally non -abiding.

Therefore, their rights and obligations retain their strength to this day [7]. This is a fact! Another question is that the Russian Federation, having left the imperial state, has not really found its own person yet.

That is, on the one hand, it did not become familiar to the Western world of National-State, which primarily suggested the option of creating a territorially terrible but purely Russian state with the principle of spatial arrangement according to the type of land, and on the other hand, the Russian Federation did not return to the usual imperial model, about the need for which the Communists and National Bolsheviks were tirelessly insisted for them, naturally, with resuscitation, with resuscitation.

The deceased socio-political system. Everything is so ... But is it exhausted only by this - only a negative characteristic - the process of the collapse of the SSR union and its extensive sphere of influence? We admit that no - it is not exhausted. Remembering the wise Chinese, you involuntarily wonder: maybe it opened for such a supporting element of the design of the Soviet Union, like Russia, new opportunities gave it a new geopolitical chance?

Yes, the fall of communism in the city is far from a rhetorical question. As he expressed himself very accurately, even in the course of the notorious perestroika, that is, before the collapse of the Union, our wonderful historian and philosopher Mikhail Gifter seemed to look into the water: “The ruins are also a problem. What are we currently going to rebuild our house - Eurasia?

Yes, everything is so, everything is right. But in this case, we would like to focus on another. As the people say: “There is no thin without good” ... We can repeat this common phrase in the context of the development of domestic geopolitical thought of the twentieth century. And because from the moment of Russia entered the state of the “third great turmoil”, the situation has changed overnight not only in the country, but also in the world as a whole, which sharply actualized the issues of spatial-territorial development.

And this, as you know, is the "golden hour" of geopolitics. Indeed, according to the exact remark of Alexander Dugin, this is a “discipline of political elites”, which either de facto rule their countries and nations, or are preparing to carry out such an important mission; This is a “textbook of the authorities, which is given the resume of what should be taken into account when making global fateful decisions - such as the conclusion of unions, the beginning of wars, the implementation of reforms, the structural restructuring of society, the introduction of large -scale economic and political sanctions, etc.

Therefore, there is nothing surprising in the fact that in the situation of the initially serious“ slipping ”, and then the collapse of the Gorbachev perestroika that has become As a result, for our country there is nothing more than “catastrophy” by Alexander Zinoviev, they suddenly remembered geopolitics. And recalling, in particular, they realized that the absence of just a geopolitical doctrine in the country throughout the posttalinsky period, including the restructuring itself, “became one of the most components of the acute political and ideological crisis that struck the Soviet Union in the years.

The economic problems of the USSR were aggravated by the defenselessness of the Soviet leadership before the tough and offensive geostrategia of the leading world powers, primarily the United States ”[11]. In the new historical conditions, the dawn dawned on the domestic geopolitical thought, since many gateways opened, many obstacles fell away by themselves, much could now be done freely.

And most importantly - to think freely. So, during the next third “Troubles”, more precisely, with its beginning, since it occupied almost the last decade of the 20th century. Under these conditions, there was an opportunity for the “return” to the homeland of the richest intellectual and scientific heritage of Russian emigrants who dealt with geopolitical issues, as well as issues of geoeconomics, geoistoria, geocyvilization problems; It became possible to remove, finally, thoughtless accusations of reactionary, pseudoscientificity, retrograde, etc.

And in this case, we are talking not only about the authors more or less known in the USSR about the same Eurasians, for example, and specifically about P. Savitsky or G. Vernadsky, General A. Snesarev or, say, about I. Ilyin, G. Fedotov or N. Trubetsk, but also about little -known figures, which turned out to be a lot. One way or another, but the views, ideas and concepts of many brilliant intellectuals, thinkers and scientists of the Russian abroad returned to us.

Thus, the fruits of their work were still not in vain. And on our part it has long been time to pay tribute to them. According to the merits ... Be that as it may, at the beginning of the 10s in post -communist Russia, an unthinkable thing was before - the “rehabilitation” of geopolitics. And she de facto touched a considerable number of thinkers, scientists and specialists.

The names of many of them are now in hearing. Speaking about the rehabilitation of the field of knowledge related to the issues of geopolitics, we put a very definite meaning into this concept. In one of the works of the beginning x with which we completely agree could be read: “Scientific rehabilitation is not political, where a person is justified retroactively due to the lack of corpus delicti.

Scientific rehabilitation is the introduction of convicted or forgotten ideas into the scientific circulation, which can even be erroneous, but without them the history of science and culture is incomplete ”[14]. Therefore, speaking about those processes that began in the intellectual and spiritual sphere of the Russian then Soviet society at the turn of the year and gained momentum in the first half of X, one positive fact cannot be ignored: this process began and quickly went - rehabilitation of the once -prohibited geopolitics, and, therefore, and other areas of knowledge associated with it.

The speed of this process could have seemed strange. But even that ... it might seem to those persons and groups who were in the past adherents of the same state ideology that forbade too much, and based on which it was believed that geopolitics is a harmful “case of the construction of socialism” that it was a pseudonauca that makes a thoughtless bet on the so -called geographical determinism, or, at the worst end, that this is a common appendage of reactionary political pre -prereen [15].

And here it must be said that the efforts of individual enthusiasts work to overcome ignorance of the history of Russian thought began almost immediately after this field of knowledge was rehabilitated. Those who began to work in the key of geopolitics again remembered and reminded us all! Many domestic researchers and experts, a long period of time, which were under the magic of Istmat and Diamat, finally realized simple things in general.

What exactly? And the fact that to think geographically does not mean limiting your set of intellectual-scientific means to understand the more and more complicated world, but on the contrary, it is an opportunity to “reach a new level of complexity in the analysis of foreign policy and thus discover the possibility of a deeper and wide understanding of the world” [16].

Yes, it is good that these capital truths began to understand our researchers, that the moment came when one of the main dogmas of Marxist social studies began to be reviewed in Russian literature, according to which the geographical environment cannot and should not play the decisive role in the development of human society and does not determine the specifics of certain politicals over these issues, by the way, in the 10th.

In other words, geographical nihilism in political science came to an end. And, I must say, the initiative here was for geographers. As far as we managed to restore the chronology of events, the pioneers were prof. Lavrov is an unconditional authority among St. Petersburg geographers, as well as Vladimir Kolosov. The contribution of the first is especially significant [18].

Largely, thanks to the efforts of S. Lavrov, in those years the once -tabulated field of knowledge was revived, and the city of Petrov himself again became the center recognized in the country ... Now the new geopolitics. Thus, Peter restored the former - since pre -revolutionary times [19] - the status of an unofficial capital of geopolitical thought in Russia.