Andrei Nikolaevich Medushevsky Political writings: law and power in the context of social transformations. Medushevsky A. N. The Constitution of Russia: Limits of Flexibility and Possible Interpretations in the Future

Medushevsky A.N. RUSSIAN CONSTITUTION: LIMITS OF FLEXIBILITY AND POSSIBLE INTERPRETATIONS IN THE FUTURE
The political processes of the last fifteen years that have passed since the constitutional revolution of 1993 have led to significant changes in the relations between society and the state, the political system, institutions and their functioning, value orientations, and the political vocabulary itself. These changes are seen by some as the logical conclusion of the post-Soviet transition period, by others as a departure from the principles proclaimed by it. There is no unity in assessing the existing political regime and the prospects for its development. Of fundamental importance in this discussion is the assessment of the constitutional parameters of the political process, the correlation of norms and reality in it, legal declarations and the effectiveness of their application in practice.
Constitution and political process
The political process in Russia, connected with the results of the last elections to the State Duma in 2007 (a certain dominance of the ruling party), raises questions: are the existing rules of the game outdated, those constitutional and legal frameworks that determined the essence of the political process in the post-Soviet period; to what extent the current constitution is adequate to the changes that have passed since its adoption, whether the time has come to change it; and if so, what forms and procedures should be adopted for these changes? The political alternative is to maintain constitutional stability (which could lead to stagnation in the long term) or changes (formal or de facto) that would mean a revision of constitutional provisions (with the possible threat of losing this stability). The answer can be given from the standpoint of the sociology of law, political science, and also the comparative historical approach.

The 1993 constitution is an undeniable victory for democracy during the collapse of communism at the end of the 20th century. It reflected the fundamental rights and freedoms resulting from liberal constitutionalism in post-war Europe (1). The adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation summed up the communist experiment in Russia and stimulated democratic processes that engulfed Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the countries of Asia, Latin America and even Africa (South Africa). The cyclic nature of the constitutional process in Russia has led to the fact that the ideas put forward at the beginning of the last century turned out to be relevant at the beginning of this century precisely because they were not implemented then (2). The current constitution is an expression of the ideas of civil society and the rule of law proclaimed by the liberal constitutional movement in Russia in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which the February Revolution of 1917 tried but failed to implement (3). (about were not implemented then (1ok in changing societies. ionic justice. ii. The modern Constitution of Russia, however, turned out to be internally contradictory: while fully implementing the Western concept of individual rights, it, at the same time, consolidated a fairly authoritarian model of presidential power, turning it into a driving force and a decisive (if not the only) instrument of the political process.As a result, a power structure has emerged that combines a number of elements of classical forms of government (mixed, presidential and super-presidential), but in fact is an original version, direct analogues of which cannot be found in modern constitutional law textbooks.

The creation of this structure of power (in many ways reminiscent of the imperfect and compromise model of the dualistic monarchy that existed in Russia on the eve of the revolution of 1917) was probably justified in the conditions of the resolution of the constitutional crisis of 1993 and is associated with the well-known circumstances of the adoption of the current Constitution (in as a result of the constitutional revolution), the persistence of a split in relation to the strategy of transformations between the branches of power (the period of dominance of the opposition in the State Duma until 1999) and the lack of constitutional legitimacy during the transition period. But with the achievement of political stability, the question of the prospects of this system and the possibilities of its transformation in the future is justified. These problems have taken on obvious political relevance in connection with the constitutional reforms that were proclaimed by various “color revolutions”, which called into question the very structure of power that was imported from Russia after the collapse of the USSR (Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan, where there is currently a permanent constitutional the crisis).

Constitution Change Strategies

The inconsistency of the Russian constitution that we have noted makes possible three diametrically opposed strategies for changing it. The first (traditionalist) strategy (neo-Slavophile, neo-communist and even estate-monarchist) is to abandon the Western vector of constitutionalism, revise precisely those provisions of the Constitution that became the conquest of the liberal revolution of 1993, and return to the historical ("national" as they consider) stereotypes and forms of surrogate democracy, which are represented by various legislative institutions - from Zemsky Sobors and Congresses of People's Deputies up to the ideas of the revival of the estate system, the qualifying electoral system, and even the aristocracy and monarchy. Supporters of this view point to the gap between positive law and reality, the difficulties of adapting rational legal structures to the consciousness of the population, but see the solution to the problem in a return to archaic forms of political structure.

The second strategy (of the supporters of modernization and Europeanization), on the contrary, is associated with the development of the principles of the constitutional revolution of 1993, the strengthening of the European vector of constitutionalism, and therefore proceeds from the need to liberalize the political system in accordance with European ideas about the separation of powers, and, in particular, the need for changes constitutional design of the form of government aimed at strengthening parliamentarism. The argumentation of the supporters of this position includes the denial of the exclusivity of the Russian situation, the idea of ​​the possibility of a quick and decisive transformation of the consciousness of society in the direction of Western values ​​of freedom and individual rights, the possibility of defending them in court.

The third strategy is expressed in the notion that the transition period in Russia is not over: in order to preserve the achievements of the liberal revolution, it is necessary to maintain a strong presidential power capable of implementing unpopular reforms, including through the head of parliament and political parties (“metaconstitutional” or “dormant” powers). president). This position is based on the idea that a strong presidential power is the guarantor of the liberal-democratic vector of the political system, and therefore pragmatically defends the possibility of a gradual transformation of the provisions of the constitution that regulate the system of separation of powers. Obviously, this point of view has a right to exist only if the regime of guided democracy is really connected with the goals of democratic transformation, and the presidential power does not go beyond the framework of an enlightened "republican monarchy". These positions include different ideas about the very scope of the necessary constitutional reforms: from the idea of ​​a complete revision of the current constitution and replacing it with a new one, to preserving the constitution with careful and extremely pragmatic adjustment of its individual provisions in the future.

Another side of the problem of constitutional reforms is the degree of flexibility of the current Russian constitution. Since the time of J. Bryce, all constitutions have been divided into flexible and rigid ones (4). Mixed constitutions include various combinations of both. The first (flexible) ones are those that make changes fairly easy. Until recently, Great Britain served as a classic example, where there is no written constitution at all, and therefore an act of parliament is enough to effect a change in constitutional relations or institutions. However, the ease of these changes is combined with the seriousness of their consequences and practical irreversibility. Rigid constitutions, in contrast, are those that fix extremely complex procedures for amending and changing the constitution, seeking to protect it from rash or politically unilateral changes. Although it is difficult to change rigid constitutions, this can be done, if necessary, through amendments or other changes. In particular, a variant of a rigid constitution corrected by judicial interpretation (USA) is possible.

In societies of a transitional type from authoritarianism to modern democracy, rigid constitutions are most often encountered. This is due, on the one hand, to the desire to consolidate radical socio-political changes in society and, on the other hand, to guarantee against a return to authoritarianism. Such are all the constitutions of the countries of Southern Europe, which establish an extremely complex procedure for changing them (Greece, Portugal, Spain). A similar approach is characteristic of the post-communist constitutions of Eastern Europe (5). The Russian constitution is no exception and is defined as rigid.

It should be emphasized that the subsequent fate of the constitutions of transitional periods is determined not only and not so much by constitutional provisions on their change, but by the nature of their adoption and political circumstances. Thus, in countries where the transition was implemented through a contractual model (a classic example is Spain), this contract forms the invisible foundation of the entire “constitutional building”, and the revision of the constitution presupposes the consent of all political forces. Another option occurs when a rigid constitution, which arose in the conditions of a constitutional revolution and a break in legal continuity, embodies the dominance of one force or power over others. In this case, the rigidity of the procedures for changing the constitution fixes the result of the coup and becomes directly proportional to the strength of the resistance. The Russian version of a rigid constitution is an example of such a trend. The question arises, can the Russian Constitution of 1993 be changed, what is the mechanism of changes, what is the political reality behind these possible changes and, therefore, what are their objective goals?

Legal Procedures for Constitutional Review

Let us turn to the actual legal procedures for constitutional review. In the theory of law, it is customary to distinguish between two basic concepts denoting the transformation of the constitution - "change" and "transformation" of constitutions. These concepts were introduced into science by the greatest legal theorist G. Jellinek at the beginning of the 20th century. and express a phenomenon of extreme importance for our purposes (6). Changing constitutions is a revision of their text - i.e. amending the current Basic Law as a result of a constitutional coup (a political, not a legal decision) or on the basis of those provisions and procedures that are fixed in itself. The transformation of constitutions is a more complex phenomenon: it means the actual revision of the meaning of constitutional norms without changing their textual expression. This difference in the directions of constitutional revision is especially relevant in relation to the modern Russian Constitution of 1993, which, as noted, is rigid and, in this sense, difficult to reform, however, it can be transformed gradually, as a result of, so to speak, "invisible maneuvers" - changes in the political regime and related features of the interpretation of norms, their semantic content.

So, changes in the Russian constitution (if we do not consider the option of a non-legal solution to the problem) are possible in the following two ways (7). First, by revising the entire Constitution of the Russian Federation when changing chapters 1, 2 and 9 by the Constitutional Assembly (in fact, this means the most radical constitutional reform). Disputes about the principles of formation of the Constitutional Assembly (and alternative strategies related to them) revealed the following issues: the principles of formation, term of office, the procedure for the activities of the Constitutional Assembly, its prerogatives during the development of a new Constitution (the law on the Constitutional Assembly was not adopted). The problem of constitutive power has always been linked to the question of the legitimacy of the Russian Constitution. Opponents of the Constitution consider it not legitimate, while supporters speak of historical and popular legitimacy as opposed to legal. The opposition criticized this form of adoption of the Constitution, referring to the falsification of the voting results (referendum on December 12, 1993).

It was proposed to adopt a new Constitution based on the consensus of various political forces within the framework of a more representative and legitimate body - the Constitutional Assembly or another constituent body (Zemsky Sobor, Constituent Assembly, Congress of People's Deputies). The question, however, was not what form of constitutive power would be chosen and what historical name it would receive, but how this institution would be able to establish a consensus in society regarding the Constitution. Such a consensus or the implementation of a contractual model is possible only as a result of the consent of political parties, while the absence of consent in society or its split leads to the failure of all attempts at constituting power. Examples in the history of Russia are the Democratic Conference, the Pre-Parliament and the Constituent Assembly during the revolution of the early twentieth century and the failure of similar institutions during the constitutional revolution of the late twentieth century (this should include such institutions for seeking consensus as the Congress of People's Deputies, the failure to create a single Constitutional Commission during conflict between the parliament and the president, the ineffectiveness of agreements on the consent of public and political forces, and later also the failure to convene a new Democratic Conference and Civil Forum). Moreover, these examples show that the institutionalization of consensus in a divided society, as a rule, does not automatically lead to the removal of contradictions. Therefore, examples of a successful way out of authoritarianism by negotiation (the Spanish model) are very rare.

In modern Russia, where the process of party formation is at an early stage, and the culture of compromise is completely absent, the idea of ​​a new constituent does not seem effective. The absence of strong parties and public organizations was a consequence of the enactment of the Federal Law "On Political Parties" (8). Therefore, the initiative to convene the Constitutional Assembly and adopt a new constitution can give advantages only to those forces that do not doubt the result. And this means controllability from the outside of the constituting power. It is extremely easy to carry out such an action in the current alignment of forces, one can find a favorable justification for it (for example, the need to change the Constitution in connection with the creation of a new union state), but its long-term consequence may be a decrease in the constitutional legitimacy of the regime. Disputes about the principles of formation of the Constitutional Assembly (and alternative drafts related to them), concentrating on legal and procedural issues, do not take into account the considered political component of the problem of developing and adopting a draft of a new Constitution.

The institution of the Constitutional Assembly was introduced into the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation, most likely as a result of borrowing from the US Constitution (where it exists under the name of the Convention, which is also extremely vaguely regulated). Therefore, it is not surprising that the issues relating to the Russian Constitutional Assembly are similar to those arising in the United States regarding the procedure for convening and the activities of the Federal Convention. The Federal Convention (under Article V of the US Constitution) is convened by Congress at the request of the state legislatures and is an institution that is potentially available at any time, although it has never been convened to discuss amendments to the Constitution. No one knows how such a Convention could be organized, since the circumstances of the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 were so specific that it cannot serve as a model for future conventions called by state legislatures to discuss amendments (9). Three groups of questions arose: how such a Convention could be convened and whether the range of questions it could discuss could be limited; how the Convention should be organized and run; what can Congress and the states do in response to the actions of the Convention? Since there is no legislative regulation of these issues, their raising, for example, in a situation of a constitutional crisis, will be very acute.

Secondly, changing the Constitution of the Russian Federation (chapters 3-8) is possible through amendments (according to the procedure laid down in it, as well as the decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Federal Law of March 4, 1998 “On the procedure for the adoption and entry into force of amendments to the Constitution Russian Federation”)(10). The Russian amendment mechanism, also similar to that enshrined in the US Constitution, appears to be extremely rigid. Actually, in the United States, this mechanism was developed in order to prevent changes to the Constitution by the federalists and was designed to guarantee the rights of the states against attempts to create an overly centralized model of federalism (the carriers of these ideas in the United States were precisely the federalists - supporters of a single federal state who fought against its opponents - the confederalists) . This motive, of course, was also present during the adoption of the Russian Constitution (suffice it to recall the conflicting nature of relations between the Constitution and the 1992 Federal Treaty). At the same time, it is obvious that along with this situation in Russia there was another important motive (characteristic of all post-communist states). It was determined by the desire to prevent the restoration of the one-party (communist) system by making the amendment procedure as difficult as possible. It is precisely with this that not only the adoption of the amendment mechanism is connected, but also the clarification of its application by the Constitutional Court, which did not allow the opposition, which then dominated the State Duma, to change the Constitution. However, given the current alignment of political forces in the State Duma, it is not a problem to form a qualified majority for amending the Constitution.

Political parameters of the transformation of the Constitution

As for the transformation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (without direct changes to its text), it is possible in a number of ways. First of all, through its interpretation by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (especially when considering gaps, omissions and contradictions in it, resolving conflicts between the Constitution and federal constitutional laws) (11). Interpretation can take on various options, including the interpretation of the norms of the Constitution on its own change, as was demonstrated, for example, in the interpretation of Article 136 (12) by the Constitutional Court.

Further, through the adoption of new constitutional or federal laws, which, as is known, can transform the scope of the basic concepts of the Constitution and the hierarchy of their values, and not even necessarily a separate law, but their totality. The result of these changes, carried out without a formal change in the Constitution, according to some analysts, has already become the appearance of a de facto "parallel" constitution. The current Constitution of the Russian Federation has undergone changes (transformations) in all its most important sections (federal constitutional laws). Among the directions of these changes: the vertical separation of powers (the transition from contractual federalism to constitutional - more centralized, the creation of a new administrative-territorial division, a change in the status of the subjects of the Federation and their ability to influence the interpretation of federalism as a whole); horizontal separation of powers (change in the functioning of the upper chamber due to a three-fold radical revision of the procedure for its formation, the introduction of the State Council not provided for by the Constitution, the reform of the judiciary and the prosecutor's office, the expansion of the powers of the President to strengthen the vertical of power, etc.); relations between society and the state (revision of the status of public organizations and political parties, mass media, changes in the electoral system, etc.). A radical change in the real prerogatives of presidential power in favor of their expansion is stated (this trend can realize the model of imperial presidency).

Finally, transformations are possible through the adoption of ordinary laws and the implementation of the “decree” right of the president and changes in legislation through changes in law enforcement activities (up to a complete change in the political regime, for example, by delegating certain powers to courts and administration, etc.). This means that the Russian Constitution, in principle, is not guaranteed against a repetition of a situation where radical constitutional reforms could be carried out by decisions of the Parliament or the President of the Russian Federation.

Ultimately, the transformation of constitutional values ​​is achieved with a change in the actual circumstances of life without changing the law (possibly, in particular, provoking these actual circumstances). These changes in their totality (for example, a new public ethics or ideology, the regime of administrative structures, the media, non-governmental organizations, business) change the entire range of constitutional norms, including those enshrined in sections on fundamental rights, federalism, structure power and control. In general, they reflect a trend towards reconstitutionality. In a certain sense, this is a return to discussions on the eve of the adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in 1993.

The history of the crisis of parliamentary democracies of the twentieth century. (in Russia, Italy, Germany, Spain, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the Balkans) shows the main possible technologies for coup d'etat, which combine both the direct violent destruction of democratic institutions and the creation of quasi-democratic institutions, the possibility of directed political transformation of the constitution without changing its text . In the absence (weakness) of real parliamentary control, in a number of cases it was enough to obtain the necessary qualified majority, and it became possible to change the fundamental foundations of the state - the principle of federalism, the redistribution of the competence of the central government and regions, the form of the state and the most important democratic institutions (suffrage, parliamentarism, referendum). The collapse of the Weimar Republic (which is regarded as the ideal type of such a transformation) occurred while maintaining the formal constitutional framework through a gradual change in the constitutional regime: the leader of the largest party receiving the post of chancellor from the president; holding new parliamentary elections to create a parliamentary majority: the destruction of parliamentarism from within and turning it into a political props; the prohibition, and in part the organization of the “self-dissolution” of political parties; establishing control over the media and propaganda; policy of unification of legislation and public administration; the transition to unitarism and the liquidation of self-government of the lands; the transformation of the Cabinet of Ministers into an instrumental governing body, which then ceased to be convened at all; merger (by referendum) of the posts of chancellor and president (which gave the unification of civil and military power, since the president was commander in chief), the actual abolition of the separation of powers and the implementation of the principle of the Fuhrer. It was a coup d'état carried out in a legitimate way (the Weimar constitution was not formally repealed) (13). Such a change became possible because the prevailing positivist legal doctrine was calm about the very fact of changing the Weimar constitution.

The decisive role in this process was played by the parliament's self-removal from the political process, the delegation of powers from the legislative branch to the executive (“decree” right), and the use of emergency laws. In modern Russian political journalism, addressing the situation of the crisis of the Weimar Republic is becoming one of the directions for analyzing the transformation of the political regime, in which critics see a movement towards authoritarianism - "limited democracy", "guided democracy", "sovereign democracy".
Social and historical causes of constitutional deformations: imaginary constitutionalism
Of key importance for the fate of democratic transformation is the preservation of social consensus in the course of reforms, on the one hand, and the maintenance of the liberal-democratic vector of development, on the other. In the current literature on transition periods, two main models of transformation have been reconstructed - the contract model and the break model. The first is characterized by the preliminary agreement of the main political forces - participants in the transition process - about its goals and means to achieve these goals. The contractual model expresses the situation of the existence of fundamental agreement in society regarding the basic values ​​of the constructed political or social system. This may be an agreement between the main political parties (as in post-Franco Spain) or between the opposition and the old government (as in Eastern Europe during the Round Tables of the communist government and the opposition in 1989).

Such a treaty can also take a legally fixed form, if the negotiating parties are ready to assume political responsibility for its implementation. In Russia, as noted, some analogues of this process can be found during the revolution, when this model received little expression in the creation of a number of institutions for finding a compromise between political parties - the Democratic Conference and the Pre-Parliament, although they did not play a fundamental role. In general, however, the contractual strategy of socio-political modernization was not implemented in Russia in 1917, just as it was not implemented later in 1991 and 1993. In all three cases of radical transformations of the social and political system in the twentieth century. the path of constitutional revolution was chosen, but not constitutional reform (which involves the introduction of new legal norms based on the provisions of the old Basic Law to amend it). This problem has become relevant again at the present time in connection with the controversy regarding the advisability of changing the current Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993 and the ways of such a change. Historical experience shows that the relationship between norm and reality very often changed in Russia without corresponding changes in law or even took place contrary to the norms of positive law, which threatens the fragile social consensus - political stability achieved at the previous stage of modernization.

An important component of comparative historical studies of this problem is the appeal to the problems of imaginary constitutionalism. The consequence of the instability of the political system, which is forced to simultaneously solve problems of various levels, is the regime of imaginary constitutionalism, which is characterized by the formal recognition (and constitutional consolidation) of the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens, but includes in the main legislation such norms and their interpretation that endow the head of state with supra-constitutional (or "metaconstitutional") powers, provide the executive branch with virtually unlimited prerogatives. The features of such a regime (associated with the lack of a real separation of powers, federalism, multi-party system, social control over the distribution of financial resources, the dependence of the judiciary and limited freedom of the media) lead to the centralization and bureaucratization of management, the delegation of power and responsibility to the highest level of decision-making - personification of power and the regime of personal rule.

This political regime was typical for a short period of existence of elements of a dualistic monarchy in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. (as well as for a number of other empires of Eastern Europe (German, Austro-Hungarian) and Asia (Japan under the Meiji Constitution) and was reproduced in essential terms with the completion of the constitutional revolution of 1993 and subsequent stabilization. The current political course of the government can be defined as pragmatism This means that Russia no longer sets the task of ideological dominance (the very fact of the presence of a mobilization ideology indicates the incompleteness of modernization), but seeks to preserve and protect its interests, which makes conservatism a popular system of views. to ideological stereotypes and political forms of the past, in particular, to the statehood traditions of the imperial period.

The fact that this regime (of alleged constitutionalism) has been repeatedly reproduced in history makes it possible to see in it an expression of the contradictions of modernization - the desire to combine the democratic legitimacy of power (necessary to ensure its sustainability) with the preservation of its autonomy and essential freedom from social control (necessary to carry out the inevitable but unpopular reforms). In recent times, ostensible constitutionalism has been a key feature of many developing country regimes. If you look for its analogues in earlier historical periods, then they can be found in various modifications of democratic Caesarism, like the Principate Augustus in Rome or plebiscitary authoritarianism - Bonapartism (like the regime of the First Consul in post-revolutionary France). This makes us think about the social functions of this regime (legitimation of authoritarian modernization), as well as the possibilities of getting out of it (in the direction of real or nominal constitutionalism), and the technologies that should be used for this.

Changing the traditional order of relations between society and the state, in which the latter acts as the main, and often the only active force of transformation, is important for the success of all future attempts at modernization. Obviously, the success of modernization (even the most radical one) will always be correlated with the ability of society to accept its key values ​​and institutions. In the absence of such a correlation, the process of their erosion immediately begins: the constitutional cycle ends with retraditionalization - the restoration of traditional institutions and values, sometimes in a new form, but with the old content. In the context of modern reforms (and counter-reforms), this conclusion encourages us to pay primary attention not so much to strengthening the presidential power (which constitutionally has practically unlimited powers), but to the development of the legal foundations of civil society, a market economy worthy of human existence, political participation, local self-government, expanding the demand for law and access to justice.

Form of government and possible directions for adjustment

In this context, at the intersection of political and procedural arguments, it is possible to consider the prospects for changes and transformations of the Russian constitution. The main issue that has constantly been at the center of modern debates (between left, right and centrists) is the form of government, changing the mechanisms of relationships between the branches of power and the question of the responsibility of the government.

The leftists (communists) have traditionally advocated a parliamentary system and the abolition of a strong presidency (because this allowed hope for the restoration of the Soviet system of nominal constitutionalism). Emphasizing the advantages of the parliamentary system (its greater democracy, the possibility of coalition governments and effective parliamentary control over the government), they usually ignore the difficulties of its implementation in Russia - the difficulty of combining monistic parliamentarism with asymmetric federalism, the lack of mechanisms for resolving conflicts along the line of bicameralism, and also the lack of rootedness of a multi-party (or two-party) system, without which it is not possible to ensure effective procedures for parliamentary decisions.

The right (liberals) - initially proposed the reception of the American presidential system (with a rigid system of separation of powers), but were forced to abandon it because of the threat of paralysis of power in the event of an insoluble conflict between parliament and the president (in the United States, the threat is removed by the role of the Supreme Court, as well as national features of the functioning of the main political parties).

Centrists - advocate the preservation of the form of a mixed presidential-parliamentary system, in the interpretation of the Russian version of which the similarities with the French were emphasized and fundamental differences were obscured (the main of which is the practical impracticability of the government's responsibility mechanism to the Duma).

The concept of the existence in Russia of some analogue of a mixed system justifies the discussion about the possibility of a gradual transition from one of its modifications to another - from the presidential-parliamentary model to the parliamentary-presidential one. This makes it possible to raise the question of the constitutional responsibility of the government, the responsible ministry, or at least a “partially responsible” ministry (as was presented in some of the amendment proposals). The reform vector is determined by the orientation towards the classical model of a mixed republic, implemented in the French constitution of the Fifth Republic of 1958. This reform, in the opinion of its supporters, does not require significant changes in the text of the Russian constitution and can theoretically be implemented by transforming it - revising the constitutional legislation (in especially about the government). The advantage of this system is its flexibility. Ultimately, the functioning of this model in practice depends not so much on constitutional norms as on the alignment of forces: whether the president has a parliamentary majority or not. Depending on this, the entire system alternately functions as a parliamentary or presidential one (and therefore, various interpretations of the mixed form are possible - in favor of the parliament or the president). The disadvantage is the maintenance and reproduction of "double legitimacy", that is, the conflict between the president and the prime minister if they belong to different parties (this is probably one of the reasons that this scheme was rejected in 1993).

The possibility of adjusting the system of separation of powers in the direction of a parliamentary-presidential system becomes theoretically possible and practically realizable as a result of the ruling party (and its clones) obtaining an absolute majority of mandates in the 2007 State Duma elections. This opens up prospects for the formation of a responsible party (or coalition) government, which ceases to be "technical" and remains in power as long as it has the support of the parliamentary majority. Movement in this direction creates mechanisms for the implementation of the government's responsibility (before parliament) and means a redistribution of the power prerogatives of the president and prime minister in favor of the latter. However, how can this system work in Russia (taking into account the changes made to the electoral system, the regrouping of political parties (the creation of a pseudo-multiparty system and the exclusion of liberal parties from the political spectrum), the building of a power vertical)?

Benchmarking allows you to see the dangers along the way. If the parliament is dominated by one party in power, and the power itself will actually be taken out of legal control (which happened in a number of countries during periods of reconstitution), then it is not excluded that the parliament will become an instrument of long-term domination of one ruling party (or its clones), like regimes of the "Institutional Revolutionary Party" in Mexico, the "People's Republican Party" in Turkey, the "Indian National Congress" in India or the "Liberal Democratic Party" in Japan, which critics say is neither liberal nor democratic, and, at the same time, it ceased to be a party in the proper sense of the word (due to the dominance of patronage-clientelist relations in it) (with all the differences in the forms of government in these countries). But such a solution is only a different form of authoritarianism - it leads to a narrowing of the space for political debate, corruption and bureaucratization (14).

The adjustment of the political course and the formation of a corps of responsible politicians, as well as their rotation in power (for example, alternately occupying the highest posts of president and head of government) are carried out in systems of this type outside parliamentary control, in a closed regime, at best through intra-elite dialogue, but not based on the competition of political parties, public parliamentary debates and democratic elections. This leads to a sharp narrowing of the scope of the political process, decision-making within a narrow group of persons representing not so much constitutional institutions of power, or even parliamentary caucuses, as privileged groups of the military and civil administration.

In fact, this is a new form of imaginary constitutionalism, possible in the conditions of mass society and telecommunications. The power of a political group, personified in one or more leaders, gets the opportunity to retain, transfer and legitimize its power, relying on economic and administrative resources, information technology, moreover, with formal observance of constitutional procedures, but without maintaining real constitutional restrictions on power. Of key importance is the interpretation of constitutional norms (both legal and quasi-legal), capable of limiting and changing them in a radical way in favor of the current government.

Goals of the revision of the Constitution

Strong statehood is not only building a power vertical, but also creating tools for dialogue between society and government and, in particular, a system of feedback between them. Such a feedback system is built in modern democracies through the creation of a democratic electoral system, the development of party pluralism, an increase in the role of public opinion (through the media), and a system of independent non-governmental organizations. In general, the active role of the parliament, in particular, strengthening the role of parliamentary debates and expanding the institution of parliamentary control. The opinion of the opposition (regardless of whether it got into the Duma or not) should certainly be taken into account in making significant decisions. Without this, the post-Soviet constitutional cycle may end with a return to authoritarianism or “sham constitutionalism” in one of the many modifications (15).

The essence of the problem: with the seeming strength and stability of the political system of a managed democracy and even its effectiveness for a limited period of time, a situation of dysfunction, bureaucratic sclerosis and inflexibility of the constitution may arise. World experience shows that this hinders the articulation of public sentiments, their expression in specific bills, legal politics and judicial practice. In the worst case, we can return to the classical paternalistic model that existed in Russia, where responsible decisions are not made by government institutions, but simply delegated to a higher level, up to the very top. This gives rise to the fragility and uncertainty of state power, leads to its overload and inefficiency, which makes the executive vertical itself extremely vulnerable in crisis situations.

In the light of the arguments presented, it is clear that, in the long run, one should strive to avoid both extremes - constitutional stagnation and a full-scale revision of constitutional provisions (the results of which may turn out to be unpredictable). The modern constitution can be transformed through its new interpretation and adjustment, and the very directions of this adjustment are set by the priorities of the rule of law. The pragmatic solution to the problem of responsible government is to find such a reading (interpretation) of the constitution that would be oriented towards the values ​​of democracy and European standards for understanding it (no other reasonable standards exist), and not a return to "catholicity" and paternalism, which in fact, they will mean the erosion of the liberal principles proclaimed in the constitution.

As the experience of modern democracies shows, the stability of a constitution is determined not only and not so much by the norms fixed in it, but by the agreement of the main political parties regarding basic constitutional values. Naive, therefore, are the calls to rectify the situation by reforming the constitution. It is much more important to make the transition from technical government to responsible government; from pseudo-multiparty system to real party pluralism; and from imaginary constitutionalism to the present.

Notes:

1. Common legal space of Europe and the practice of constitutional justice. M., IPPP, 2007.

2. Medushevsky A.N. Theory of constitutional cycles. M., SU-HSE, 2005.

3. On the causes of the collapse of the democratic republic in Russia in 1917, see: On the 90th anniversary of the February Revolution in Russia // Domestic History. 2007, No. 6.

4. Bryce J. Studies in History and Jurisprudence. London, 1901.

5. Constitutions of European states. M., Norma, 2001. Vol. 1-3.

6. Jellinek G. The general doctrine of the state. SPb., Legal Center Press, 2004.

7. The Constitution of the Russian Federation in the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Russia. M., IPPP, 2005.

8. This possibility was already realized at the time of the adoption of the law: Federal law on political parties // Federation Council and constitutional processes in modern Russia. 2002, No. 1.

9. Vile J.R. A Companion to The United States Constitution and Its Amendments. Westport, Praeger, 2006.

10. Federal Law of March 4, 1998 “On the procedure for the adoption and entry into force of amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation // Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation. 1998 No. 10. Art. 1146.

11. Legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Russia. M., 2006.

12. Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of October 31, 1995 No. 12-P on the case of the interpretation of Article 136 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation // Collected. Zach. RF. 1995. No. 45. Art. 4408).

13. Linz H. The collapse of democratic regimes: crisis, destruction and rebalancing. Washington, 1993.

14. Huntington S. Political order in changing societies. M., Progress, 2004.

15. Medushevsky A.N. Reflections on modern Russian constitutionalism. M., ROSSPEN, 2007.

Medushevsky A.N. - Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, Professor.

Vyacheslav Vyacheslavovich Medushevsky is a researcher of ways of expressing the spiritual life of a person in music. His fundamental research "On the regularities and means of the artistic impact of music" (1976), "The intonation form of music" (1993), etc. are already included in the golden fund of not only Russian, but also world music science. If you get acquainted with the works of V.V. Medushevsky in accordance with the chronology, you can become a witness to the process of spiritual searches of the scientist, which naturally led him to the formation of an Orthodox worldview. Since the 1990s The main topic of Medushevsky's scientific research is the spiritual beauty of music and culture, the religious nature of musical ear, and the Christian anthropology of music. Medushevsky is working on the topic "Spiritual and Moral Analysis of Music". The problems of musical pedagogy, psychology and anthropology of music are devoted to his book Listen to Angelic Singing (2000).

Vyacheslav Vyacheslavovich MEDUSHEVSKY: interview

Vyacheslav Vyacheslavovich MEDUSHEVSKY (born 1939)- musicologist, teacher, doctor of art history, honored worker of arts of Russia, member of the Union of Composers: | | | | .

Conversation with Professor of the Moscow Conservatory V.V. Medushevsky

Vyacheslav Vyacheslavovich, did you come from a religious family?
- My grandfather was a priest, my parents believed. But when I once told my mother that, they say, there is no God, we were told so at school, she retreated. Consciously, I began to come to faith in the 80s. For a very long time I hoped that I would study another science, and the circle would close, and the truth would be revealed. And then it turned out that there is no circle of sciences, but there is a circle of faith, from which sciences emerge.
The Lord created some situations in my life that directed me to Him. I remember how, as a child, I inhaled the smell of wild rose and retreated in thought, trying to understand what he was talking about, where such a miracle came from. Father Pavel Florensky says that smell is the language of the universe, in which God really tries to tell us a lot. What is the worst smell? The smell of death. And Father Pavel called the smell of mountain violets the purest.
Another time - it was at the time when I was learning to play the violin - I was struck by the complexity and perfection of my fingers. Out of delight, I even began to pray without words and, I remember, crossed myself.

Did you get into music early?
She has always been in our house. During the war, my mother saved our beautiful piano, did not let it go for firewood, even when the water froze in the apartment. I played it without knowing the notes, improvising, trying to understand the laws of harmony.

- What is music? Sorry for such a vague question.
- This is the language of our heart, not the language of emotions, as it has become fashionable to think now, but of such depths of our personality that we cannot tell with the help of speech. One can only guess what is happening there, what kind of struggle is going on. Sometimes there is some diabolical cacophony, sometimes the sounds are unspeakably beautiful. High music awakens in us the memory of our heavenly dispensation. We forgot about paradise, but music remembers.

- How is the Russian school different from the Western one?
- The Western image is that the fingers, playing, seem to hover separately from the body, the head leans thoughtfully over them. This Protestant attitude is somewhat analytical. The Russian school differs from it in the game of weight, which gives a feeling of volume, semantic completeness, the whole body of the body is involved, and the sound from the fingertips through the hand comes into contact with the heart. Against the background of others, the Russian performing style stands out precisely for its ontology, beingness, in which there is a force that lifts the soul up. This also applies to violin art. Yehudi Menuhin, the greatest violinist, said that one can learn to play only from Russians. Only they convey the spirit of music, not emotions, not psychism, but a person's belonging to the spiritual world.
Chinese students once asked me how I understand Tchaikovsky's statement that the highest quality of virtuosity is objectivity. As explained - do not understand. Finally, I say: "This is the Tao." We immediately understood: I look, they wake up, they almost whisper with reverence: “Oh-oh-oh, Yes-oh-oh.” The fact is that in the Chinese Bible, “In the beginning was the Word” is translated as “In the beginning was the Tao”, that is, the path. This does not contradict the correct understanding, because the Lord also says: "I am the way." When the Lord came, he revealed the meaning of both the Chinese Tao and the Greek logos, filling them with new meaning. Before that, they were impersonal, but suddenly it was revealed that the truth, and the path, and the word are not what, but Who. Through this, the deepest connection between the human person and God was revealed.
When they hear about the Tao, about the humility of a musician, my Chinese say: "This is our philosophy." Actually, it's Christian. Truth will not transform a person as long as it is something external, until a person understands that by becoming like Christ, he himself becomes a person. Only by the Lord do we move, as the apostle Paul said. What is this movement, how does it manifest itself?
To explain this, I remind students of one episode from the life of Beethoven - the story of two opening notes in the adagio of the 29th sonata, illustrating the gospel words "The kingdom of heaven is taken by force." It was told by the composer's student Ferdinand Ries, to whom Beethoven sent the sonata to London for publication. When the engraving was completed, Rhys received a strange instruction from his teacher - to add two notes to the adagio as the first measure. It was just right to think about whether the rumor was true that something was wrong with Beethoven. Send two notes in addition to a large, carefully designed and already half a year as a completed work! But Rhys was even more amazed when he discovered the impact these notes had. Previously, the melody began as a kind of lyrical spiritual outpouring, in which there was a shadow of some relaxation, lethargy. But suddenly she became ascetic and collected, a movement of the soul appeared in her, conquering pride and humbly waiting for a meeting with God. In this movement to the Lord - all the salt. The unbeliever, trying to move, always stands still. Formally, everything seems to be in order, but he always lacks two notes or one word, some kind of “smallness”.

What do you think is the purpose of music?
- Bach, the greatest genius of music, in 1738 dictated to a student that the ultimate and final goal of all music is to serve the glory of God and refresh the spirit. Let's pay attention: all music, without dividing it into church and secular. But we are only talking about beautiful music, because Bach further explained that where this is not taken into account, there is no real music, but there is devilish chatter and noise. Now we are increasingly dealing with this noise, they are trying to designate music as the language of our emotions, that is, a manifestation of selfhood.

- To what extent did Russian classical music reflect the folk character?
- My preferences have changed for a long time. Either it seemed that there was nothing more beautiful than Russian music, then it seemed to be some kind of amateurish - whether it was German, it was so polished! Then I turned to our music again. What is its difference? This question was best answered by my granddaughter when she was five years old. Once, while listening to Rimsky-Korsakov, she suddenly exclaimed: “What Russian music!” "Why Russian?" - I was surprised. My granddaughter looked at me with regret and said that adults do not understand this, but children know everything. I continued to ask why she was still Russian, and finally received the answer: "Because she is kind." This is an amazingly accurate word. You can't say the same about German music. She is sublime, benevolent, but kind is something else. In Russian music there is the ability to see saved individuals in all people, the desire to help everyone.
I use a comparison from the field of physics. The electron has a corpuscular-wave nature. It combines the properties of both particles and waves, although their properties are not combined in our consciousness. So is a person: he is both a “particle” with his personal responsibility before God, and a “wave”, unity with other people on the basis of mutual responsibility. In the music of Russian composers, this is felt with particular force.

- Which of them has more?
- Well, of course, in the music of Tchaikovsky. This is the highest genius. Tchaikovsky had the gift of the greatest love for people. When he was seven years old, he wrote a prayer: “Lord, give all Russian people as much as me!” It also said: “Lord, make sure that the Russian people have nothing to do abroad.” Today, this can cause a smile, in fact, it shows how close Tchaikovsky was to his land, national. He had to travel the world. There was a lot of enthusiasm in Prague about his music, but Tchaikovsky insisted that it was not he who was applauded, but "dear Russia". In New York, I saw a Russian woman and burst into tears, so homesick. But what is remarkable: in Japan, he is the number one composer. It is believed that his works have a beneficial effect on the development of the individual. This is because Tchaikovsky was a man of incredible sincerity. Few people prayed with such force: he asked with tears for the forgiveness of sins, correction, humility. Listen to how his faith manifested itself in the sixth symphony, where we discover true Orthodoxy, theology. The soul there cries, repents, a person dies, but brings to that world the most important thing - love for the Creator, complete trust in Him, brings faith as the highest, only gift. Not trust in yourself, in your righteousness, but hope in God's incredible love for us. This is the kind of repentance that does not kill, but resurrects. Humility breeds freedom and joy. Tchaikovsky said about this: “It is sweet for me to say to the Lord: “May Thy holy will be done.”

- But what about Rimsky-Korsakov?
- I love Rimsky-Korsakov very much. His highest creation is "The Legend of the City of Kitezh". Before I knew him, my favorite opera was The Snow Maiden. I am still sure that this is completely Christian music.

- “The Tale of the Invisible City of Kitezh” seems to me to be a completely Christian work.
- Here is another surprisingly Russian manifestation of spiritual courage: "The Battle of Kerzhents" from this opera. The excited rhythm of the jump, the blows of the swords... But is that the main thing? How naturally a folk song floats in the skies above the battle! How did it happen in an unprecedented, Orthodox, truly Russian way - to make a song the innermost core of the battle scene! It contains the weeping of the heart, and pity for the torments of the people, compassionate, merciful and active love. But at the same time here is the highest rise of courage, the boiling of spiritual courage, self-denial to death. Only love gives such courage and contempt for death, inspired flying joy.

- Probably Rachmaninoff came closest to the fusion of church music and secular music?
- Regarding the mutual influence of secular and church music, this is a difficult question. Need both one and the other. People come to the temple for conciliar prayer, but at some point they return back to the world, where they should be met by a different beauty, where there should also be music. The essence of serious secular music, and culture in general, is in the transformation of this extra-church life, in the fact that, having left the church, a person does not fall into emptiness, lack of spirituality. Everything in the world should direct him to God, but by different means. This also moved Rakhmaninov, whose music is loved by many people who have never crossed the threshold of a temple. But the Orthodox origins of his work are obvious. In an interview with a newspaper, he said: “Everything that I am, I owe to God. To Him alone." After the revolution, Rachmaninov's work was labeled as fascism in a priest's cassock. But who remembers today the names of critics who were very popular in their time and slandered Rachmaninoff?

- Who came to replace him in Russia?
- Russian music of the last century was very difficult. Previously, in every style there was some entelechy, inner beauty. Hundreds of composers worked in the Baroque era, and no one could write badly. There was music more technical, there was less, but everything was done cleanly and beautifully. Everything has changed in the last century. The phenomenon that we call avant-garde was born - this is a generalized name for several styles that have relied on destruction, the intonation of violence. For this reason alone it was fruitless, but our geniuses overcame the limitations of avant-gardism, each in his own way. Shostakovich overcame him with his pain for humanity, Prokofiev - with joy, he said that the most terrible thing for a person is despondency. Sviridov also survived the crisis. His first works are purely avant-garde, with sharp sounds. But then he suddenly realized the complete hopelessness of this revolutionary path and turned to the traditions of Russian music. To Russian chant, purity, melody.

- In connection with the overcoming of avant-gardism, I wanted to ask how you feel about Schnittke's music?
- He worked at a time when avant-garde gave way to a new fashion - postmodernism. But Schnittke, as a representative of Russian culture, absorbed all this, rethought it and won. He created a method that he himself called polystylistics, that is, a game with different styles, from which he built dialogues of different worldviews. He was saved by that in the name of which he did everything. Everything in him is subordinated to pain for humanity, just like in Shostakovich. And he was very worried, so Schnittke's music is very difficult, painful. He plunges us very deep with him, to where, as from a well during the day, the stars are visible. But people are afraid of these depths, so he had little hope of being understood. By baptism he was a Catholic, but according to his worldview, it seems to me, Orthodox. Befriended priests. And the funeral was in the Orthodox Church according to the Orthodox order.

ON THE ORIGIN AND ESSENCE OF SERIOUS MUSIC

"High" musical culture is now - fortunately, not one hundred percent, but already in a significant part - a kind of gigantic forgery: under the guise of performed classics - the art of high tradition - the psychology of not a spiritual, but a carnal person shows itself. The vulgar performance is echoed by the soulless hearing of music. Setting the ear of musicologists, performers, composers, listeners, teachers deprives music of its spiritual fortress. A person has forgotten, lost the knowledge that truth is found in the best, and to look for the average and mediocre means to slander the infinite beauty of truth. The spiritual and moral analysis of music in the classroom is designed to constantly return to music its sublime beauty - through the education of musical ear as an organ for searching for such unearthly beauty.

The outstanding musicologist Kurt, having come to the general education lyceum, led the students and their parents (they sang together in the school choir and performed Bach's cantatas and motets with the school orchestra) into such a stormy delight that the lyceum almost turned into a conservatory. Kurt saw the reason for success in the fact that music began to be expressed to schoolchildren in spiritual terms. Any other explanation, leaving the soul empty, ruins the sublime love of music.
What did the creators of masterpieces strive for, what did they hear in music?

For baroque composers, its highest purpose is the spiritual elevation of people. Handel wrote: "I would be very sorry if my music only entertained my listeners: I strove to make them better." In the music of Mozart, Grieg saw a revelation of heavenly beauty. From the paradise of music blooming with beauty, continued the Norwegian composer, we have been banished by the sins of modern life. E.T.A. Hoffmann, writer and composer, author of the first romantic opera, speaks about the luminous-fiery content of classical music, protruding beyond the limits of this world: “Mozart introduces us into the depths of the realm of spirits. We are seized by fear, but without torment, it is rather a premonition of the infinite. Love and sadness resound in the wondrous voices of the spirits... Mozart is more concerned with the superhuman, the miraculous, which dwells in the depths of our spirit.” And Schubert enthusiastically exclaims: “O Mozart, immortal Mozart, how many, how infinitely many such salutary imprints of a brighter, better life you have left in our souls!” The following definition stuck to the music of Schubert himself forever: “divine lengths” - here we mean the state of prayerful and contemplative delight, which makes one forget about time; contemporary composer Alexander Knaifel said of him: "He certainly could not help but feel the divine touch." And Theodor Adorno, insufferable by the vulgarity of his sociological interpretations, nevertheless noticed the amazing deep effect of this “liberated music of a transfigured person”: “We cry, not knowing why, because we are not yet what this music promises.”
The expression "divine art" does not leave the lips of Beethoven. “Each note of my violin concerto is dictated by the Almighty,” he testified, considering himself nothing in comparison with the “Composer of the world,” God. Berlioz hears his Fifth Symphony in a striking way. How the sky is separated from the earth by his performance-auditory reading from the insignificant modern understanding. There is no crude self-admiration of the muscle in the frenzied straining of intonation, no arrogance of blind revolutionary pride, no ferocious power of the fist. In the festive finale, Berlioz hears something else, higher: the soul, having passed all the trials, having passed the mystical horror of the scherzo (Schumann also wrote about the deep fear of the scherzo), being freed from earthly bonds, free, light, enters into the immortal world of jubilation. What can compare "with this song of victory - a song in which the soul of a poet-musician, now free from all shackles and earthly suffering, seems to ascend in radiance to heaven!" Oh, who would worthily glorify the music of Glinka, Rachmaninov, Tchaikovsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, full of even greater revelations about the incomprehensible beauty of spiritual existence! "What Russian music!" - exclaimed a five-year-old girl while listening to the overture to "May Night". - “Why do you think you are Russian? You haven’t heard a single Russian song yet?” “Adults don't feel it. Children - they know everything. - “But still: why Russian?” - "Because it's good." Through the mouth of a baby... About the Orthodox roots of the goodness of the Russian land, the destiny of the Mother of God, - about the infinite freedom of love of the children of God - the mind often does not guess, and the immaculate heart knows the truth: "a man will come, and the heart will be deep, and God will ascend" (Ps. 63). About the heart of Russian culture, in which God ascends, Gogol wrote penetratingly. The time for a worthy interpretation of Russian music has not come: the revolution interfered, twisting hearts with confusion. But we are indebted to her height; it is our strength.

Is the personal religiosity of geniuses the reason for the height of masterpieces? Oh no! Although in this respect they are superior to us. How many have been vouchsafed to have holy friends? And Glinka was friends with St. Ignatius (Bryanchaninov), and had conversations with him about art. From them, written down by the saint at the request of Glinka, we learn that the composer in his music was looking for an incomprehensibly high, incomprehensibly beautiful, whose name is God. Tchaikovsky's words about Glinka's music are known: in it, like an oak tree in a stomach, is all subsequent Russian music. This amazing idea is repeated endlessly. But let's think about it: what great power has enclosed the future in the acorn of the present? The same one that imbued Dostoevsky's work with prophetic revelations, communicated the prophetic gift, according to Gogol, to all Russian literature. This is holiness. For Gogol and Dostoevsky, this is a galaxy of great elders of the Optina Hermitage, for Glinka - St. Ignatius. Realizing the greatness of the goals set by God for Russian culture, Glinka, shortly before his death, goes to his old teacher Den - to study the musical art of the pre-humanist tradition in order to find the way for Russian music to its ancient and eternal church roots. Great precepts - his creative anticipation of the light of the future - Glinka passed on to Balakirev, through him and to the Mighty Handful.

Tchaikovsky felt the same way about the tasks of Russian culture. In the church works of Bortnyansky, he noted the complete inconsistency of their style with the spirit of Orthodoxy - the positive ideal of Tchaikovsky himself is guessed in harsh criticism. We too can admire his faith. From the very beginning, he saw the meaning of creativity in sacrificial service to God. “I must sacrifice everything in order to develop and educate what God gave me in the bud,” he wrote to his sister, motivating his refusal to become a lawyer. Hence, from the idea of ​​selfless self-sacrificing service to God, moreover, without the slightest admixture of vanity (!), - extraordinary zeal in work and impetuous flight of his genius. Like Pushkin, Tchaikovsky's faith grew, clearing up with the maturity of the soul. He acquired the gift of tearful prayer. In it, he asked not for trifles, but for the main, essentially necessary: ​​humility, love, forgiveness, and enlightenment. God granted what was asked. It was sweet for the composer to say to Him: “Lord, Thy will be done” (from a letter to N.F. von Meck); to the outstanding Orthodox teacher S.A. Rachinsky, he revealed the secret: he learned what he had not been able to do before - to love God. “I thank God every hour and every minute for giving me faith in Him.” Faith, acting through love, moved him to struggle with the passions that tormented him, to disagree with them.

And yet the reason for the beauty of masterpieces is unimaginably deeper and higher than the personal religiosity of the creators. The mind of geniuses can be wrong, but the artistic instinct (lat. - intuition, impulse) senses the truth and leads the creator to the heights of beauty.

The root of beauty is in the very essence of high art. In the great goal of art rooted in it as its essence. Aristotle (perhaps, thinking about the meaning of his name “Good End” - and who am I then at the beginning of the journey?) grasped this unity of givenness and predestination in an amazing neologism. Entelechy! Literally, "commitment". Entelechy is deeper and stronger than the humanistic term “ideal” coined by Kant (from an ancient root meaning to see, as in the words idea, idol, see). The ideal is like a crane in the sky - it can be contemplated at a distance: it is beautiful, but you can live without it. And entelechy is inside, in the very core, as the basis of the being of a thing. You can't throw her away without her not being herself anymore. For a person to abandon the great goal of being rooted in him means to stop being a person. And the people without it are already (or still) not a people. “The people are an assembly of worshipers” (St. Gregory of Nyssa). “Once not a people, but now the people of God” (1 Pet. 2:10). Affinity by grace is at the base. And if entelechy is destroyed by a quarrel with Heaven? - Then a terrible transformation takes place: “Without God, a nation is a crowd united by vice. Either stupid, or blind, or, what is even worse, cruel. And let anyone who speaks in a high style ascend the throne, The crowd will remain a crowd until it turns to God ”(Hieromonk Roman). The action of entelechy - and in the creations of man, in art. Style is not just the distinctiveness of an artist's work or an era. Style is the height and beauty of originality, irresistibly attracting to itself, to its transcendental peak. And the genres were raised by the energy of the entelechy contained in them.

Without the last eternal goal, which has become the essence, there would be no whole field of serious art. It, the great secular art of modern times, also has its own entelechy. Yearning with his heart for her, for her unprecedented beauty, the creator of music tunes in her, like a tuning fork, his ear and all his creative abilities. Once inside the masterpieces, it, as their highest content, becomes the prerequisite and the main force for the artistic education of children at school. We are about to reveal the entelechy - the purpose-meaning-essence - of high art.

Above the creators of immortal art is that which is free from death. What exactly? Art is one of the manifestations of tradition and culture. The unprecedented concept of Tradition (Tradition) is one of the wonderful gifts of Christianity to humanity. Tradition is the transmission in generations of an exalted, meaningful life with God, the Giver of grace-filled love, inspiration, eternal spring newness and renewal. The Church's core of tradition, the liturgical life of faith, is the transmission of the fullness of Divine life, the transmission of immortality in the sacraments of the Church, the communion of the created nature of man with the uncreated nature of God (cf. 2 Pet. 1:4). From the core of tradition, the secular (non-church) spheres of life are illuminated with light and saturated with strength and wisdom. Correlative with the concept of tradition is the concept of culture. Tradition is the seed, culture is the soil of the heart, human striving and willingness to accept the gift of the highest Divine life. The word culture (“cultivation”) came from the mouth of God in Paradise. The cultivation of the paradise of the soul in the proximity of God is the vital task of man and mankind. In order for the seed to germinate and bear fruit, the soil of the heart must not be stony, but prepared and moistened. The eternal newness of tradition, sent down from above, is answered by the thirst for light and the infinite height of perfection, which is the nerve of culture.

Culture is not truth, but an indicator of how the truth and beauty of God have been assimilated by mankind. The culture that participates in the tradition of the undying newness of the transfigured life and unprecedented being (“whoever is in Christ, that is a new creature; the ancient has passed away, now everything is new” - 2 Cor. 5:17) - accepts the elixir of immortality. Since the New Age, Christian culture has become uniquely and undividedly universal - the world could not resist the unearthly height and beauty of the values ​​​​sung by it.

The worldwide triumph of Christian science and art became possible because, for the first time in history, the secular spheres of culture assumed the greatest, unheard of new mission - to assist the Church, to become a preparatory sermon of beauty and truth on the porch. Therefore, it is an essential part of a great tradition and culture. Here is the entelechy of secular culture. Science, turning the revelation of God to the study of the natural world, turned the pagan paradigm of thinking upside down. She put it upside down: instead of the pagan faith in the form as the cause of movement, she accepted (in the person of the theologian Newton) the biblical concept of force. Having risen to her feet, she became capable of a swift step and ascent.

Secular art, having turned the gaze enlightened by Christianity to non-temple spheres of life, begins to realize itself in the light of the great goal - the elevation of the human spirit to heavenly beauty, accepts the criteria of seriousness, strict and concentrated depth, chaste and reverent heavenly purity and clarity of spirit, inspired striving for wondrous divine perfection, and together with the criteria - the great experience of church arts.
This is also the origin of serious secular music. She is not from the fool-makers and not from the buffoons! The romantic writer, composer and researcher of early music E.T.A. Hoffman wrote: “I would like to draw your attention to a great thing - to the inner relationship of church music and tragic opera; it served as the basis for the ancient composers to create a special, majestic style. Outside the Church, the path from song would lie (contrary to Kabalevsky's theory) not at all to the opera, but to the stage!

Church singing and secular music - what is the main thing in them akin and what is different? How are the two branches of culture related? Is it possible to correlate church singing with the beauty of God, and secular music - with the beauty of the created world, as suggested by V. Martynov? Such a mechanical division will not make it possible to see the true miracle of European secular music, which attracted all the peoples of the earth to itself.
The stunningly beautiful Andante fis moll 23 of Mozart's piano concerto... Could its infinitely tender and chaste, concentrated and detached sublimity be born in the era of the predatory-sensual Aphrodite and Venus? Oh no, this is the creation of a different era, a different humanity - washed by the blood of Christ, knowing the transfiguration of the soul, honoring the Mother of God and the saints, giving himself to the ideal of self-denying love!

Connects both spheres and at the same time distinguishes - the concept of grace. With this term, the holy Equal-to-the-Apostles brothers Methodius and Cyril conveyed the uniquely untranslatable Greek word cari. In the language of Homer, it meant at the same time love, beauty and gratitude. Christianity introduced inexplicable perfection and infinity into this concept of the beauty of love, filled it with strength for salvation, for, as it was said. God Himself, the Eternal Himself “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace (cari) and truth; and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only begotten of the Father” (John 1:14).

Grace is one, but its manifestations are different. Deifying grace operates in the temple, while in secular music it is invoking grace. Its peculiarity, according to St. John Chrysostom, is as follows. For a brief moment, she reveals the ineffability of God's beauty and love. But then, as it were, he retreats, waiting for the answer of his heart, in order to allow him to manifest his gift of divine freedom. If the heart is ready, then, irresistibly attracted, it rushes after the big one and is rewarded with the blessedness of a church-going life.

Calling grace invites every soul to the feast of faith, captivating hearts with the beauty of heavenly truths. “Many are called” (Matthew 20:16; 22:14; Luke 14:24)! But the elect, who have responded to the call, who have betrothed themselves to Christ, who have received the pledge of the Spirit for assurance of salvation, grace enlightens, transforms, regenerates born again, perfects, adopts, deifies. The latter - only in the bosom of the Church, the Body of Christ; currents of transfiguring grace also permeate liturgical singing. The initial, calling grace, according to the thought of St. Ignatius (Bryanchaninov), St. Righteous John of Kronstadt, St. Barsanuphius of Optinsky, flows in the works of secular art. It is she who constitutes the innermost content of serious music. That is why, to evaluate serious music, religious terms are used and can be used more fully.

The saving power of Christ and the perfections of God echo in the hearts of people who are being transfigured by grace. The highest content of the intonation of liturgical singing is Divine perfection, the holiness of God. We know from the Holy Fathers that God is incomprehensible in His essence, but we can comprehend it in energies, actions, communions. The grace of the Holy Spirit exalts the praying soul to God. Approaching - transforms it. Therefore, it can be said that the content of church intonation is also the transfiguration, the sanctification of a person, as well as the transfigured person himself, standing before God, being adopted and sanctified.

Briefly say: the content of the intonation of liturgical singing from the side of the Divine is Christ, the grace of the Holy Spirit, the perfection and holiness of God. On the human side, there is a heavenly person in us, “a man hidden in the heart in the incorruptible beauty of a meek and silent spirit” (1 Pet. 3:4), spiritual and moral perfection, the union of virtues, the inflorescence of the gifts of the Spirit.
Such are the highest layers of the semantic content of great secular music: a reflection of Divine perfections and a person transformed by Christianity. With a glimpse of God's beauty, she arouses spiritual thirst, being unable to satisfy it, which is why a poignant note arises in her beauty: the soul feels the unattainability of God on the paths of secular art and cries the more, the more beautiful the music. “The contemplation of ideal beauty always gives rise to pain” (Somerset Maugham, The Story “Redhead”). “There must be another life that is not familiar to me, which speaks the language of books, paintings and music, awakens anxiety in me, beckons me,” says the heroine of Remarque (Life on loan, M., 1960, p. 43). The heroine is disturbed by pangs of conscience: the soul is far from God, does not live according to the commandments, therefore it does not have peace, a guarantee of eternity. Let us also recall the already quoted words of Adorno about Schubert: “We cry, not knowing why, because we are not yet what this music promises” (“Musical Moments”).

In the church, in response to the thirst for God, ecclesiastical tenderness is shed - an ocean of God's love! That is why, instead of aching melancholy, there is a living pleroma unity of searching and finding, hope and certification in it. Secular music, although it reflects on the divine in images, as if in the third person, still does not leave a prayerful mood, it permeates other images. It is easy to be convinced of this by comparing it with pop music, the essence of which is militant lack of spirituality, the repulsion of prayer, the affirmation of the bestial state of the soul as an imaginary norm. The tradition of prayer and prayer has supported and maintains the height of serious secular music. The prayerfulness of serious music is its central genre principle: how would its sublime meanings, which make up its essence, be expressed in it without that?!

Serious music, keeping in itself the memory of paradise, does not allow a person to stagnate. “He who does not carry music in himself, who is cold to charming harmony, can be a traitor, a liar, a robber, his souls of movement are dark as night, and, like Erebus, his soul is black” (Shakespeare). Instinctively reading this secret philosophy of the soul, this brightening and softening effect of secular music, parents to this day send their children to study music, patrons of all ages and the state supported it. So, the content of great serious secular art is by no means emotions, as the 20th century thought poorly! The main thing in it is the ideological beginnings of life, motivational depths and strategies of life, innermost goals, the ideal desired state of the soul in aspiration to God.

The Lord saturates the masterpieces of secular art with calling grace, perfects the ear and quickly elevates to genius those performers and composers (as well as poets and artists) who serve this main task of secular art: invocation to the beauty of God.
How does secular music perform its main function - a preparatory sermon on the porch? Let's show this with a specific example.

Tchaikovsky's Sixth Symphony. The great life-affirming meaning of death. The wonderful Orthodox actress Yermolova wrote about this brilliant music: “It is clear and deep and solemnly beautiful. It is gloomy and mournful, but this is not the cry that makes us writhe in convulsions, which rips all your nerves, this is a great sorrow that opens the heavens.

How, then, do the heavens open, infinitely rejoicing the human spirit? What is the life-affirming power of death? Why do masterpieces of art so often grow out of the theme of death? Why degraded, slipped into the abomination of culture, losing the memory of death? Why did the holy fathers revere it, the memory of death, as the basis of true, abundant life? Orthodoxy gives us amazing clarity here. Serbian Metropolitan Amfilohiy (Radovich) characterizes death as the limit of man's disfigurement, his alienation from God and alienation from himself. But in it, as in the temporality of all history and civilization, there is also a life-affirming educational meaning. "Death is the true measure and final test not only of man, but of all human activity, of all values... only those values ​​that are stronger than death can be true."

What is stronger than death? Is it a human? Is it human pride? No, she suffers a complete defeat in death. Stronger than death is God, God's eternal love for creation, God's beauty, bliss, light, perfection, truth. All the priceless riches of divine eternal life are bestowed upon man, if only he wants to take them.

What could be the threat of death? Is it life? Can death, which is from the devil (“by the envy of the devil, death entered the world, and those who belong to his inheritance test it” - Wisdom 2:24), be stronger than life, which is from God! No, it is not death that destroys true life, but mortal life. Heidegger said that man is "being towards death." If we keep in mind the narrowness of this definition, then within this narrowness the definition is correct: death really crowns the mortal, inauthentic existence of man. This is especially evident in unbelieving people. Is this life? It is this mortal "life", mortal existence, a consequence of alienation from God, that absorbs death as its rightful property, for evil has no right to immortality. The perishability of man is a consequence of the lack of true life in man. "Before the existent, the Existent." Everything unimportant has a temporary existence - such is the law. Existence is possible only in the rays of God's eternal love. Therefore, the holy fathers called the end of the earthly life of pious people not death, but the “third birth” (after birth and baptism) and “liberation from death” (St. Maximus the Confessor). Believers already in this life receive promises, pledges and undoubted evidence in the Divine life, and therefore, remembering death, ascend from joy into joy. Christ left us perfect joy (John 15:11; 16:24; 17:13; 1 John 1:4). “Rejoice always” (1 Thessalonians 5:16), exhorts the apostle! The ancient promise of eternal youth came true - “your youth will be renewed like an eagle” (Ps. 103:5). “While our outer man smolders, our inner man is renewed from day to day” (2 Cor. 4:16). Hence the joy of waiting for death. “For to me life is Christ, and death is gain. But if life in the flesh bears fruit for my cause, I do not know what to choose. Both attract me: I have a desire to resolve myself and be with Christ, because this is incomparably better; but it is more important for you to remain in the flesh” (Phil. 1:21-24).
The West, falling away from the original Orthodoxy, having lost these firm foundations of a correct, bright life-sense, acquired a sinful horror before death. How far from the fiery words of the Apostle Paul: “Neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ. Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 8:38-39)! The terrifying "Dance of Death" becomes a favorite subject in painting; in the humanistic era, even the church genre of the Requiem is struck by notes of darkness, while the Orthodox Panikhida is a prayerful and solemn farewell to the deceased in true life with the saints. In the secular funeral march, bright memories in the middle part only set off the darkness in the soul, affirmed by the extreme parts. From this horror, the West in recent centuries has fled into animal insensitivity, unconsciousness, into arbitrary oblivion of the life-giving memory of death. However, life in a serene illusion with many sedative pills and distracting amusements does not save a sick human society from neurasthenia, from a hidden feeling of futility, melancholy and meaninglessness.
What is the miracle contained in the works of Tchaikovsky, dedicated to the theme of death? Why are they shocking the whole world? What is the strength that uplifts and pleases the spirit, their Orthodox depth, grandeur, beauty? It seems that Metropolitan Amphilochius writes directly about Tchaikovsky's Sixth Symphony: “Shaking all human values ​​to the ground, crucifying sinful selfishness and complacency, death awakens a thirst for true values ​​and life, eternal Truth and unquenchable light. As an existential shock, it raises a rebellion in a person against the slavery of inevitability, temporality and sin, becoming an impetus for awakening the desire for original integrity and lost freedom. This is how death educates and, most importantly, sobers and wakes up from a “heavy sleep”. Yes, such is the inspiring poetry of the true life of our brilliant composer.

The most unexpected, unheard of even from the point of view of tradition, but at the same time an extremely logical part of the symphony was its finale. It contradicts not only the desire, characteristic of the final parts, to give at the end something life-affirming in the usual sense. He also presents something new in comparison with the gloomy ending of the sonata-symphony cycle, which touches on the theme of death in Chopin's sonata b moll.
In it, after the ominous infernal scherzo, a funeral march follows, in which, according to Schumann, “there is even something repulsive; in place of this march, some Adagio, for example, in Des, would have made an incomparably better impression. What you hear next under the title of the finale is more of a hoax than music. Nevertheless, it must be admitted that even in this joyless, melodyless part, we feel the breath of a peculiar and terrible spirit, ready to powerfully suppress everything that opposes it. Resignedly, as if chained, you listen to the end; but praise freezes on the lips - for this is not music. The mourning march made a repulsive impression on Schumann, apparently, with its naturalism. Terrible, hard-sounding, empty fifths, bare from life, is an expression of the horror of non-existence. And what is the bleak finale? What terrible spirit seeks to crush everything that opposes it? They heard here the icy wind on the graves, blowing away the last leaves of the memory of the once and forever disappeared life. Strangely, the tradition of horror that zombified the medieval West, which had departed from Orthodoxy since the time of the dances of death, backfired here.

What an unprecedented fiery life of the spirit is revealed by this comparison in the finale of the Sixth Symphony! If in the first part death was mourned with heart-rending sobs, if in the slow part the departed soul shows the bliss of paradise, if the soul meets the temptations of glory, then where is it in the fourth part? Awaiting judgment? What will be the judgment? It depends on what the soul has acquired on earth and taken with it into eternity. Is it pride, bitterness, demonic fear of God (after all, “even the demons believe and tremble” - James 2:19)?
What did the sinful, trembling soul of the intonational hero of the symphony acquire, what did it take? I took the main thing, the most precious thing: prayer, the ability to prayerfully ask and weep repentantly! Consequently, life also took over, the attitude towards the Judge as a merciful, loving God. Before an unmerciful God, it is impossible to open your heart in trust and weep repentantly. Hardened demons slanderously revere God as such, and therefore, withered, having lost love for their Creator, they cannot repent and pray. Likewise, the hardened, incapable of love, human souls. But if the trusting childish love for the Creator has been preserved (let us remember the words of the Lord: “unless you turn and be like children, you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven” - Mt. 18:3), can the Lord reject children's love?! The goal of all life on earth is the acquisition of love: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind” (Matthew 22:37). This commandment, as we see, is fulfilled by a lyrical hero! Not the number of sins, but the repentantly humble, loving state of the soul determines its future, its ability to live with God. The West reduced the original Orthodox-ontological concept of sin as a disease that removes one from God, Who is love, to the legal concept of guilt. Oh, how difficult, terrifying, painful it would be to appear before a God-lawyer and jurist. But the soul feels that it will appear before the judgment of Love.

Let's look at the means of expression. First opening chord. The fiery cry of the soul. Tonic with Dorian sixth. What a strange paint! It simultaneously contains sadness, and extreme tension, confusion, and something wonderful, the light of hope. How much more hopelessly, how emptier the tonic triad would sound! And for the tonality of the dominant - this is the second step. The tone of the dominant mode, with a major local tonic, is also important in an unsettling context. From the major of the local tonic - the encouragement of light. And the incompleteness of the major dominant and its inclination towards the tonic, as it were, corresponds to the openness of the soul, its aspiration to the desired graces. And the end of the phrases on a melodic rise, a sign of supplication and questioning - like hands outstretched in prayer.

Let's not pass by choral associations. Here is hidden catholicity: weeping on behalf of all praying humanity! In subsequent motifs, sections of the church psalmody also express this zealous state of mind. Further prayerful sobs rise up in ascending sequences. Is it accidental in the work of Tchaikovsky the huge role of such sequences, bursting upwards and often accompanied by the indication of crescendo, “falling in love with crescendo”, as he once wrote in notes? They are erected by the currents of heavenly love breathing in his work. And in this case, these sequences imbued with love express living in petitions, in which perseverance, a languishing thirst for closeness to God, is combined with repentance, with repentant sorrow (sharp, aching seconds of detention). How clearly the theme of death in Tchaikovsky is transformed by the poetics of love characteristic of his work!

The "lyrical hero", the artistic "I" of the work does not always coincide with the personality of the author. But for such a sincere person and composer as Tchaikovsky was, he is not far away. Precious is this sincerity! The glaring gap between the beauty of the creation and the wickedness of the author cannot but reduce admiration, no matter how art critics defend the right of the artist to autonomy (in translation: self-made) of his art. It is no coincidence that Tchaikovsky became the most beloved composer in the world. In this regard, let us turn to the key biographical facts already mentioned - to the installation of sacrificial service to God in creativity, to the growth of faith as a sign of her sincerity, to the gift of tearful prayer, to the depth and height of prayer petitions (“I ask Him to give me humility and love, I ask you to forgive me, to enlighten me, and most importantly, it is sweet for me to say to Him: Lord, Thy will be done, for I know that His will is holy”), to the grateful arrangement of the soul. Faith, acting by love, moved him to struggle with the sins that tormented him. Therefore, let's not be like the slanderer from Čapek's fable: “Is this tree beautiful? And look, he has a dry branch! God, as we know from the holy fathers, "kisses even intentions." Let us note that the holy fathers called slander not a deliberate lie (which was called perjury), but the discovery of the sins of one's neighbor, especially those covered by repentance and struggle against them.

"Love people, run away people." In fulfillment of this patristic commandment, Tchaikovsky runs away from empty communion, which, according to him, increases love for people. “I hate just as much, for example, salon human relations, as infinitely dear, for example, family ones. Perhaps, thanks to this removal from the vain circulation among the crowd of the city, I am more and more imbued with a new and sweet feeling, which was previously only in the embryo in me. I began to believe in God and love Him, which I could not do before” (from a letter to S.A. Rachinsky).

What does the word used in the letters to various addressees say: “I didn’t know how”? The Holy Fathers interpreted spiritual love for God and for people as an arbitrary feeling that grew out of the divine freedom of man, from the decisive, arbitrary inclination of a free soul to goodness and zealous, zealous, ardent efforts of free will. We often use the highest name of love incorrectly, applying it, for example, to Carmen's lecherous animal passion, which is shamefully attracted by it, without making any, even sluggish attempts to free itself from it and despising the victims of the previous predatory desire of the heart - a clear revelation of what is at the heart of "love" lies a diabolical hatred of people and rabid selfishness. Tchaikovsky’s “couldn’t know how” testifies to the previous labor of the soul and that his love through suffering is genuine, grace-filled, post-voluntary love: a gift of God, a new previously unfamiliar “sweet feeling”, according to the composer. Man brings to God a "work of love" (1 Thess. 16:3; Heb. 6:10) - a phrase strange to unbelievers. And the Lord grants the heavenly sweetness of feeling. This conclusion encourages our grateful feeling for the composer, encourages us to interpret the exceptional Orthodox kindness of his music not as a manifestation of sentimental, unenlightened human worldly emotions, but precisely as the radiance in his music of Divine love, the great gift of God to Russia.

Who loved Orthodoxy, thanked God for it - how could he not love the Orthodox homeland? “How much delight it was, and all this was not for me, but for the little dove of Russia” (entry in the diary after the concerts in Prague). “I am an artist who can and must bring honor to his Motherland. I feel a great artistic power in myself, I have not yet done even a tenth of what I can do. And I want to do it with all the strength of my soul.”

Let's not vulgarize his music with sentimental lazy interpretation. In his music - under the modest appearance of exceptional simplicity, unpretentiousness, trust and boundless sincerity - the greatest miracle is hidden: the fire of heaven. The “falling in love crescendo” of sublime love for God may elevate the hearts and inspire the souls of the performers! May it permeate every cell of his wondrous music. May the theoretical interpretation and the listener's perception of his music rise to even greater heights for the glory of Russia in the world and for the sake of purifying the fallen and cynical atmosphere, impoverished by love.

Ananyich B.V., Ganelin R.Sh. Nicholas II // Questions of history. 1993. No. 2.

All-Russian Constituent Assembly and democratic alternative. Two views on the problem // Patriotic history. 1993.№5

Gerasimenko G.A. Transformation of power in Russia in 1917 // Patriotic history. 1997.№1

Eroshkin N.P. History of state institutions of pre-revolutionary Russia. M., 1968..

History of public administration in Russia / Ed. R.G. Pihoi. 2002.

Kropotkin G.M. The ruling bureaucracy and the “new system” of Russian statehood after the manifesto of October 17, 1905 // Domestic History. 2006. №1

Leonov S.V. The party system of Russia (the end of the 19th century - 1917) // Questions of History 1999. No. 9.

1. Medushevsky A.N. Causes of the collapse of the democratic republic in Russia in 1917 // Patriotic history. 2007. №6

2. Medushevsky A.N. The Constituent Assembly as a political institution of the revolutionary period // Patriotic history. 2008. №2

Our fatherland: the experience of political history. T.1. M., 1991.

Political parties of Russia. The end of the 19th - the first third of the 20th century: Encyclopedia. M., 1996.

Additional literature:

Avrekh A.Ya. The collapse of the June 3rd system. M., 1985.

Ananich B.V. The crisis of power and reforms in Russia at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. in the studies of American historians // Patriotic history. 1992. No. 2

Antsifirov A.M. The reign of Emperor Nicholas II in facts and figures // Domestic History. 1994. No. 3.

Witte S. Yu. Selected memories. M., 1991.

Power and reforms: from autocratic to Soviet Russia. SPb. 1996.

Gerasimenko G.A. People and power. 1917. M., 1995.

Gerasimenko G.A. The first act of democracy in Russia. M., 1992.

Dyakin V.S. Bourgeoisie, nobility and tsarism in 1911-1914. L., 1988.

Zyryanov P.N. The social structure of local government in capitalist Russia (1861-1914).//Istoricheskie zapiski. 1993 No. 6.

Ioffe G.Z. “Rasputiniada”: a big political game // Patriotic history. 1998. No. 3.

History of political parties in Russia / ed. Zeveleva A.I. M., 1994.

Crisis of autocracy in Russia. 1895-1917 M.; L., 1984.

Ovchenko Yu.F. Police reform V.K. Plehve // ​​Questions of history. 1993. No. 8.

Rozenberg U. Formation of a new Russian statehood.// Patriotic history. 1994 No. 1. S. 3-16.

Sukiasyan M.A. Power and management in Russia: dialectics of traditions and innovations in the theory and practice of state building. M. 1996.

Seminar lesson №10

Topic: The formation of the Soviet system of state power (1 hour)

The main provisions of the Constitution of the RSFSR of 1918

Powers of the highest state bodies of the RSFSR.

Creation and functioning of the central organs of Soviet power.

Organization of Soviet power in the field.

Establishment of a one-party system in the USSR.

Main literature:

Boffa J. History of the Soviet Union: In 2 vol. M. 1990.

Werth N. History of the Soviet state. M., 1995.

Geller M. Nekrich A. History of Russia. 1917-1995: Utopia of power. M., 1996. T.1.

Zemtsov B.N. Constitutional foundations of the Bolshevik power (the first Soviet Constitution of 1918) // Patriotic history. 2006. No. 5.

Iskenderov A.A. The first steps of Soviet power // Questions of history. 2003. No. 3.

History of public administration in Russia / Ed. R.G. Pikhoya. 2002.

History of public administration in Russia. Rostov-on-Don, 1999.

Russian history. XX century / A.N. Bokhanov, M.N. Gorinov, V.P. Dmitrienko. M., 1997 .

Korzhikhina T.L., Figatner Yu.Yu. Soviet nomenclature: formation, mechanism of action // Issues of History, 1993. No. 7.

Korzhikhina T. P. The Soviet state and its institutions: November 1917-December 1991. - M. 1995.

Leonov S.V. Soviet statehood: plans and reality (1917 - 1920) // Questions of history. 1990. No. 12.

Our fatherland: the experience of political history. T.2. M., 1991.

Modern history of the Fatherland: XX century. / Ed. A.F. Kiseleva, E.M. Shchagin. M., 2002. T.1.

Gimpelson E.G. "Processing" of the Soviet State Apparatus: Illusions and Reality // Patriotic History. 2000. No. 5.

Igritsky Yu.N. Again about totalitarianism // Patriotic history. - 1993. - No. 3.

Izmozik V.S. Political control in Soviet Russia.// Questions of history. –1997.- No. 7.

Novoselov D.S. The crisis of the Cheka in late 1918 - early 1919. // National history. 2005. No. 6.

Pavlov B.V. Formation of control of the party nomenklatura over the law enforcement system in 1921-1925 // Questions of history. 2004. No. 1.

Pavlova I.V. The mechanism of political power in the USSR in the 20-30s // Questions of History. 1998. No. 11-12.

Sinitsyn F.L. Constitutional principles of freedom of conscience and universal suffrage in the USSR: an attempt to implement and counteraction (1936 - 1939) // Russian history. 2010. №1

Upadysheva N.A. From Solovki to the Gulag: the birth of the Soviet camp system // Domestic History. 2006. No. 6.

Chebotarev V.G. Stalin and the party-Soviet national cadres // Questions of history. 2008. No. 7.

Department of Culture of Peace and Democracy

Position

Docent

Academic degree

Doctor of Political Science

Biographical information

Medushevsky Nikolai Andreevich. Born on 11/01/1986. Father - Medushevsky Andrey Nikolaevich. Mother - Sobennikova Irina Vyacheslavovna. Married since 2009. Two children.

Scientific and pedagogical activity

Scientific and pedagogical activity since 2008. Education - higher. Place of study - Russian State University for the Humanities (FIPP) 2003-2008. Specialty - political science. Specialization - social policy, increasing the effectiveness of higher education, tolerant behavior as the basis of social dialogue, the third role of the university.

PhD in Political Science 2011. Dissertation topic "Expert Community in the Political Sphere in the Late 20th - Early 21st Century: Social and Innovative Potential of the Thought Factory". Specialty 23.00.02. Doctor of Political Sciences 2018. Topic: "The principle of tolerance as a legitimizing basis for the European integration project: paradigm, social function, contribution to political transformation." Specialty 23.00.01.

Courses: conflictology, tolerance, human rights, geopolitics, general political science, etc. (lectures and seminars, methodological work, etc.).

Organizational activity. Implementation of thematic grants, for example, "Conducting a set of studies on innovative research practice-oriented projects in the field of social tolerance, promotion of a healthy lifestyle, and the fight against drug addiction." Place of parallel work - State University Higher School of Economics IMOMS (Institute of International Organizations and International Cooperation) (Researcher) until 2012.

• Implementation of a set of projects for the development of the North-Eastern Federal University, analysis of the integrated development of the regions of the Far East, study of the third role of the university and the social mission of the university
• Publication of a series of articles in the journal of the institute
• Participation in projects on the risks of international development within the framework of the activities of the G8 and G20”

Places of previous work:
• Audit and Consulting Group "Development of Business Systems" (RBS) (consultant of the Department of State Consulting) until 2012. Analytical support for the implementation of administrative reform (preparation of reports and recommendations). Search and processing of primary legal and statistical information. Interaction with the customer on the preparation of reports.
• "Gallery Chizhov" (Position - Analyst for interbudgetary relations and taxes in the apparatus of the deputy S.V. Chizhov) until 2011. Creation of materials for planning the actions of organizations and systems, influencing public opinion and behavior; news monitoring in the direction; delivering information to the target audience; organizing and conducting telephone consultations in the direction within the framework of the "Hot Line".
• GU Russian Institute of Economics, Politics and Law in the Scientific and Technical Sphere of the GU RIEPP until 2011 (Position - head of the sector "Monitoring of new forms of organization of research and innovation activities"). Receiving and working on grants and lots, interaction with departments of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. Division leadership.
• Center for Problem Analysis and State Management Design - until 2010 (Position - expert political scientist). Analytical work, preparation of scientific reports, research of the modern political and economic field of the Russian Federation. Interaction with the central office of Russian Railways.

Area of ​​scientific interests and scope of scientific activity

Issues of intercultural interaction, conflictology (ethno-social), ideology of tolerance, politics of memory
Updated: 13.03.2019 01:04:00

Andrei Nikolaevich Medushevsky

Political writings: law and power in the context of social transformations

© S.Ya. Leviticus compilation series, 2015

© A.N. Medushevsky, copyright holder, 2015

© Center for Humanitarian Initiatives, 2015

© University Book, 2015

Foreword

Book by A.N. Medushevsky is devoted to the problem of the relationship between the legal tradition and the policy of power in the context of social transformations. This topic becomes especially relevant in modern political discussions when answering the question - what hinders the democratic transformation of the country, why the proclamation of democratic constitutional principles in the course of reforms of the past and present is not accompanied by their adequate implementation, and often leads to a reversal. Is the historical tradition to blame for this - the "matrix" of Russian history, the passivity of society, the mistakes of reformers, or an inadequate interpretation of the very principles of a democratic system? Rejecting the widespread fatalistic approach, the scientist sees the statement of this situation as a research problem rather than its solution. The central idea of ​​the author is to determine how legal culture determines the position of political power in the context of social transformations and, conversely, how the logic of these transformations actualizes the features of the legal tradition and uses it. A.N. Medushevsky is a well-known Russian political scientist, jurist and historian, author of works on the theory of law, the history of European and Russian social thought, the political process and the practice of modern constitutional reforms. The presented work is conceived as a concentrated expression of the main conclusions obtained by the researcher as a result of many years of work. The book includes key articles by the author, reflecting the process of social transformations in the world and in Russia in the post-Soviet period. To clarify these issues, the author proposes a new conceptual framework, considering the political process from the standpoint of the legal construction of reality - a kind of cognitive selection of certain legal principles by reformers in the context of social transformations. Cognitive approaches (studying consciousness) have had a significant impact on the entire spectrum of modern humanities, but are not sufficiently applied in political and legal studies. The book proposes the basic concepts of the cognitive theory of law and the possibility of its development in terms of such parameters as the legal system, norms and institutions, their genesis, structure and interpretation within the process of information exchange, social and cognitive adaptation of the individual. It is shown how the new cognitive-informational paradigm makes it possible to overcome the one-sidedness of traditional approaches in the philosophy of law, opens up prospects for rational legal construction of reality and the purposeful application of constitutional engineering. This approach allows us to give fundamentally new answers to the question of the competition of models of the political and legal structure, the parameters of the historical selection of certain norms, the reasons for their cyclic reproduction at different stages of development, the changing relationship between law and society's ideas about social justice. Modeling the processes, the author reconstructs the dominant theoretical constructions, stable stereotypes of consciousness, institutional relations, not forgetting to establish the causes of changes (up to the opposite) in the attitudes of political power.

From these positions, the book examines the change in theoretical paradigms, the relationship between classical Western theoretical models and their Russian interpretation, the logic of transitional processes from authoritarianism to democracy, the dynamics of constitutional cycles, the stable trends of the Russian political system, in particular the post-Soviet period, are identified, and in some cases prognostic conclusions and recommendations. An analysis of the constructions of law and power is presented in terms of such parameters as the relationship between law and legal consciousness; liberal paradigm in the political philosophy of modern and contemporary times; the changing balance of democracy and authoritarianism in the logic of transition processes; the parameters of social construction and technologies for its implementation are considered; actual problems of post-Soviet political and legal development are revealed. On all these issues, the book is extremely informative, presenting material on constitutional and political reforms from England and the United States to Japan and China, while declaring Russian reforms as the main priority.

Within the framework of the cognitive theory and neo-institutional approach, the researcher solves the problems of the global transformation of modern and contemporary times - the relationship between law and power in it. He rightly believes that modernization everywhere means a situation of unstable equilibrium - a kind of balance of power between its supporters and opponents, which can be resolved in favor of one side or the other. Modernization, therefore, gives rise to the dilemma of reformers, on the solution of which depends the optimal development of social processes or their disruption. Constitutional crises, revolutions, upheavals indicate disruptions along this path, but do not close the possibility of legal transformation of regimes. A very important place in the system of these decisions is occupied by the choice of the legal and institutional configuration of the political regime, which allows it to function effectively and achieve its goals in conditions of social transformations or, on the contrary, blocking the achievement of these goals.

The main emphasis is on the reconstruction of the Russian political and legal tradition, in particular the circumstances of the 1993 constitutional revolution, and the logic of the post-Soviet political process. Noting the unresolved nature of these issues and the growing tension between positive law and legal consciousness in post-Soviet Russia, the author demonstrates the competition and variability of strategies for the legal construction of reality in such key parameters as property relations, national identity, and state and political structure. He puts forward his own vision of a rational correlation of legitimacy, legality and effectiveness of legal decisions, designed to overcome the conflict of law and justice, political reason and social ideal. Without limiting himself to sharp criticism of the contradictions and disproportions of modern political and legal development, the author offers a reasonable and well-reasoned concept of overcoming them within the framework of the liberal program of constitutional reforms.

The author's works presented in the book are characterized by scientific fundamentality, a broad empirical base, the use of a comparative legal method in explaining the relevant phenomena of the European, Russian and Asian political tradition - from the theory of justice and the concept of separation of powers to imaginary constitutionalism and restoration tendencies. The comparative and associative series built by the author makes the book interesting to read and stimulating thought. It is noteworthy that the author does not limit himself to traditional and classical concepts of social thought (which are fully presented in the book), but analyzes them in the context of the social practice of modern and contemporary reformers, including post-Soviet and developing countries. For a long time, the author was engaged in political analytics and teaching in higher education - Russian and foreign universities, acted as an expert in the development of legal, political and administrative reforms in Russia and other regions of the world, in particular the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the states of the post-Soviet space.

The book includes five sections, the material of which is grouped according to the problematic principle: law and justice in transitional societies (I); the liberal paradigm in the political philosophy of modern and contemporary times (II); democracy and authoritarianism: the logic of transition processes (III); dynamics of the Russian political process in history and modernity (IV); actual problems of post-Soviet constitutional development (V). In their totality, the presented works (published in the period from the late 1980s until the present - 2014) reflect the general trends in the development of Russian social science and political science in the post-Soviet period - an appeal to the problems of democratic reforms during the period of Perestroika; search for their philosophical and sociological explanation; restoration of the traditions of Western European and Russian classical political and legal thought; explaining the constitutional revolution of 1993 in a comparative perspective; the formation of a new political regime and the dynamics of post-Soviet legal disputes; solution of the problem of constitutional reforms at the present stage. This grouping into sections is conditional, since all topics are cross-cutting for the articles of the book and relevant in the development of a modern transformation strategy. When selecting published works, we took into account three circumstances: their theoretical contribution, influence on the political thought of the period under review, and public outcry in Russia and abroad. Articles are published according to the authentic texts of the first editions with minor corrections and updates by the author. We also considered it expedient to include an afterword in the book - articles on the formation and development of the views and ideas of A.N. Medushevsky, compiled by the colleagues of the scientist.