The definition of rashism and its recognition
Rashism. This concept has confidently entered not only journalistic but also scientific lexicon in Ukrainian and international (rashism). It is featured in several Wikipedia articles in multiple languages and is considered favorable by such authoritative researcher as Professor Timothy Snyder from the USA. And now, in Kyiv, a popular science book titled ‘Banning Rashism’ has been published, created in the form of a collective monograph, authored by a number of well-known domestic scholars and was presented at the Borys Grinchenko Kyiv University. According to the definition provided by the authorial team, “rashism is an ideology and practice of national exceptionalism and cultural superiority of Russians; the practice of postulating the ‘Russian world’ as the basis of worldview and national identification, and the cause-and-effect extension beyond their own geopolitical space; interference in the internal affairs of other states and the possibility of imposing their own ideological visions through armed invasion within the borders of sovereign states.”
See also: Failed state
8 main factors underlying rashism
The authors elaborate on this definition by describing eight main factors that, in their opinion, underlie rashism. Let’s list them. So:
- The national exceptionalism of the Russian people, their “chosenness” and “messianism,” attempts to impose their worldview, values, and culture on other nations.
- Extreme xenophobia towards other peoples, whose experience of existence cannot serve as an example, leads to the atrophy of critical thinking among the average Russian, who is unable to see the flaws of their existence in a multicultural world.
- Expansionism, which is the technology of seizing the lands of other peoples; through territorial expansion, extreme imperialism also spreads, the desire to acquire new territories, which ultimately degenerated into a quest for global domination.
- Self-assertion at the expense of enslaved peoples and cultures, for which Russians falsify history, distort meanings, and impose a terrible terror and ruin on the occupied lands in order to physically destroy the bearers of historical truth.
- Centralism or the uncontrolled power of the monarch, which has always been opposed to Ukrainian democratization and people’s self-governance. Moscow chauvinism sees its task as the destruction of everything that does not fit into the canon of the “Russian soul” psychology, including the Ukrainian mentality.
- Anti-intellectualism or “sameness” as a form of the most optimal brainwashing of the general public. Russian culture and literature have always been imperialistic and have had a negative attitude towards other nations.
- The fragmentation of societies of subjugated peoples, where those who serve the empire acquire a new status and enjoy material benefits, while those who resist become outcasts, deprived of property, and so on. This creates a social collaborator field and provokes the emergence of negative behavioral practices.
- Interethnic conflicts that are fueled by Moscow’s authority towards representatives of different ethnicities, where there are restrictions on access to education for all non-Russian-speaking peoples, prohibition of using their native language, disregard for national self-expression as a cultural value, the presence and application of a methodology of conflicting interethnic interests, pitting national minorities against each other, and practices of displacement and resettlement of people from one region to another.
Addressing the historical evolution and cultural implications of rashism
We do not aim to write a review of this book, so we will not specify what we fully agree with, what seems somewhat inaccurate, and what is entirely inaccurate. We will only mention that this is perhaps one of the first extensive, monographic-type publications, where the authors identify the key components of the current Russian ideology and socio-political practices, tracing their formation throughout centuries of Moscow, and later Russian, history. In our opinion, both the strength and weakness of this collective work lie in the fact that the differences between traditional, “classical” Russian despotism and various forms of totalitarianism are smoothed out, and sometimes even leveled. However, such differences do exist because it is about totalitarianism that emerged in the early decades of the 20th century, precisely in Russia, which infected many countries worldwide and strives to initiate a new cycle of the same.
It is worth paying attention to the concept of Larysa Yakubova, the head of the Department of Ukrainian History in the 1920s-1930s at the Institute of History of Ukraine, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, in terms of the scientific understanding of the phenomenon of rashism.
She emphasizes: “Rashism is even an understatement for the terrifying fatal process we are currently experiencing. It is about the latest version of ‘Russian fascism.’ The evolution of Russian fascism occurred in parallel with the nation-building of Ukrainians. To a significant extent, it was a reaction to the collapse of the empire and the formation of post-imperial nations. In fascism, the aim is to provide people with an idea of an alternative world, a mission of a specific nation or national surrogate in this alternative world, and to assume the role of reshaping the entire surrounding world according to their own template, appealing to this “grand” purpose. For this very reason, the state grows alongside society, which ceases to be a society and transforms into a population. They consume each other entirely… The state becomes a colossal mechanism aimed at the concentration of resources to achieve this “higher” goal. The population is transformed into a demographic resource to fulfill this overarching task, while everyone is de-subjectivized. So, there is a multitude of biological individuals who think and act as one. And there is a leader who embodies the senses generated by this distorted formation, different from the rest of the world.”
And he concludes that “this is a global project aimed at the destruction not of Ukraine but of Western European civilization and the subsequent global war with the USA.” It is clear and understandable about the threat to humanity.
In other words, it is time not only for journalistic but also scientific-theoretical comprehension of the phenomenon of rashism. Ukrainian researchers have been tasked with outlining it, identifying the dangers it poses to humanity, and finding ways and methods for deconstructing and destroying this totalitarian monstrosity. No one will do this work for us because no one currently possesses the relevant experience.
Originally posted by Serhii Grabovskyi on the Day (Kyiv). Translated and edited by the UaPosition – Ukrainian news and analytics website
See also: Ukraine is not Vietnam: why Russians are willing to kill “their boys” endlessly
