Russia vs. The United States
The United States and Russia have been battling off pernicious factions menacing the stability of their democracies over the years. Russia has come a long way over the past century, enduring a number of different phases that have completely desecrated any power Russia may have had paralleled to the rest of the world. The United States, however, has been evolving into a prosperous world power that has led to new respect from many other nations. Both Russia and the United States have struggled in the past at maintaining a significant amount of cultural commitment to preservation of specific aspects of their respective democracies. Having a relatively new democracy, Russian citizens have different perceptions and expectations of government from those of United States citizens. With new liberties and freedoms, Russians are struggling to grasp the concept of capitalism and participation in government. In order to preserve strong features of democracy, such as the right to vote or freedom of speech, a country's constituents must respect and positively view their government. They must have faith in that the government is working for their best interests. Physically, the United States and Russia have been impacted greatly by their geography. Historically, the backgrounds of Russia and the United States are of stark contrast. Traditionally, Russians have a difficult time believing in the stability of their government as it has changed a number of times. Geography has had a profound influence on the Russian psyche. Russia is a land that lies open to invasion and the elements, for it possesses no major natural barriers. In the southeast, there are great plains that allow easy entrance to any would-be conquero...
... middle of paper ...
...eved this state of mind through the geography, history and traditions of the nation. Russia, although having geography, history and traditional values standing against it, has made a significant effort to preserve strong features of democracy through recent decades. Bibliography Grudzinska-Gross, Irena. The Scar of Revolution: Custine, Tocqueville, and the Romantic Imagination. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991. Gustafson, Thane, and Daniel Yergin. Russia 2010. New York: Random, 1993. Heywood, Andrew. Political Ideas and Concepts. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1994. McDaniel, Tim. The Agony of the Russian Idea. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996. Melvin, Neil. Russians Beyond Russians. London: Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1995. Rzhevsky, Nicholas. Cambridge Companion to Modern Russian Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Historically, Russia has always been a country of perplexing dualities. The reality of Dual Russia, the separation of the official culture from that of the common people, persisted after the Revolution of 1917 and the Civil War. The Czarist Russia was at once modernized and backward: St. Petersburg and Moscow stood as the highly developed industrial centers of the country and two of the capitals of Europe, yet the overwhelming majority of the population were subsistent farms who lived on mir; French was the official language and the elites were highly literate, yet 82% of the populati...
Moss, W., 2014. A History of Russia Volume 2: Since 1855. 1st ed. London, England: Anthem Press London, pp.112-113.
1) The pre-revolutionary history of Russia. For the Russians it was traditional view itself as a nation with a special mission. It started since the late Middle Ages. After the destruction of Byzantium, Russia was the only independent country with a dominant Orthodox faith. The religious factor has led to the fact that in spreading the true fait...
Sack, Arkady J., “The Birth of the Russian Democracy”. New York city, Russian information bureau. 1918.
ABSTRACT: This paper advances the idea that Russian constitutionalism developed through a reinterpretation of Russian history in terms of Hegel's concept of the World Spirit. Russians implicitly viewed their nation as the embodiment of Hegel's World Spirit, which would have a unique messianic mission for humanity. However, the specifics of Russia's historical development diverged from Hegel's critical stage of ethical development, in which individuals would be mutually recognized as free beings. For this reason, the rights of the individual in Russia were seen until recently as originating exclusively in the state and valid only insofar as a given individual constituted an organic part of the whole or collective. I give examples from all six Russian and Soviet constitutions. I also demonstrate how the 1993 post-Soviet constitution represents a major breakthrough in the advancement of individual rights in Russia.
When Russians talk about the war of 1812 they do not mean the war in which Washington was burned by the British, but the war in which, apparently, the Russians burned Moscow. This war between the French republican empire and the Russian Tsarist Empire was as remarkable a high - spot in the history of the latter as it was a low - spot in the history of Napoleon. For Russia, it was one of those rare moments in history when almost all people, serfs and lords, merchants and bureaucrats, put aside their enmities and realized that they were all Russians. Russia, sometimes called ‘a state without a people’, seemed to become, for a few precious months, one people, and never quite forgot the experience.
Historically, Russia’s relationship with the West has been shaky at best. From the Crimean War in the 1850’s to alienation following the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution all the way up to the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has been “under attack.” This has forced them to adopt a mentality that is based in self sufficiency and autarky. As Western nations attempt to strengthen democracy in Russia in the 21st century, Russia has responded negatively to these perceived “intrusions.” Therefore it is important to ask what role the West should play in Russia’s development and what is hindering this from happening? In her book Russia: Lost in Transition, Lilia Shevtsova outlines two different ways the West can approach development with Russia: let them figure it out themselves or patiently create an international environment that the Russians feel comfortable in. Shevtsova clearly favors the latter. The West’s involvement is hindered however by double standards, ideological differences, and negative perceptions of the West’s motives by the Russian people. These must first be analyzed before showing how a cautious, assertive approach is the best way for the West to assist in Russian development.
Morcombe, M. and Fielding, M. 2014. The Spirit of Change: Russia In Revolution. New South Wales: McGraw-Hill.
Kann, Andrew. "Was There a Russian Enlightenment?." Podcast lecture, University of Oxford Conference from University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, November 10, 2012.
Russia is generally apportioned the benefit of having introduced a political phenomenon that basically provided an alternative for capitalism; communism. Since this concept was only set in motion at the turn of the 20th century, we can therefore deduce that, to a large extent, Russia is, to most people, synonymous with leaders such as Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, and Gorbachev. This supposition is entirely based on the premise that the Russian revolution of 1914 inherently altered the socio-cultural and socio-political direction of the nation, bringing into birth a never before envisioned era where Russia was not ruled by the Tsars, but by simple men; men who spoke to and articulated the needs of the masses. To this extent, communism, therefore, is largely misconceived as having been the fulcrum of Russia’s civilization. Much of this misconception , as signaled earlier, is based on the growth and progression of the Russian society in the years after the revolution until 1990, when the Berlin wall fell, essentially bringing down with it decades of Soviet Union tradition based on communism.
In an era of discord, chaos, and bloodlust, Russia had temporarily lost its position as an orderly country on the world map. Many events, like the unpopularity of
In a speech broadcast to London via radio on October 1st, 1939, Winston Churchill famously said: “I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma (Murdico, 1).” While it is true that Churchill was referring to his inability to predict the country’s actions in regards to the impending world war, the words can be used to illustrate a general confusion and lack of understanding, by both western and eastern powers alike, concerning the massive nation. Russia, as it stands today, currently encompasses about 6.6 million square miles of land (Murdico, 1), and is the largest country in the world by land mass. Along with a large area, Russia also has quite the large reputation; having been through two world wars, governments both communist and imperial, and a slew of civil wars and internal struggles. Russian politics and history is still today a hot topic of conversation, yet very little of this conversation mentions anything pre-WWI. It may be difficult to say exactly why this is so, as a great number of factors, including first an foremost our own cultural biases and perspectives come in to play, but it is true that Russia may confuse us because it is nearly impossible to categorize as being entirely “western” or “eastern” in nature. It is not really European nor is it truly Asian. Instead it has been shaped by a blend of different cultures and political ideologies that certainly include both European and Asian influence. Playing a huge role in this is the geography of the area; its location lends itself to contact with and, more importantly, being attacked by surrounding societies while still being pushed up against the corner of a continent in an almost isola...
Franklin, Simon and Emma Widdis, eds. National Identity in Russian Culture: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004.
Vladimir Putin’s aggressive actions toward the western world, specifically Ukraine, is inspired by the steps Joseph Stalin took during his rise to power by developing a cult mentality, using brute force to invade countries such as Greece and Turkey, and issuing threats to all countries who disagreed with his expansion of power and communism during the Cold War. It was Stalin’s increasing aggression towards Europe and the United during the Cold War that made him one of the most feared and unpredictable individuals at that time. Today, Putin is exhibiting identical behavior by following in Stalin’s footsteps and is issuing threats in addition to ignoring what Europe and the United States has to say.
Riasanovsky, Nicholas V., and Mark D. Steinberg. A History of Russia. 7th ed. Oxford: Oxford, 2005. Print.