A look at the question of the validity of the statement about the formation in the USSR of a "new community - the Soviet people", the bearer of "Soviet civilization" and "Soviet culture"

In the course of socialist construction in the USSR, the socialist nations flourished. The long-established division of the country into industrial and raw-material regions has disappeared. Large industrial centers have grown in all the republics. A national intelligentsia was created, emerging from among the workers and peasants.

Between the Soviet republics there were relations of friendship and close cooperation in the field of economy and culture, there was an intensive process of exchange of technical and scientific experience. Representatives of all republics participated in the development of the country's natural resources and the construction of new industrial centers. By joint efforts, work was carried out on the development of virgin butts.

The policy of the Communist Party, aimed at eliminating differences in the level of development of nations, has led to an intensification of the process of their political, economic and cultural rapprochement.

This rapprochement has reached such a high degree that common features and qualities have appeared in every nation and nationality.

The most important of these features is a political system common to all nations and nationalities.

It is headed by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Soviet people are characterized by such moral qualities as a conscientious attitude to work, social initiative, collectivism, and internationalism. A new historical community has emerged in the Soviet Union - the Soviet people, which is a union of all the working people of the USSR, characterized by social, ideological and political unity.

The social community of Soviet nations and nationalities has been developed. In all the republics, the same type of social structure has been created and the process of erasing the boundaries between classes and groups of society is underway. A single socialist culture, international in content, emerged in the USSR. It absorbed the best features and achievements of the culture of all the peoples of the country. soviet history socialist

Marxism-Leninism, the worldview of the working class, became the dominant ideology of Soviet citizens. The rapprochement of nations based on the same type of economy and social structure, having a common worldview of Marxism-Leninism and one goal - the construction of communism, led to the emergence of common features in the spiritual appearance and psychology of all the working people of the USSR.

Soviet people are characterized by such moral qualities as a conscientious attitude to work, social initiative, collectivism, and internationalism.

The collapse of the USSR occurred against the backdrop of a growing desire for self-determination of nations, primarily those whose rights were infringed by history. The Soviet national policy did not always contribute to the development of culture, language, and traditions. The territorial and national integrity of peoples was violated. In the name of the general, the particular was sometimes infringed upon. The premature declaration of a new historical community - the "Soviet people" - also played a negative role.

Society of developed socialism. The Soviet people - a new historical community

In the early 1960s, the USSR entered the stage of a developed socialist society. At the stage of developed socialism, when, as stated in the Constitution of the USSR (1977), “socialism develops on its own basis, the creative forces of the new system, the advantages of the socialist way of life are more and more fully revealed, the working people are increasingly enjoying the fruits of the great revolutionary achievements.

Under developed socialism, unprecedented in the history of

The main conveyor of the Pavlodar Tractor Plant

riy opportunities for the development of productive forces. On the basis of scientific and technological progress, industry and agriculture are almost completely reconstructed and re-equipped with new technology. The economy of mature socialism is characterized by a more harmonious development of all branches of the national economy, and a convergence in the rates of development of heavy (Group A) and light (Group B) industries.

Capital investments and fixed assets are growing sharply. Kazakhstan, an integral part of the unified national economic complex of the USSR, is a clear example of this. In the Kazakh SSR in 1961-1965. the volume of capital investments (17,809 million rubles) was almost equal to the sum of capital investments for all previous five-year plans (18,752 million rubles), while the eighth and ninth five-year plans exceeded capital investments for all previous years of Soviet power by almost one and a half times. Fixed assets also grew rapidly: in 1961-1965. they were introduced in the amount of 16323 million rubles. against 15,002 million in the fourth, fifth and sixth five-year plans, and in the ninth - in the amount of 29,679 million rubles.

The most important characteristic feature of the economy of mature socialism is that the growth of industrial and agricultural production is achieved mainly not through an extensive path (expanding production areas, commissioning new capacities, increasing the number of labor forces), but through intensification, due to technical progress and raising the productivity of social labor: the growth of industrial production due to the increase in labor productivity in Kazakhstan increased from 48 percent. in the seventh five-year plan to 61 per cent. in the eighth five-year plan and up to 76 per cent. in the ninth five years.

Intensification determined the high dynamism of industrial development. If 1940 is taken as a unit, then after 20 years, in 1960, the total volume of industrial output of the republic as part of the USSR increased by 7.3 times, and after 15 years (1976) under the conditions of developed socialism - by 26 .7 times, and in some industries even more (for example, electricity production in 1960 increased by 28.6 times, and in 1975 by 150.6 times). At the same time, the dynamism of development is determined not only by the percentage of growth, but also taking into account the absolute value of 1 percent. increase in production: in the eighth five-year plan it amounted to 81 million rubles, and in the ninth - 126 million.

Qualitative changes are also taking place in agriculture. In the period of mature socialism, the process of intensifying the production of grain, industrial and vegetable crops, meat, milk and other agricultural products is underway on the basis of the introduction of the achievements of science and technology, mechanization and chemicalization, and land reclamation. Large capital investments, continuous electrification, an influx of high-performance machines and mechanisms, an increase in the production of mineral fertilizers, the construction of large and small canals, reservoirs contributed to the gradual development of labor in agriculture, primarily in field cultivation, into a kind of industrial labor, further erasing the differences between town and countryside.

The economy of a developed socialist society in the USSR is inextricably linked with the economic organism of the entire world socialist system, primarily with the CMEA countries. Socialist integration, specialization and cooperation on the scale of the CMEA, joint work to solve important economic and scientific problems contribute to higher rates of development for all members of the community. Soviet Kazakhstan takes an active part in economic integration and cultural ties with the fraternal countries of socialism.

Developed socialism with its powerful economic potential corresponds to the maturity of socialist relations of production. By the time Soviet society entered the period of developed socialism, socialist public property existed in our country in two forms: state (nationwide) and group (cooperative collective farm). Under developed socialism, both forms of property are further improved, with a predominant increase in the share and role of state property, and the level of socialization of production and labor in both forms of socialist property is raised.

In 1960, in Kazakhstan, 76 percent fixed assets were in state ownership, 9 percent - in the cooperative-collective farm and 15 percent. - in the personal property of citizens. At the end of the Ninth Five-Year Plan, state property already accounted for 92.2 percent, co-operative-collective farm property 4 percent, and personal property 3.8 percent, although in absolute terms the fixed assets of collective farms and the personal property of citizens increased significantly: the first in comparison with 1965 in 2.8 times (in value terms), the second - by 20 percent.

If in 1960 there were 879 state farms and 1355 collective farms in the republic, then at the end of the ninth five-year plan there were 1864 state farms, and the number of collective farms was reduced to 422. socialist property, bringing it closer to state (national) property.

The process of improving production relations proceeds along the line of further socialization of production through the creation of production associations that create conditions and prerequisites for specialization, cooperation, combination and concentration of production, and the fullest use of the achievements of scientific and technological progress.

By the mid-70s, there were 120 such associations in Kazakhstan (versus 32 in 1970), which gave 42 percent. the volume of sales of all industrial products and 55 percent. arrived. An important indicator of the all-round growth in the level of socialization of collective farm property is the steady growth of indivisible funds in the fixed and circulating assets of collective farms: from 1960 to the end of the ninth five-year plan, they increased (without fishing) from 1358.6 million rubles. up to 2043.6 million rubles

An even more convincing indicator of the increase in the level of socialization of collective farm production, the deepening of social relations, and the further convergence of the two forms of socialist property is specialization, the concentration of agricultural production on the basis of inter-collective farm cooperation and agro-industrial integration in the production of agricultural products, animal husbandry, construction, production of building materials, etc. "Kazmezhkolkhozstroy" is successfully operating. Spetskhozobedinenie for fattening animals have become widespread.

The powerful rise of the national economy, the growth of the economic potential of developed socialism, is based on the growing enthusiasm of the working people, which is manifested in socialist emulation.

Mature socialism is characterized by the further improvement of the social structure of society. On the basis of class and national equality, community of spiritual interests and a single ideology, there is an accelerated convergence of the working class, the collective farm peasantry, and the people's intelligentsia.

At the end of the ninth five-year plan, the urban population amounted to 54 percent. The detachments of workers associated with branches of industry that played a decisive role in the scientific and technological revolution—the power industry, the chemical industry, mechanical engineering, metallurgy, and others—grew especially rapidly. The qualifications, educational and cultural level of the workers are constantly rising. There is a process of convergence of the educational and cultural-technical level of the working class, engineering and technical workers. The workers actively participate in public and political life. Serious changes are taking place in the conditions of developed socialism in the collective-farm peasantry. The number of collective farmers is significantly reduced, and in Kazakhstan faster than in the Union as a whole: in 1973, collective farmers employed in material production in the country amounted to 14.1 percent, and in Kazakhstan back in 1971 - only 5.5 percent . In such regions as Karaganda, Dzhezkazgan, Maigyshlak, the collective farm peasantry by the 70s had completely joined the ranks of the agrarian detachment of the Soviet working class. At the same time, the collective-farm peasantry is drawing ever closer to the working class. Scientific and technological progress, the saturation of the village with modern technology, penetrating into all spheres of agricultural production (mechanic-electrician, engineer became the same necessary and common figure on the collective farm as the agronomist, milkmaid, veterinarian), the general growth of culture (universal secondary education, an extensive network libraries, houses and palaces of culture, clubs, cinemas), advances in public health, the construction of comfortable apartments with all conveniences, the growth of consumer services in the countryside, the expansion and improvement of means of communication and transport, the widespread dissemination of radio and television, have significantly accelerated the overcoming of significant differences between the city and the countryside. .

Changes in the sphere of social distribution, in the system of guaranteed wages and the organization of pensions for collective farmers, also contributed to the acceleration of the rapprochement between the working class and the collective farm peasantry. The political activity of the collective-farm peasantry also increased.

The ranks of the Soviet intelligentsia are growing intensively under the conditions of developed socialism. In terms of numbers and proportion in the composition of the population, it came in second (after the working class) place.

“This process is natural,” noted the Report of the Central Committee of the CPSU to the 24th Congress. “It is the result of the Party’s policy aimed at the utmost acceleration of scientific and technological progress, at further raising the culture and education of the people.”

Thus, under the conditions of developed socialism, there is a process of further strengthening the unity and rapprochement of all social groups and strata of our society. At the same time, the process of maximum rise and prosperity of all Soviet national republics and the rapprochement of all nations and nationalities of the USSR is going on. “Summing up the heroic accomplishments of the past half century,” said L. I. Brezhnev in a report on the 50th anniversary of the USSR in December 1972, “we have every reason to say that the national question in the form in which we inherited it from the past” , resolved completely, resolved finally and irrevocably. This is an achievement that can rightfully be put on a par with such victories in the construction of a new society in the USSR as industrialization, collectivization, and the cultural revolution.

Soviet Kazakhstan is called a laboratory for solving the national question, a forge of friendship between peoples, because people of more than a hundred nations and nationalities live, work, build communism in the republic as a fraternal family. The collectives of all plants, factories, construction sites, state farms, collective farms, institutes, technical schools, schools, colleges in Kazakhstan are multinational.

International unity and commonality are manifested primarily in the sphere of production, but not only in it. The value of the disinterested help of the fraternal peoples, especially the great Russian people, in the development of science and culture in the training of national personnel, as well as the help of the Kazakh SSR to all Soviet republics, is still invaluable.

The indestructible socio-political and ideological unity of Soviet society, of all its strata, complete equality, legal and factual, which ensured an unprecedented flourishing of the economy, living standards and culture of all nations and nationalities, fraternal friendship and international solidarity, joint work and common goals of all working people led to the fact that a new historical community of people, the Soviet people, has developed in the USSR. This commonality is based not on ethnic, racial or religious characteristics, but on social homogeneity, legal and economic equality, common Marxist-Leninist ideology and a common goal and ideals - the construction of communism.

The Soviet people have a common economy for all the republics, a single, all-union territory and a common language of interethnic communication - Russian. The first secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Kazakhstan, D. A. Kunaev, emphasized that "the Russian language gradually became the second native language of the Kazakh people", that "this process is natural, and it should take place in parallel with the flourishing of national languages."

In accordance with the enormous socio-economic changes in the course of the progressive development of the country and the establishment of a society of developed socialism, the Soviet state also evolved. Having arisen as an organ of the dictatorship of the proletariat, as a result of changes in the social structure of Soviet society and deep economic transformations, it became a state of the whole people, expressing the interests of all members of society. At the same time, the leading role of the working class, which occupies key positions in the economy, is the most organized, condensed in itself the richest experience of class battles, political struggle, economic and state; construction.

In the Ninth Five-Year Plan, the strengthening of the Soviet state and the improvement of its apparatus continued. “In carrying out this work,” said L. I. Brezhnev at the 25th Congress of the CPSU, “the party, its Central Committee proceeded and continue to proceed from the fact that a developed socialist society has been built in our country, gradually developing into a communist one, from the fact that our state is state of the whole people, expressing the interests and will of the whole people. We proceeded and continue to proceed from the fact that we have a new historical community - the Soviet people, which is based on the indestructible alliance of the working class, the peasantry and the intelligentsia, with the leading role of the working class, the friendship of all nations and nationalities of the country.

The rights and material possibilities of local Soviets have been considerably expanded. Legislative provisions on nature protection and public health were adopted. The law on the status of a deputy was of great importance in raising the role and authority of the elected representatives of the people.

The further expansion of the rights and competences of the union republics continued, their role in solving the most important economic, social, legal issues within the republics and participation in the management of the entire Union increased. Kazakhstan, like other republics, is represented in all the highest legislative and executive bodies of the country and the Supreme Court of the USSR.

In 1974, in an atmosphere of great labor and political upsurge, elections were held to the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, where 71 deputies were elected from the republic. Of these, 61 deputies became members of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet, permanent commissions and the Committee of the Parliamentary Group of the USSR. Senior shepherd-mentor S. Sh. Zhaksybaev was elected deputy chairman of the Council of Nationalities.

In the Supreme Soviet of the Kazakh SSR, elected in June 1975, 490 deputies were represented, half of them were workers and collective farmers, more than a third were non-party, 35.5 percent. deputies are women. Of the 121 thousand deputies in the local Soviets of Kazakhstan, there are over 84 thousand workers and collective farmers, more than 57 thousand women.

1.3 The concept of the Soviet people

The stability of the multinational Soviet state and society largely depended on the strength of interethnic relations. They were regulated by the national policy of the party and government. The CPSU program of 1961 set the task of ensuring, in the process of building the material and technical base of communism, an accelerated rapprochement and merging of Soviet nations and nationalities into a new historical community - the Soviet people.

In fact, having curtailed the course towards building communism in the short term, the new leadership of the USSR after 1964 maintained the continuity of national policy. XXIV (1971) and XXV (1976) congresses of the CPSU, the Constitution of the USSR of 1977 consolidated the position that a new historical community of people was formed in the USSR - the multinational Soviet people. According to the 1979 census, a single community rallied 123 private communities, incl. 36 nations, 32 nationalities, 37 national and 18 ethnic groups. The main features of the new historical community were a single territory (USSR), a single language of interethnic communication (Russian), a single economic basis (a single national economic complex), a common socialist in content and national in form of culture and the foundations of the character of the Soviet people, expressed in their patriotism and internationalism .

Recognizing the Soviet people as a really formed community, the country's leadership in 1972, on the eve of the 50th anniversary of the formation of the USSR, came to the conclusion that the national question in the country in the form in which we inherited it from the past had been resolved. This meant that the national antagonisms in the USSR were overcome. Their relapses were strictly suppressed, but more often they were ignored, officially ranked as household.

In order to strengthen a single community, interethnic marriages and the study of the Russian language were encouraged. If according to the 1959 census in the USSR there were 103% of ethnically mixed families, then in 1979 - 14.9%, in 1989 - 17.5%. Russian was recognized as a native language in 1959 by 10.2 million, in 1979 by 13 million, and in 1989 by 18.7 million people of non-Russian nationality. At the same time, according to the 1989 census, 141.5 million (49.4%) non-Russians lived in the USSR, with a total population of 286.7 million people.

Friendship and solidarity of the peoples of the USSR in a single community did not prevent interethnic conflicts and national unrest. From the second half of the 60s to the beginning of the 80s, there were more than 20 of them, each of which involved several thousand people. The largest of them were the performances of the Crimean Tatars in Uzbekistan in 1966 and 1967. for rehabilitation and restoration of autonomy. In 1967, there were protests by the Abkhaz for the expansion of rights. Abkhazia as part of Georgia. In 1973, the Ingush movement began demanding the return of the Prigorodny District, which is part of North Ossetia, to the Chechen-Ingush Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. In 1977, Vilnius was shocked by a riot of youth demanding the expulsion of the Russians and the withdrawal of Lithuania from the USSR. In 1978, there were protests by Georgians for giving the Georgian language the status of a state language throughout the Georgian SSR and a simultaneous movement of the Abkhazians for giving a similar status to their language. In 1981, the Ossetians opposed the Ingush in North Ossetia. In the second half of the 70s, the USSR began the movement of Soviet Jews for the freedom of emigration. The United States actively participated in this movement, condemning the USSR for violating human rights and intensifying discrimination against the Soviet Union in trade.

1.4 Dissident movement

Difficulties and contradictions in the socio-economic and political development of the country and society, the divergence of the words and deeds of the ruling party, the curtailment of the reformist course of N.S. Khrushchev and the strengthening of conservative tendencies led to the emergence in the mid-60s of dissent, which resulted in a dissident movement in the 70s. Its characteristic features were anti-communism and anti-Sovietism.

Mostly intellectuals, mainly scientists and cultural figures, participated in the Movement. They were far from the people, they did not enjoy their support and sympathy. Defending civil and political human rights, dissidents, as a rule, ignored the socio-economic rights of the broad masses. However, since the mid-1980s, their interests surprisingly intersected with the interests of a part of the nomenklatura (administrative apparatus), which wanted to relieve itself of the burden of caring for the people, while maintaining its dominant position.

The dissident movement was united in defining the strategic goal - the removal of the Communist Party from power, the elimination of communist ideology and Soviet power. But it was not united in questions of tactics, means of achieving the goal. Some were guided by the internal resources of the people, primarily the Russians, hoping to revive in them a sense of national pride of the Great Russian, to break the "fetters" of internationalism on them. They staked on national patriotism, which was synonymous with nationalism. Others hoped for help from the West, with its liberal-democratic traditions, propagated cosmopolitan views of the unity and indivisibility of the world, and in fact the need for the country's transition to the world of Western bourgeois civilization.

Researchers see a certain continuity in the views of various currents of the dissident movement with the Slavophiles and Westerners in the 19th century. They single out two main currents in it - Russophile (pochvennichesky, national), in its conservative and liberal forms, and new Westerners, in liberal-democratic, social-democratic and Euro-communist forms.

The origins of the first went to the All-Russian Society for the Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments (VOOPIIK), created in 1966. Organizations emerged from it that defended the national interests of Russia and Russians. Their ideologists relied on the views of Russian scientists, artists, writers - B.A. Rybakova, I.V. Petryanova-Sokolova, P.D. Korina, I.S. Glazunova, L.M. Leonova, V.A. Soloukhin.

The most prominent representative of the national-liberal movement of dissidents was the writer A.I. Solzhenitsyn, who became widely known after the publication in 1962 on the initiative of the editor-in-chief of the Novy Mir magazine A. T. Tvardovsky and with the approval of N. S. Khrushchev, the story "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich", about life, customs, orders and destinies of people in Stalin's concentration camps. In 1969 he was expelled from the Writers' Union of the USSR, and in 1970 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature. In 1974, Solzhenitsyn was expelled from the USSR and deprived of Soviet citizenship for publishing abroad the first part of the three-volume exposé study The Gulag Archipelago, in which "one day" began in October 1917 and ended with Stalin's death. Solzhenitsyn presented it as a "black day" of thousands of years of Russian history, the convulsions of which continued after 1953.

On the eve of the expulsion from the USSR A.I. Solzhenitsyn published in samizdat "Letter to the Leaders of the Soviet Union" (1973). In it, he proposed to avoid a war with China and a common death with the West in an environmental catastrophe by abandoning the communist ideology. Being a supporter of an authoritarian regime of government, he turned to the "leaders" because he believed in the power of power, not the people. Subtly sensing the defection of the "leaders" in the cause of building communism, Solzhenitsyn tried to persuade them to turn the programmatic turn they had planned into a turning point. However, the material and social prerequisites for this have not yet matured. Ahead of time, the writer became an exile.

The origins of the second current of dissidents are associated with the organized by the poet A.S. Yesenin-Volpin by an unauthorized demonstration on December 5, 1965 on Pushkin Square, in Moscow, demanding an open trial of the writers Yu.M. Daniel and A.D. Sinyavsky. They were arrested in September 1965 for "especially dangerous crimes against the state", expressed in the publication abroad of satirical stories about life in the USSR. More than 60 members of the Writers' Union spoke in defense of Daniel and Sinyavsky, including. V.P. Aksenov, G.N. Vladimov, A.A. Voznesensky, V.N. Voinovich, A.T. Gladilin.

In 1970-1973 the new Westerners united in the Committee for the Protection of Human Rights with the participation of Academician A.D. Sakharov and Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences I.R. Shchafarevich, then to the Russian section of Amnesty International, which was headed by Moscow physicists V.F. Turchin and A.N. Tverdokhlebov. After the All-European Conference in Helsinki in 1975, this trend of the dissident movement began to be called the human rights, Helsinki.

The most famous representative of the human rights movement was Academician A.D. Sakharov, three times awarded the title of Hero of Socialist Labor for his contribution to the creation of Soviet hydrogen bombs. The feeling of remorse for the creation of weapons of mass destruction made him a dissident. In 1968, his first social and political work was published in samizdat. "Reflections on Progress, Peaceful Coexistence and Intellectual Freedom", in 1974 - "Anxiety and Hope". In them, Sakharov developed the concept of convergence - the unification of two opposite socio-economic systems by preserving the best achievements of each - the liberal democratic freedoms of the West and social guarantees in the USSR. In 1975 he won the Nobel Peace Prize. In 1980 A.D. Sakharov was exiled to Gorky for his sharp criticism of the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan.

Peoples. Under the influence of Khrushchev's "thaw", a whole generation of "sixties" was formed, who took the fight against the cult of personality as the beginning of a social revival. Under N.S. Khrushchev dealt the first blow to the administrative-command system. The development of the political process in the country in the late 50s and early 60s. The Hungarian events of 1956 and the attempt to remove N.S. ...

All countries of the world. However, this unique chance to create a lasting peace for many generations remained unused. The Second World War was replaced by the Cold War. The very term "cold war" was coined by US Secretary of State D. F. Dulles. Its essence is political, economic, ideological confrontation between the two systems, balancing on the brink of war. It makes no sense to argue about who ...

The Black Sea saved Ukrainians and Moldovans from the threat of Turkish dominance. In 1775-1783. during the American War of Independence, Catherine II proclaimed the so-called "policy of armed neutrality" to protect the maritime trade of neutral powers. II Characteristics of the political system of the state in 1956 -1964. 1 Form of government (monarchy or republic) The form of government is a republic. ...

According to the old official version, in the USSR there were 15 nations registered as union republics and, accordingly, having the right to self-determination up to secession, as well as a certain number of nationalities registered as autonomous republics, autonomous regions, national districts, etc., with such rights not possessing. And then the transformation of the 15 republics of the USSR into 15 independent (very conditionally independent, as today's events show) states looks, if sad, but nevertheless relatively justified. However, if this thesis was true in the first decades of the existence of the USSR, then by the 1980s the real situation had changed significantly.

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

In general, there are two main interpretations of the term "nation". One, characteristic of the German tradition in its time and used by Hitler, suggested that the "nation" is the unity of "blood, origin and culture." Another definition was characteristic of both the Franco-American tradition and the traditional Soviet social science of the Stalinist format, here the “nation” was understood as a historical community of people, including a community of both territorial-geographical, and historical-cultural-linguistic, and state-political, and economic.

From this point of view, the nation is a relatively late historical formation, which, in general, is no more than five hundred years old. Nations appear when a national market arises, that is, the economic unity of the country is formed, a more or less unified socio-economic way of life is established.

Children's ensemble "Friendship" in Kazakhstan, 1972 RIA Novosti, Iosif Budnevich

And if we proceed from this understanding (and speaking of the theses of Soviet social science, we must proceed from its methodology), we cannot get away from the fact that each of the union republics within the USSR, of course, did not represent “a unity of people united by a historical territory, a special language, special culture, special economy. Even from a purely ethnic point of view, a large number of interethnic and interethnic marriages in the USSR significantly blurred the boundaries between the old nations and ethnic groups, forming not only a new national, but also a new ethnic fusion.

USSR President Mikhail Gorbachev (right), Chairman of the USSR Supreme Soviet Anatoly Lukyanov (center) and USSR Prime Minister Valentin Pavlov (left) at a meeting of plenipotentiaries of the Union and the republics on completion of work on the draft union treaty in Novo-Ogaryovo , 1991 RIA Novosti, Yuri Abramochkin

The illegality of the formation of new states on the territory of the former USSR has always been obvious to those who looked at the issue not from the point of view of propaganda clichés of those years, but from a legal point of view. The difference between the Novoogarevsky process (a project to create a Union of Sovereign States instead of the USSR. For the first time, the signing of the union treaty was disrupted in connection with the so-called "August putsch" (more on the events of August 1991), the second time - in connection with the Belovezhskaya agreements) and The Belovezhskaya agreements was that the Novoogarevsky process tried to justify the division of the USSR with the appearance of law, and the Belovezhskaya agreements openly contradicted it, the law.

It must be admitted that today in the world multi-ethnic nations prevail over mono-ethnic ones, therefore the civilized understanding of the nation today is associated, for the most part, not with ethnicity, but with citizenship and historical community.

The main crew of the Soyuz TM-9 spacecraft: commander, Hero of the Soviet Union, USSR pilot-cosmonaut A. Ya. Solovyov (left) and flight engineer A. N. Balandin RIA Novosti, Pushkarev

If we talk about the USSR, then, according to experts, already at least during the Great Patriotic War in the Soviet Union, the identification of the majority of people living in the country with one territory, one state entity , with a common history for all, a single language of interethnic communication and a single economy. Later, Soviet social science called this community the "multinational Soviet people", and this definition laid the conceptual basis for division along ethnic lines.

However, some experts believe that a new, “Soviet nation” was indeed born in the country - not in the sense of a “nation of Soviet power”, but in the sense of a nation that forms the people of a country called the USSR. The United States also recognizes the existence of the American nation, but no one calls African Americans a nation, for example, and in other cases, the nation "American" as a concept always dominates, relatively speaking, the old nations, whose representatives created the country in its current form and melted down over the centuries into a new supranational community.

Soviet social science introduced and used a rather controversial category of "Soviet people", which was defined as a "new historical community". It was assumed that it consisted of the named number of nations and nationalities. Actually, Soviet social science has never been able to clearly, structurally explain how this "new community" differs from such an "old" community as a nation. Or rather, didn't try to do it. However, according to experts, it captured the main thing: the formation in the space of the USSR of what is usually called a “political”, that is, not an ethnic nation. But in this case, Soviet social scientists should have declared that the old nations are atrophying, dying. However, they did not dare to do this, because in this case it would have turned out that socialism sort of destroyed national formations, while it was proclaimed that socialism ensures their flourishing, which was true, if we talk about the USSR, regarding the reality of the first decades of Soviet power, when nations were given the opportunity for broad development, but by the 1970s this real flowering had already led to a process of merger, although not complete, into a single union nation.

What was the "Soviet people" in fact? A territorial-geographical, linguistic-cultural-historical community (actually, in every "socialist Soviet nation" at least two-thirds considered Russian as their native language), a state-political and economic community. That is, from this point of view, it was not an abstract "new community", but a real new nation, although it should be recognized that the process of its formation was not fully completed.

Essentially true principle of the right of nations to self-determination in conjunction with a virtual mythologem about fifteen nations and a certain number of nationalities in the USSR against the background of the socio-political and economic cataclysm born of the degradation of the late Soviet elite in the 1970-80s and the aggravation of the contradictions of the then stage caused by this degradation socialism in the USSR (social relations overtook the productive forces), for many became the motivation and justification for the division of the country.

Many Russians still consider themselves citizens of the USSR RIA Novosti, Artem Zhitenev

However, according to a number of experts, the division of the USSR was not the implementation of the principle of recognizing the right of nations to self-determination, but its complete disregard, since the right of this new political allied "Soviet" nation to own its own national state was ignored. The interests of this real nation were infringed. Following the dismemberment of a single political Soviet nation, today there is a destruction of the self-identification of the contender for the role of its successor - "Russian protonation".

Meanwhile, according to the theory of a "single political Soviet nation", the recognition of a given nation's right to self-determination, that is, to own its own national united state within the borders of the USSR, both in the past and today, could solve the problem of a "divided people" and ensure normal development of the country, since even today the interests of Soviet national unity in the former USSR objectively diverge from the interests of the modern "first estates" that divided the once united country, the interests of ethnocratic regimes that have established themselves in some territories of the USSR, violating any internationally recognized norms, the "national interests" of states who are interested that a single state on the territory of the USSR does not exist and does not turn into a technotronic superpower of the 21st century. Today, however, even many of those who would like this are often afraid to speak about it publicly and officially, fearing reproaches for striving for the “restoration of the empire” and “trampling on the rights of other nations”, “commitment to Stalinism and great power”.

(HISTORIOGRAPHY)

The historiographic study of the development of the problem of the formation and development of the Soviet people as a new historical community, in essence, is still at the very beginning. Until now, only a few attempts have been made to analyze the literature on the problem, and most often they were either of a very general nature or concerned particular issues 1 . The need for a detailed analysis of all this literature is caused primarily by the social need for a deeper understanding of the essence of the new historical community, a conscious consideration of its objective role in solving the problems of building communism. Of all the literature on this topic, only that part of it, which left the most noticeable mark in the development of the problem, is analyzed below. The purpose of the article is to reveal the process of comprehension by scientists of the fact of the formation and development of the Soviet people as a new historical community in the process of establishing mature socialism, the increment of knowledge on this most important issue of the theory and practice of the development of our society. The following aspects of the consideration of the problem are touched upon: posing the question of the Soviet people as a new historical community in the documents of the CPSU and special studies; reflection in the literature of the history of the development of the issue of the stages of formation of this community; documents of the party and the works of scientists on its essence. Analyzing these issues, the author is guided by the theoretical and methodological position formulated in the Report of the Central Committee of the CPSU to the XXV Party Congress: "We proceeded and continue to proceed from the fact that we have a new historical community - the Soviet people, which is based on the indestructible alliance of the working class, the peasantry and intelligentsia with the leading role of the working class, friendship of all nations and nationalities of the country" 2 .

1 See R. Rzaev. The concept of "multinational Soviet people" in Soviet and bourgeois sociology. "On some concepts of the theory of nation". Frunze. 1968; A. I. Kholmogorov. United and multinational. Riga. 1970; M. N. Rosenko. The formation and development of the Soviet people is the triumph of the principles of Lenin's national policy. "Issues of Theory and Practice of the Development of National Relations". L. 1974; A. V. Likholat, N. V. Komarenko. The main problems directly discussed are "Radyansk people - a new historical unity of people". Ukrainian Historical Journal", 1976, N 1; V. P. Sherstobitov, E. A. Zaitseva. Some historiographical problems of the formation and development of a new historical community in the USSR - the Soviet people. "Problems of the history of social thought and historiography". M. 1976, and etc.

2 "Materials of the XXV Congress of the CPSU". M. 1976, p. 81.

The birth of socialism, associated with a stage of unprecedented acceleration of world development, was bound to lead to the emergence of new historical communities of people. Shortly before the victory of the Great October Revolution, which opened a new era in the history of mankind, V. I. Lenin pointed out that socialism "creates new, higher forms of human community, when the legitimate needs and progressive aspirations of the working masses any nationalities will be satisfied for the first time in international unity, provided that the current national barriers are destroyed. merging them into an international community, contrary to the bourgeois aspirations for national isolation "4. The establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat practically marked the beginning of the formation in our country of a new socio-political international community. Lenin, in particular, noted that already the defense of the gains of the socialist revolution in the first years of Soviet power soldered the working class and the peasantry, that the policy of the Communist Party strengthens and unites all "the peoples of the Land of Soviets" into one great powerful family, "forming one great whole" 5 . In the conditions of the struggle for the victory of the revolution and the building of socialism, the working people were rallied, according to Lenin, "by unbreakable chains of living interests, of class consciousness."

Lenin repeatedly noted the international character of socialism and the Soviet system, and stated the unifying character of such new concepts as "Soviet revolution" and "Soviet forces" 7 . The very title "Soviet" rallied the builders of the new world, and even in the first years of the revolution, the leader of the revolution spoke more than once about the duties of a "Soviet citizen." Especially important is Lenin's statement of the great significance of the fact that the new life was built by "truly Soviet people", that collectivism, patriotism and proletarian internationalism became their distinguishing features. This was a guarantee that, along with the transformation of people, their new communities would appear, capable of ensuring the construction of socialism and communism. For the first time in history, such a community in the person of the Soviet people has developed in a country that has begun to pave the way to a bright future for all nations and peoples of the world.

The concept of "Soviet people" was used back in the 20s and 30s, but then it meant not a new community, but simply the population of our country, rallied around the Leninist party in the process of building socialism. The newspaper Pravda wrote in early 1936: "The Soviet people represent that unity which has served and continues to serve as the object of dreams of every government." As the unity of society strengthened, it became more and more realized that, on the basis of this unity, qualitative changes were taking place in all class and national communities, in their relationships. It is characteristic that the figures of Soviet culture already noticed the profound changes in the consciousness and psychology of people, in their social relations, and through

3 V. I. Lenin. PSS. T. 26. p. 40.

4 V. I. Lenin. PSS. T. 25, p. 319.

5 V. I. Lenin. PSS. T. 45, p. 440; v. 52, p. 301.

6 V. I. Lenin. PSS. T. 35, p. 287.

7 V. I. Lenin. PSS. T. 38, p. 68; v. 41, p. 417.

8 See V. I. Lenin. PSS. T. 38, pp. 63, 235.

9 Pravda, 4.II.1936.

them - and throughout society. A significant manifestation of the gradual awareness by the Soviet people of the deepest changes in the socio-political, ideological and cultural life of the country was P. Tychyna's poem "The Feeling of a United Family" (1938).

The success of the formation of the Soviet people as a community by the end of the 30s is evidenced by the conclusion of the XVIII Congress of the CPSU (b) that by that time the foundations of socialism had been built in the USSR, that moral and political unity, friendship of peoples and Soviet patriotism. At the same time, it is characteristic that the congress, which for the first time introduced the concept of "Soviet people" into party documents and noted the growing monolithic nature of our society, nevertheless, on such an important issue of its life and development as moral and political unity, quite definitely stated that only its foundation had been created. ten . At that time, among some previously backward peoples, the process of the formation of new classes was still going on; The socialist nations and nationalities in a number of regions of the country are still only in the main.

The Great Patriotic War was a serious test of the strength of the Soviet social and state system, of achievements in the transformation and strengthening of the union of social and national communities, in the formation of a new man. The new historical community that took shape during the years of building socialism was strengthened and tempered in battles with the enemy, playing a huge role in achieving victory. During the war years, as well as during the restoration of the national economy destroyed by it, social relations developed even more, the unity of all class and national communities became truly indestructible, and Soviet people rose to new heights of their maturity. It is especially important that in those years the economic, ideological and political bonds of the unity of social and national communities, of all Soviet people, became immeasurably stronger.

The concept of "Soviet people" in the sense of a single and indivisible whole came into circulation already during the war years and the post-war period. On the basis of the successes achieved in the restoration and further development of the national economy in the country, the implementation of the Leninist program for building a socialist society was completed. The social ties that developed during the years of socialist construction became even deeper and more multifaceted, testifying to the solidity of Soviet society, to the indissolubility of the bonds connecting its constituent classes and social strata, nations and nationalities, and all working people. The conclusion of the 21st Congress of the CPSU that "socialism has won a complete and final victory in our country" 11 was extremely important for an in-depth analysis of the changes that had taken place in terms of strengthening the social-class and international unity of Soviet society. The decisions of the congress stated that the most remarkable achievement of the socialist system was the education by the Party of millions of conscious builders of communism. The historic victories of the Soviet people in building socialism have led to the further strengthening of our system and its unshakable foundation - the alliance of the working class and the peasantry; friendship became even closer and the political unity of all the nations and nationalities of the Soviet country, showing the world "an example of a communist community of free and equal peoples," 12 was strengthened.

10 See "CPSU in Resolutions and Decisions of Congresses, Conferences and Plenums of the Central Committee". Ed. 8th. T. 5. M. 1971, p. 336.

11 "Extraordinary XXI Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Verbatim report". T. II. M. 1959, p. 443.

12 Ham, p. 433.

In connection with the preparation of a new Party Program, the task arose of further studying the changes that have taken place in our society in order to determine the immediate tasks and prospects for the development of the country. The Central Committee of the Party, presenting the draft Program for discussion at the XXII Congress of the CPSU, considered it necessary to state: "In the USSR, a new historical community of people of various nationalities with common characteristics has emerged - the Soviet people. They have a common socialist homeland - the USSR, a common economic base - a socialist economy , a common social class structure, a common worldview - Marxism-Leninism, a common goal - the construction of communism, many common features in spiritual appearance, in psychology" 13 . Attention is drawn to the fact that, firstly, this provision was not included in the Party Program, and, secondly, that the main emphasis in determining the essence of the new community - the Soviet people - was also placed on its international character (on the unification in this community of "people of various nationalities"). At the same time, the CPSU Program included the thesis that the emergence of the USSR, and then the world socialist system, "is the beginning of the historical process of the all-round rapprochement of peoples" 14 . At the same time, the Party's conclusion was of exceptional importance that the working people of all nationalities, united around the Leninist Party, "have common characteristics", a common homeland, common foundations of economic, social and spiritual life, a common goal. Soviet people of various nationalities, the Program said, "have developed common features of their spiritual make-up, generated by a new type of social relations and embodying the best traditions of the peoples of the USSR" 15 .

In subsequent party documents, the idea of ​​forming a new historical community in our country was further developed. The Report of the Central Committee of the CPSU to the 23rd Party Congress contained the concept of a "multinational Soviet people" and stated the strengthening of friendship and unity of its constituent nations and nationalities. In the Theses of the Central Committee of the CPSU for the 50th anniversary of the Great October Revolution, it was noted that on the basis of economic and social community, international features are actively developing among the socialist nations, common Soviet traditions are being established - unity of goals and Marxist-Leninist ideology, devotion to the cause of communism, deep internationalism and Soviet patriotism, respect national dignity, friendship and brotherhood 17 . In the Theses of the Central Committee of the CPSU on the 100th anniversary of the birth of V. I. Lenin, attention was drawn to the fact that in the USSR social and ideological and political unity of all sections of workers, all citizens, regardless of origin, occupation, nationality, gender, education . "The Soviet people," the Theses said, "a fundamentally new, international community of people, a socialist union of all the working people of the USSR - workers in industry, agriculture and culture, physical and mental labor, which constitute the social basis of a multinational nationwide state" 18 . In this provision, for the first time, it was emphasized - along with the previously recorded international unity

13 "XXII Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Verbatim report". T. I. M. 1962, p. 153.

14 Ibid. Vol. III, p. 244.

15 Ibid., p. 312.

16 "Materials of the XXIII Congress of the CPSU". M. 1966, p. 89.

17 See "50 Years of the Great October Socialist Revolution. Documents and Materials". M. 1967, p. 59.

18 "To the 100th anniversary of the birth of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin". Abstracts of the Central Committee of the CPSU. M. 1970, pp. 32 - 83.

new historical community - also its fundamentally new character and socio-political essence.

Of decisive importance for working out the problem of the education and development of the Soviet people as a new historical community was the inclusion of a provision on it in the Report of the Central Committee of the CPSU to the 24th Party Congress: a new historical community of people - the Soviet people. AT joint labor, in the struggle for socialism, in the battles for its defense, new, harmonious relations were born between classes and social groups, nations and nationalities - relations of friendship and cooperation "19. This was the most complete of all the provisions on formation and development of a new historical community It contained answers to questions about the time of its formation, about the combination of social-class and international factors in its essence, about the methodology for analyzing a new community among other historical communities.

From the conclusions of the 24th CPSU Congress it clearly follows that the education of the Soviet people is a natural phenomenon arising from the nature of socialism, from the development trends of a multinational socialist society in which the working class plays the leading role. Consequently, the formation and development of a new historical community is determined, along with objective factors, are also subjective, and above all, the leading role of the CPSU. It is her constant and tireless concern for rallying all the working people around the working class, for strengthening its alliance with the working peasantry, for strengthening friendship and international unity of all nations and nationalities of the country in every possible way, which made it possible to make full use of the objective conditions generated by socialism so that in the process of the steadily growing social-class and international unity of our society, a new historical community, the Soviet people, could be born, take shape and grow stronger.

Development during the period from the 22nd to the 24th CPSU Congress of the Party's views on the question of education and essence of the Soviet people as a new historical community served as the initial basis for further analysis of those cardinal changes that marked the complete and final victory of socialism in the USSR, its entry into a new stage in the construction of a socially homogeneous society. It became more and more obvious that the idea of ​​Soviet society as the sum of social class and national communities no longer reflected the full diversity and strength of the ties that had developed under the leadership of the party and played such an invaluable role in establishing socialism and defending its gains. On the basis of party documents, there was a gradual, but every year more and more profound understanding of new phenomena in the process of strengthening the social unity of Soviet society. Simultaneously with its further progress, new, even deeper changes took place, the awareness of which merged with the process of comprehending previously achieved successes in bringing together classes and social groups, nations and nationalities of the USSR, all working people, regardless of their nationality and profession. For about ten years, on the basis of the conclusion of the XXII Congress of the CPSU that a new community had already taken shape, the Party and Soviet scientists carefully analyzed the results of strengthening the social class and international unity of our society, until this position, developed and recorded in the documents of the XXIV Congress of the CPSU, did not reflect in itself new conclusions about the time of formation and the essence of the Soviet people as a community, the methodology of its analysis.

19 "Materials of the XXIV Congress of the CPSU". M. 1971, p. 76.

The first attempts by scientists to comprehend the essence of the achieved stage of the unity of Soviet society almost entirely followed the path of comprehending new aspects of the international unity of the peoples of the USSR, while the results of the convergence of classes and social groups, in general, the social class foundations of this unity, for some time fell out of the field of view of researchers. Meanwhile, it became more and more obvious that even the concept of “friendship of peoples”, which had come into use in the prewar years, undoubtedly retained its meaning and even absorbed new results of the life and relationships of nations, nationalities, still did not reflect all the successes of their steady rapprochement. . The first attempt to comprehend the new phenomena and processes in the development of the unity of Soviet society was the opinion that in our country "a single Soviet nation is being forged" 20 . Researchers and propagandists immediately drew attention to this thesis. Moreover, it is still subject to criticism. In the matter of fixing the results of strengthening the unity of society, he is certainly wrong: there is no "forging a single Soviet nation" in our country, and there can be no talk of it in the future. At the same time, one cannot ignore the positive, to a certain extent, nature of this thesis - it reflected the search for ways and means of comprehending what was new in the field of strengthening Soviet society during all the years of the formation and strengthening of socialism.

During the preparation of the draft Program of the CPSU, the researcher of the problem of the development of nations and national relations, M. D. Kammari, formulated a conclusion about the emergence in our country of a new historical community. Speaking in Lvov on May 23, 1961, with a public lecture "The flourishing of the socialist nations and their rapprochement during the period of transition from socialism to communism" (the text of this lecture was soon published as a separate brochure), he said: "Such a stable historical community, such a people as ethnic formation, consisting of many socialist nations, at the same time united in its social, spiritual, moral character, has not yet known the history of mankind.This, from our point of view, is no longer a "nation", but a higher and broader type of historical community (economic, political, cultural and even linguistic) than the people and the nation" 21 .

Today, from the heights of the conclusions made by the party, domestic science about the time of formation and the essence of the Soviet people as a new historical community, some vagueness of the conclusion formulated by M. D. Kammari is clear. An inaccuracy, for example, was the characteristic new historical community as an ethnic one, although this inaccuracy was partially weakened by the simultaneous characterization of the same community as consisting of many socialist nations, and at the same time united "in its social, spiritual, moral character." And yet, the shortcomings of M. D. Cammari's formulation are particulars compared with the importance of the very conclusion about the emergence in our country of a new historical community, which, by the way, he has not yet designated by the now generally accepted concept of "Soviet people." It was also positive that MD Cammari objected to the identification of a new historical community with a "new nation".

Guided by the documents of the party and more and more deeply analyzing the processes of strengthening the social and international unity of the Soviet people, researchers took new steps towards revealing its essence. I. E. Krainev, when characterizing a new historical community, paid special attention to the general features

20 Kommunist, 1960, No. 6, p. 39.

21 M. D. Cammari. The rise of the socialist nations and their convergence during the period of transition from socialism to communism. Lvov. 1961, page 14.

there nations rallied in it. “The Soviet people consists of many socialist nations and at the same time they are united in their social, spiritual, moral character,” he wrote. rallying them into a single Soviet people" 22 . In this definition of a new historical community, the author, highlighting the common features of nations, pointed to the commonality of their economic LIFE. Almost simultaneously with I. E. Kravtsev, the same feature of the new historical community was emphasized with even greater persistence by M. D. Kammari. Together with national economic ties and the community of people under socialism and the full-scale construction of communism, he wrote, a broader, powerful, progressive and stable interethnic or international economic community of people of all nations and nationalities is growing and strengthening. And already on the basis of an economic community (national and international), in his opinion, a corresponding political and cultural, spiritual community develops.

However, in the early and mid-1960s, an in-depth and methodologically correct approach to the analysis of the Soviet people as a new historical community was characteristic only of individual researchers. Many of them have not yet fully taken into account the party's conclusions about the common features of the working people of all nationalities united in a new historical community. The main emphasis in assessing it was placed not on the class aspects of its unity, but on its interethnic character. At the same time, MS Dzhunusov wrote: "The Soviet people are an interethnic community of people... Gradually, elements of an international community of people begin to take shape" 24 . Such a distinction between the interethnic and international character of a community is hardly justified, especially if one considers that even Lenin, in the notes to one of his works, explained: "International - international, international" 25 . At the same time, MS Dzhunusov was one of the few researchers who already in 1966 noted that "the Soviet people embodies the unity of diverse formations (social and national)" 26 .

A number of authors in the same years, in essence, repeated the above erroneous thesis about the formation of a single nation in our country in relation to a new historical community. One of them wrote that the process of "creating a single nation with a single language" was taking place in the USSR. Another stated that, in his opinion, the development of the Soviet people as a new historical community means the manifestation of a tendency towards the formation of a "single Soviet nation" 28 . The third in 1965 expressed, and in 1970 repeated the idea that in our country "the appearance of a new ethnic community is emerging, born by the practice of

22 I. E. Kravtsev. Development of national relations in the USSR. Kyiv. 1962, page 27.

23 M. D. Cammari. to complete unity. M. 1962, p. 14.

24 M. S. Dzhunusov. On the dialectics of the development of national relations during the period of building socialism and communism. M. 1963, p. 45. And later M. S. Dzhunusov wrote: "The statement that the Soviet people is an international community of people ... is not an entirely accurate statement, in our opinion." ("Scientific foundations of the Leninist national policy of the CPSU." Kishinev, 1968, p. 44).

25 V. I. Lenin. PSS. T. 24, p. 120

26 M. S. Dzhunusov. The dialectic of the formation of the Soviet people as a multinational social community of people. "The multinational Soviet people - a new historical community of people." M. 1966, p. 66.

27 A. A. Isupov. The national composition of the population of the USSR. M. 1964, p. 9.

28 A. V. Efimov. On directions in the study of nations. "New and Contemporary History", 1967, N 4, p. 35.

communist construction - the Soviet nation" 29. In addition, he formulated another incorrect position: the new community, as it were, had not yet taken shape, but was only being born. Meanwhile, by this time, the literature already had a correct, sufficiently reasoned opinion on the first question N.N. Chebaksarov, who wrote that “the Soviet people are, of course, not an ethnic community.” True, he called the Soviet people, without proper justification, a “national-political community” 30 .

It is not surprising, of course, that during the period when the essence of the new historical community was being comprehended, the most contradictory opinions were expressed. Another thing is important: such judgments were proof that in many cases the study of the processes of formation and development of the Soviet people has not yet taken on a sufficiently deep character.

As early as the mid-1960s, a number of researchers resolutely spoke out against the slanderous distortions by imperialist propaganda of the essence of the CPSU's struggle to strengthen the unity of Soviet society. The fact is that in bourgeois literature the provisions of the new Program of the CPSU were interpreted as leading to the formation of a "single nation of the Soviet-Russian type." Criticizing this kind of exercise by Sovietologists, E. A. Bagramov wrote that there were no grounds for such statements, since "the formation of a new, international community of people, which is the Soviet people, does not mean the absorption of nations, but the achievement of a certain level of their unity, due to social - economic and ideological and political factors" 31 . At the same time, A. I. Kholmogorov noted with good reason, referring primarily to the inaccuracies made by some of our scientists: “Ignoring national specifics, reasoning about the“ extinction ”of the essential features of socialist nations, their“ mutual assimilation ”,“ denationalization ”of national statehood , about the imminent approach of a "complete state-legal merger" of nations, etc., are premature, theoretically untenable, politically harmful" 32 .

The gradual deepening of the analysis of a new historical community can be judged, in particular, by its characterization by M. D. Kammari, which is already somewhat enriched in comparison with the one given above. Now he wrote that the new community is international in its type and character, that it "is growing and will grow, more and more fully covering all aspects of the social life of people and entire nations, not eliminating national units, but acting as the basis for their development and convergence. " 33 . At the same time, the definition of the Soviet people by Yu. Yu. Weingold was formulated. The Soviet multinational people, he wrote, is a new historical form of a community of people, which is a stable association of people of different nationalities, an association characterized by the unity of the Fatherland and territory, economic life, social structure, unity of goals and struggle for the construction of communism, unity of spiritual life

29 M. Ichilov. From fragmentation to unity. "Soviet Dagestan", 1970, N 1, p. 8.

30 N. N. Cheboksarov. Problems of the typology of ethnic communities in the works of Soviet scientists. "Soviet Ethnography", 1967, N 4, p. 108.

31 E. A. Bagramov. National question and bourgeois ideology. M. 1966, p. 295.

32 A. I. Kholmogorov. Correlation of national and new historical community of people. "The multinational Soviet people - a new historical community of people", p. 47.

33 "The construction of communism and the development of social relations". M. 1966, p. 288.

and will 34 . Other authors, in one form or another, repeated the characteristics of the Soviet people given by M. D. Kammari. This, in particular, can be judged from the materials of the first scientific conference held at Moscow University on the problem "The multinational Soviet people - a new historical community of people." One of the speeches said, for example, that the correlation of two tendencies in the relations between nations and nationalities, corresponding to socialism, "led to the formation of a community of the Soviet people" 35 . In another, the opinion was expressed that the Soviet people is a form of a multinational social collective, and the processes of formation and convergence of socialist nations into such a collective proceeded simultaneously.

In the second half of the 1960s, the attention of researchers to the study of the new historical community continued to grow. P. M. Rogachev, M. A. Sverdlin, and S. T. Kaltakhchyan, for example, gave a significant place to this problem. MP Kim characterized the all-round development of the interethnic historical community - the Soviet people - with its new international features as a synthetic expression of the achievements of all the separate nations that make it up. A. M. Yeghiazaryan followed this with the following definition of the essence of the Soviet people: “Based on the commonality of the economic base, common worldview, on the basis of the common goal - building communism, and finally, on the basis of the commonality of many features of the spiritual image of the socialist nations, a new the social category is the Soviet people. This is a new historical formation based on the flourishing socialist nations and peoples of the USSR" 39 .

An important role in summing up the first results of the development of the problem of education and development of the Soviet people as a new historical community was played by a scientific conference on the topic "The Soviet people - a new historical community of people", held in October 1968. Ts. A. Stepanyan's report emphasized the incarnation of the ideas of proletarian internationalism in the Soviet people as a new historical community. In the report of P. M. Rogachev and M. A. Sverdlin, the place of the Soviet people among the historical communities of people was considered. They rightly noted that the Soviet people are "a social class and interethnic, internationalist community in nature, embracing the entire population of the country, state-constituted in the form of a federation and based on a single economy, a diverse, but uniform in content culture, a single worldview. and a single language of international

34 Yu. Yu. Weingold. To the question of the social-volitional moments of the emergence and development of a new historical community - the Soviet people. Frunze. 1966, p. 17.

35 M. R. Bulatov. The Soviet people are the result of the all-round development and close rapprochement of the socialist nations. "The multinational Soviet people - a new historical community of people", p. 6.

36 See A. A. Nurullaev. The Soviet people as a form of a multinational social collective. "The multinational Soviet people - a new historical community of people", p. 14.

37 P. M. Rogachev, M. A. Sverdlin. Nations - people - humanity. M. 1967, p. 87; S. T. Kaltakhchyan. The socialist nations are their present and future. M. 1967, p. 36.

38 See M. P. Kim. On the development of the national problem in the modern era. "Actual Problems of the History of National-State Construction in the USSR". Dushanbe. 1970, page 23.

39 A. M. Yeghiazaryan. Socialism and nations. The Leninist national policy of the CPSU in action. M. 1969, p. 39.

40 See Ts. A. Stepanyan. The sociological law of the development of nations is the objective basis for combining the international and national tasks of the Soviet people. "The Soviet people - a new historical community of people." Volgograd. 1969, page 28.

41. In this definition, the new historical community is characterized not only as an international community, but also as a social class one, and it is precisely social class factors that rightfully put in the first place. This point of view was supported at the conference and other speakers.42 P. N. Fedoseev, S. T. Kaltakhchyan, and A. I. Kholmogorov also proceeded from the social-class nature of the new historical community in their works.

Such, in the most general terms, is the history of the Party and Soviet science raising and resolving the question of the emergence in our country of a new historical community - the Soviet people.

To clarify the essence, place and role of a new historical community, it is important to correctly understand the time and the initial foundations of its formation, the stages of formation and development. Methodological criteria for periodization of the history of the Soviet people as a community, an approach to the analysis of the processes of its formation, unfortunately, have not yet been properly developed. This led to the fact that researchers approached, and often still approach, the allocation of these stages largely without due regard for real life processes. Meanwhile, Lenin, as you know, taught that the determination of the periods of this or that phenomenon depends not on our desires, but on the objective factors of its development.

Let us take, first of all, the question of the prerequisites for the formation of a new historical community. IP Tsameryan has already correctly drawn attention to the fact that in a number of works there is an excessive enthusiasm for the search for the "historical roots" of the Soviet people 44 . Some researchers even attribute the beginning of its formation to the period of the territorial expansion of the Russian state and its transformation into a multinational state, based on the fact that even then a single territory, a single language of interethnic communication, the consciousness of a single international community, the beginnings of friendship between peoples, etc. began to take shape. 45 . With a deep understanding of the essence of a new historical community, it is difficult to imagine the possibility of the existence of such "historical roots" in it. The reference to the fact that the new historical community is a continuation of the revolutionary people who fought against tsarism and capitalism in the pre-October period is also not entirely correct. The fact is that the distinguishing feature of a revolutionary people is not so much the inner integrity of its nature, but rather its

41 P. M. Rogachev, M. A. Sverdlin. The place of the Soviet people among the historical communities of people. "The Soviet people - a new historical community of people", p. 44.

42 See N.M. Kiseleva. On the question of the concept of "Soviet people". "Soviet people - a new historical community of people", p. 94; L. N. Knyazev. Self-consciousness of the international community of Soviet people. Ibid., p. 370; Yu. L. Vorobyov. Social activity is a characteristic feature of the Soviet people. Ibid., p. 397.

43 See S. T. Kaltakhchyan. Leninism about the essence of the nation and the way of formation of an international community of people. M. 1969; A. I. Kholmogorov. United and multinational; P. N. Fedoseev. Great international feat of the Soviet people. M. 1973.

44 See I. P. Tsamerian. Unity of the international and national in the new international community - to the Radian people "Fshosofskaya Dumka", 1977, N 6, p. 12.

45 M. A. Andreev. The socialist nation in the USSR is an integral part of the Soviet people. "Soviet people - a new historical community of people", p. 179.

46 See N.K. Garifullin. Stages of development of the multinational Soviet people as a new historical community of people. "Soviet people -: a new historical community of people", p. 105; V. I. ZATEEV National relations under socialism. Ulan-Ude. 1975, p. 165 and others.

the direction of his actions against class enemies. The main thing in the Soviet people as a new historical community is its completely new, never before existing, internally inherent quality features.

In the detailed exposition of the prehistory of the new historical community given by MP Kim, the characteristics of the essence and historical role of the class and international traditions of the proletariat and all its allies in the workers' camp are very valuable. These traditions, as is known, played an exceptionally important role in ensuring the victory of the October Revolution. They are the real prerequisite that laid the foundation for the birth of the Soviet people as a new historical community. A comprehensive definition of this prerequisite is also contained in the collective monograph "The Soviet people - a new historical community of people" (M. 1975) published under the leadership of M.P. Kim and V.P. Sherstobitov and in the collective monograph "The Great Soviet People" (Kyiv, 1976). ). Other researchers characterize the victory of the October Revolution as a prerequisite for the formation of the Soviet people. At the same time, P. M. Rogachev and M. A. Sverdlin expressed the following opinion: “The Soviet people are not the first international community in history. It was preceded by international associations of the proletariat. " 48 . In essence, the same idea was expressed by E. V. Tadevosyan, who considers the prerequisite for the formation of the Soviet people to be the multinationality of the Leninist party in the pre-October years 49 . However, while recognizing the truly invaluable role of the Party in the emergence and development of the Soviet people, one cannot but take into account that these are diverse social phenomena, with different patterns of development, with non-coinciding social functions.

On the question of the stages of the formation of a new historical community and the time of its completion, the most contradictory opinions are still expressed in the literature. Now there are three points of view, according to which the Soviet people a) took shape by the middle or by the end of the 30s, b) with the victory of socialism, it was formed only "in the main", c) is a category of mature socialism, that is, it finally took shape at the turn of 50 - 60s.

N. K. Garifullin, summarizing the already existing points of view on the question of the time of formation of a new historical community, made an attempt to periodize it. In his opinion, the beginning of the formation of the Soviet people refers to the period of the victory of the October Revolution, while its formation must be attributed to the time of building socialism in the USSR. In the future, he believes, the process of development of the previously formed new historical community of people 50 is already underway. MP Kim wrote in the already mentioned monograph that "by the end of the transitional period, with the building of a basically socialist society in the USSR, a new historical community of people, the Soviet people, had basically taken shape" 51 . Later, noting the difference in points of view on the question of the time of the formation of the Soviet people, M.P. Kim confirmed his position: "Some authors believe that this community

47 See M. P. Kim. The Soviet people are a new historical community. M. 1972, pp. 45 - 46.

48 P. M. Rogachev, M. A. Sverdlin. The place of the Soviet people among the historical communities of people. "The Soviet people - a new historical community of people", p. 42.

49 See E. V. Tadevosyan. The Soviet people are a new historical community of people. "Questions of the history of the CPSU", 1972, N 5, p. 23.

50 See N.K. Garifullin. Decree. cit., pp. 104 - 107.

51 M. P. Kim. The Soviet people - a new historical community, p. 145.

developed only under the conditions of developed socialism. According to another point of view, which the author of these lines also adheres to, the Soviet people, as a new historical community of people, basically took shape by the end of the transition period, when a socialist society was basically built in the USSR "52. The same opinion is shared by V.P. Sherstobitov, who he expressed it initially in the summer of 1972, then, in a somewhat revised edition, at the end of 1976. “As you know,” he writes, “by the end of the 1930s, socialism had basically won in the USSR. At that time, a new historical community of people was basically also formed" 53 .

In subsequent years, the development of the question of the stages of formation and the time of formation of a new historical community continued. E. V. Tadevosyan, in particular, reasonably revealed the thesis that its emergence is a natural result of building a developed socialist society 54 . Yu. Yu. Weingold expressed the opinion that 1917 - 1937. were the time of the formation of the Soviet people as a new historical community. He believes that the inclusion of the concept of "Soviet people" in the Charter of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted by the 18th Party Congress is evidence of its final consolidation as a new historical community, and this process continued in 1938-1959, after which it was further strengthened and development 55 . MN Rosenko took a completely different position, declaring that the emergence of a new community of people began only "with the creation of the USSR", and this process was completed by the mid-30s 56 . In another work, she wrote: "The Soviet people formed

52 M. P. Kim. Formation and development of the Soviet people as a new historical community of people. "Issues of international education of workers". M. 1977, p. 253. It is necessary to make a reservation that M.P. Kim, speaking of the authors, according to whom the new community "was formed only under the conditions of developed socialism", does not at all mean the denial of its formation before the establishment of developed socialism , nor the fact that it is allegedly formed only after this statement, since no one has expressed such views in the literature.

53 V. P. Sherstobitov. The Soviet people are a new historical community of people. M. 1972, p. 31; his own. The Soviet people are a monolithic community of builders of communism. M. 1976, p. 17. The position of the author of this article on the issue of the stages of formation and the time of formation of the Soviet people as a new historical community, also stated in 1972, differs in some details from the one described above: "The formation of the Soviet people as a new historical community took place in two stages. The first stage covers the period from the victory of the October Revolution to the construction of socialism in the main, the second - the time of the formation of a developed socialist society "(M. I. Kulichenko. The Soviet people - a new community of people. "The Soviet Union and the modern world. Prague, 1972, p. 215). This position was confirmed in the autumn of the same year, when the idea was expressed that with the building of socialism, a new historical community was formed "at its core" (see also M.I. Kulichenko. National Relations in the USSR and Trends in Their Development. M. 1972, p. 364) that "at the second stage, the Soviet people finally takes shape as a new historical community of people and, as socialism enters the developed period, acquires developed forms; a number of qualitatively new features of this community are being formed" (see "The Multinational Soviet State ". M. 1972, p. 336). In our opinion, in relation to the history of the formation of a new historical community, there is a difference between the concepts "basically" and "basically". The first means that the Soviet people have already fully formed and are further developing on their own basis. (This is how M.P. Kim characterizes the process, who writes that “with the end of the transition period, the process of further development of the existing new community of people continued. With the victory of socialism in the USSR, the Soviet people began to develop already on their own socialist basis” - M.P. Kim, Soviet people - a new historical community, p. 146). In the second case, it means that only the foundations, the foundation of the Soviet people, have been formed, and in the future its formation will continue, this process is to be completed.

54 See E. V. Tadevosyan. The Soviet people are a new historical community of people. M. 1973, pp. 10 - 24.

55 Yu. Yu. Weingold. The Soviet people are a new historical community of people. Frunze, 1973, pp. 7 - 11.

56 M. N. Rosenko. The Soviet people are a new historical community. L. 1973, pp. 6, 9, 11, 18.

by the middle of the 1930s, when the process of the formation of socialist nations was over" 57 .

G. T. Kikalov, repeating the opinion of other researchers that “by the time of the victory of socialism, a new historical community of people, the Soviet people, had mainly formed in our country”, completely unreasonably reproaches M. P. Kim that his position supposedly “further development the Soviet people as a new community is not envisaged" 58 . Meanwhile, MP Kim, highlighting two stages in the formation and formation of the Soviet people as a new historical community, the second of them directly characterized as its development on its own, socialist basis. Returning to this question later, he not only singled out "a period of full maturity and lasting unity under the conditions of developed socialism," but also emphasized: "Great tasks arise in connection with the further strengthening of the unity of the Soviet people. The further strengthening and development of the international unity and brotherhood of the Soviet people, the all-round internationalization of the life of the Soviet people" 60 . M. S. Dzhunusov, in essence, joined the above point of view of N. K. Garifullin: “In our literature, opinions are expressed that the Soviet people took shape in connection with the construction of a developed socialist society. There is reason to believe that a new historical community took shape a little earlier, in the course of the construction and victory of socialism. But he did not further argue this point of view and practically did not add anything to the previously expressed provisions. In connection with the discussion of the draft of the new Constitution of the USSR, he again repeated that the new historical community "came into being during the years of socialist construction" 62 .

An analysis of the literature and real processes of the formation of the Soviet people as a new historical community gives grounds to conclude that this process covers two stages: a) the formation of the foundation of a new historical community in the process of building the foundations of socialism and b) the completion of its formation during the years of the establishment of mature socialism. In the future, the strengthening and development of the Soviet people, the growth of their social role. Sometimes in the literature, the development of a new historical community is mechanically separated from its formation - this suffers, in particular, from the already mentioned work of G. T. Kikalov. In fact, formation, of course, is both the development of already established features and the emergence of new ones.

Disputes about the time of completion of the formation of the Soviet people as a community should now, apparently, disappear. As you know, in his report on the draft Constitution at the session of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, L. I. Brezhnev linked together the establishment of developed socialism in our country and the formation of a new historical community. Developed socialism has been built in the USSR, he said, "hence - the growing rapprochement of all classes and social groups, all nations and nationalities and education

57 M. N. Rosenko. Cooperation and rapprochement of the nations of the USSR in the conditions of a developed socialist society. (Economic and sociological research). L. 1974, p. 153.

58 G. T. Kikalov. The leading role of the working class in the formation of a new historical community - the Soviet people. "Problems of social sciences". Issue. 19. Kyiv. 1974, pp. 26 - 27.

59 M. P. Kim. The Soviet people - a new historical community, p. 146.

60 M. P. Kim. Formation and development of the Soviet people as a new historical community of people, p. 254.

61 M. S. Dzhunusov. Patriotism of a new historical community. Kommunist, organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Lithuania, Vilnius. 1975, No. 11, p. 41.

62 M. S. Dzhunusov. We are the Soviet people. "Komsomolskaya Pravda", 2.VII.1977.

the formation of a historically new social and international community of people in our country - the Soviet people" 63. The preamble to the Constitution of the USSR of 1977 also states that our society is "a society of mature socialist social relations, in which, on the basis of the rapprochement of all classes and social groups, legal and the actual equality of all nations and nationalities, their fraternal cooperation, a new historical community of people has taken shape - the Soviet people.

Thus, an analysis of the periods of formation and strengthening of a new historical community, the development of our entire society during the years of building socialism, gives reason to conclude that the Soviet people are a specific product and result of the formation of the first phase of the communist formation. In full measure, however, this phenomenon is inherent only in mature socialism, and before its final approval, only the processes of the birth and formation of a new historical community of people took place. Academician A. G. Egorov rightly notes that the new historical community "corresponds in essence to the stage of mature socialism" and that although it took shape in the process of socialist construction, nevertheless, in 1936, when the previous Constitution was adopted, this community "did not yet exist " 65 .

From consideration of the question of the stages of formation of a new historical community, the following criteria for the analysis of this process follow. The Soviet people are a qualitatively new formation, and therefore they do not have any prototypes in the pre-October period. A new community, although it took shape during the period of building socialism, but still not fully simultaneously with its victory. Being formed as a result of the implementation of fundamental socialist transformations on the basis of the victory of socialism, the Soviet people took shape somewhat later than this victory occurred, being, so to speak, its final result. Of decisive importance in the formation of the Soviet people were the socio-economic, ideological, political, cultural and moral transformations of class communities, the strengthening of the social unity of Soviet society under the leadership of the working class. These transformations took place, of course, simultaneously and inextricably linked with the formation of socialist nations and nationalities, the strengthening of their friendship and brotherhood. However, it would be wrong to believe that only the formation of socialist nations and nationalities, their steady convergence, as some researchers sometimes assert, was of decisive importance for the formation of a new historical community. The formation and development of the Soviet people is primarily an objective process, which at the same time is also greatly influenced by subjective factors. It is especially important that all the theoretical and practical activities of the party and the working class led by it in uniting society, improving social relations, and educating the builders of a classless society simultaneously represented an active participation in the formation of a new community. The completion of the process of forming a new historical community was possible only on the basis of the complete victory of socialism (and not just its building in the main), as a result of the achievement of a high level of maturity of all aspects of the development of Soviet society.

63 L. I. Brezhnev. Lenin's course. T. 6. M. 1978, p. 536.

64 "Constitution (Basic Law) of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics". M. 1977, p. 4.

65 A. G. Egorov. The constitution of developed socialism, communism under construction. "Questions of the history of the CPSU", 1977, N 11, p. 85.

The central question in the history of working out the problem of the education and development of the Soviet people is to find out how the essence of this new community was revealed in our literature.

In addition to a number of definitions of the essence of the new historical community already given above, let us dwell here on a few more. Of great interest is the characterization of the new historical community given by Academician P. N. Fedoseev: “The Soviet people is not a special nation or ethnic category, but a new historical form of social and international unity of people of different nations. In this community, on the one hand, harmoniously combine all-Soviet - socialist and international in nature - traits, and on the other hand, the national characteristics of the peoples, the specific interests of which are carefully taken into account by the Communist Party and the Soviet state in solving the problems of all nations and nationalities, our entire Soviet society.This unity arose on the basis of the elimination of antagonistic relations between classes and nations, on the basis of an alliance between the working class, the peasantry and the intelligentsia, on the basis of the flourishing and rapprochement of the Soviet nations. Later, P. N. Fedoseev specifically singled out as one of the aspects of the characteristic of the Soviet people that it acts as a "form of consolidation of the nations and nationalities inhabiting our country" 67 . When we speak of the Soviet people, A. G. Yegorov rightly emphasizes, we are talking about the community of the peoples of the USSR, which is based on internationalist unity and cooperation of friendly classes, which has developed under the leadership of the Communist Party in the course of transforming all aspects of the life of our society. From the above characteristics of the Soviet people as a community, it is obvious what a great place in its essence is occupied by the fact that Soviet society is multinational. And at the same time, both scientists use a single methodological approach to the analysis of a new historical community: they consider it both as a social class and as an international community. Such an approach took shape in our literature far from immediately; moreover, even today it still encounters objections. However, it is now followed by the vast majority of researchers. Since, however, there are objections to it, we should dwell on them.

The actual denial of the social class foundations of the Soviet people is manifested primarily in the fact that it is viewed as a continuation of that historical series of communities that includes a tribe, a nationality, a nation. MN Rosenko, without joining this point of view, nevertheless objects to the characteristics of the Soviet people expressed in the press as a social-class, socio-political community. With P. M. Rogachev and M. A. Sverdlin in mind, who characterize the Soviet people as a social-class community, she writes that their opinion “does not have any sufficient justification on a theoretical level” 69 . According to her, any historical community, including the Soviet people, has as its basis

66 "Izvestia" of the Academy of Sciences of the Kirghiz SSR, 1975, N 6, p. 22.

67 P. N. Fedoseev. The Soviet people are the builders of communism. "Problems of Philosophy", 1977, N 7, p. 22.

68 See N. P. Ananchenko. From a nation to an international community of people. "Questions of History", 1967, N 3, p. 87; V.V. Pokshishevsky. Geography of the population, M. 1971, p. 76; N. A. Berkovich. The Soviet people as a fundamentally new social and international community of people. "Formation of the USSR - the triumph of Lenin's national policy". Pyatigorsk. 1972, p. 276.

69 M. N. Roeenko. The formation and development of the Soviet people - the triumph of the principles of the Leninist national policy, p. 7.

concrete class structure, but its content, determined by the class base, is not reduced to it and is not its sign. M. N. Rosenko, therefore, in essence, does not accept the conclusion that the Soviet people as a community is the result of the development of not only one series of historical communities - national, but also another - social class communities. The presence of social-class ties, moreover, as the fundamental basis of a new historical community, and not only because nations include classes, social strata, gives quite sufficient reason to consider the Soviet people also a socio-political community, against which M.N. Rosenko. Referring to the presence of this provision in one of the existing definitions of a new historical community, 70 she writes that "the Soviet people is a historical multinational community, but not a socio-political one" 71 . Since, however, it is generally recognized that the Soviet people is a union of classes and social strata, nations and nationalities, the harmonious nature of their social ties, is it possible to cover these ties only with the concept of a "historical multinational" community? It seems that there are no grounds for two opinions here. By the way, the concept of "international" rather than "multinational" community is more suitable for characterizing the Soviet people. The concept of "international" community emphasizes that we are not talking about the sum of national relationships, but that in a new community they also become new, that is, they rise to a higher level of development.

The determining nature of social class ties in the education and development of the Soviet people (and not only as an element of the inner life and relationships included in the new historical community of nations and nationalities) must also be emphasized because it is the development of social class ties that underlies the processes of formation social homogeneity of Soviet society. P. N. Fedoseev, in a number of his works, has already drawn attention to the fact that the main direction of the rapprochement of the nations, peoples of the USSR is determined precisely by the progressive strengthening of their social homogeneity, the deepening of their economic and cultural integration, and the development of their common features. "The decisive feature of the formation and development of the Soviet people," he emphasizes, "was that it is carried out on the basis of the movement of society towards social homogeneity and at the same time towards the unity of nations" 73 . The establishment of social homogeneity and the movement towards the complete unity of nations are, of course, predetermined by the development and convergence of the two forms of socialist property, which also includes the overcoming of the essential differences between town and country, mental and physical labor. At the same time, these are not isolated processes of the internal life of nations, nationalities, but, on the contrary, a single process for the entire Soviet society, embodied primarily in strengthening the solidity of the Soviet people as a new historical community. One cannot but agree with E. A. Bagramov, who, speaking of the unity of the Soviet people, draws attention to the fact that "it marks a new high stage in the socio-political unity of nations and nationalities", that his education

70 See M. I. Kulichenko. National relations in the USSR and trends in their development, p. 390.

71 M. N. Rosenko. Formation and development of the Soviet people - the triumph of the principles of the Leninist national policy, p. 10.

72 See P. N. Fedoseev. On the social and ideological foundations of the rapprochement of nations and nationalities. "Science of the USSR". M. 1972, p. 72; his own. Marxist-Leninist philosophy at the present stage. M. 1974, p. 41; his own. Theoretical problems of developed socialism and communist construction. "XXV Congress of the CPSU and the development of Marxist-Leninist theory". M. 1977, pp. 35 - 36.

73 P. N. Fedoseev. The Soviet people are the builder of communism, p. 23.

"can be understood only in view of the growing importance of the internationalization of our lives" 74 .

Of all the variety of forms of social phenomena that are reflected in the essence of a new historical community, socio-political ones occupy a special place. This, of course, does not in the least diminish the socio-economic essence of the Soviet people, the economic foundations of its emergence and development. The characterization of the Soviet people precisely as a socio-political community is also necessary because in this case there is no need to consider it also a state community. Various opinions on this issue have already been expressed in the press. AF Dashdamirov, for example, believes that an indication of the state character of a new historical community is obligatory 75 , while MN Rosenko, not without reason, disputes this 76 . It seems that since the state is primarily an instrument of political power, we can limit ourselves to characterizing the Soviet people as a socio-political community.

Strong objections to the exclusion from the definition of the concept "Soviet people" of references to social-class, socio-political factors are caused not only by the fact that this definition would be incomplete and one-sided without taking them into account. More important is the departure from the class foundations of this definition, which are emphasized in practically every recent Party document on this issue. The reference only to the multinational character of the new historical community is accompanied by some researchers with an exaggeration of ethnic factors in the national, which is included in the content of the new community as an element of national relations. Some researchers (I. S. Kon, M. Ikhilov, V. V. Pokshishevsky, and others) call the Soviet people an ethnic community. In a number of cases it is characterized as a superethnic or supranational community 78 . Meanwhile, it is obvious that in this case it is more correct to proceed not from the usual understanding of the ethnic as inherent in an ethnos, people, but from the nature of the ethnic, which in the life of peoples (including nations) has almost always acted and continues to act as extraclass. And since the Soviet people is a socio-political community, there is and will not be anything extra-class in it that would be akin to ethnicity, which is the basis of the ethnic features of nations, nationalities. This, however, does not mean that there are no grounds for the opinion expressed by Academician Yu.V. Quite obvious

74 E. A. Bagramov. The development of the CPSU of the Marxist-Leninist doctrine of national relations. "Communist", 1973, N 4, pp. 44 - 45; his own. Soviet national policy and bourgeois falsifiers. "International Affairs", 1978, N 5, p. 90.

75 See A.F. Dashdamirov. The Soviet people as a unity of socialist nations. "Soviet people and the dialectics of national development". Baku. 1972, pp. 56 - 63.

76 See M. N. Rosenko. Formation and development of the Soviet people.., pp. 7 - 8.

77 See I.S. Kon. National character - myth or reality? "Foreign Literature", 1968, N 9, p. 229; M. Ichilov. Decree. cit., p. 8; V.V. Pokshishevsky. Decree. op. Ed. 2nd. M. 1978, p. 193.

78 See V. I. Kozlov. Nation and national statehood (On the history of national construction in the USSR). "Issues of the Marxist-Leninist Theory of the Nation and National Relations (To the 50th Anniversary of the USSR)". Permian. 1972, p. 20; S. I. Bruk, N. N. Cheboksarov. Meta-ethnic communities. "Races and peoples", 1976, N 6, p. 39.

79 See Yu. V. Bromley, V. I. Kozlov. Lenin and the main tendencies of ethnic processes in the USSR. "Soviet Ethnography", 1970, N 1, pp. 13 - 14; their same e. To the study of modern ethnic processes in the sphere of spiritual culture of the peoples of the USSR. "Soviet Ethnography", 1975, N 1, pp. 3 - 16.

but that such processes in one way or another influence the new community, and it, in turn, on the development of these processes 80 .

In the literature on the Soviet people as a new historical community, those scholars who characterized this community as an ethnic community have already been subjected to fair criticism. It seems that this criticism is justified, especially in connection with the fact that some researchers, from recognizing the existence of ethnic features in the Soviet people, then go to the conclusion that it is inevitable that it will grow into a single nation 82 . On the issue of the essence of the Soviet people, the press also expressed the point of view of N. Dzhandildin, who virtually excludes the class foundations of the formation and development of a new historical community and reduces these foundations to a peculiar and ascending triad: personality - nation - Soviet people. This point of view can also be accepted 83 .

In general, the international character of the Soviet people turned out to be revealed in literature much deeper and more thoroughly than the social-class, socio-political character. The international content of the new historical community has been analyzed, in addition to the already mentioned works of P. N. Fedoseev, S. T. Kaltakhchyan and A. I. Kholmogorov, in a number of other collective and individual monographs 84 . An attempt at a truly comprehensive analysis of a new historical community, primarily its formation and development, of a social-class and international character, was also made in the collective works "A New Historical Community of People: Essence, Formation, Development" (M. 1976), "The Soviet people - the builder of communism (Frunze, 1977) and in publications of the materials of scientific conferences that specifically discussed this problem 85 . Scientific conferences devoted to the theoretical problems of the XXV Congress of the CPSU, the 60th anniversary of the October Revolution, the adoption of the new Constitution of the USSR, as well as other works published in the most recent years, were of great importance for the study of various aspects of the formation and development of the Soviet people, the disclosure of its essence and historical role. 86 .

80 See "Modern Ethnic Processes in the USSR". 2nd edition. M. 1977.

81 See A. M. Korolev. Nation-state construction after the October Revolution and the Soviet people. "Bulletin" of the Leningrad University, series "Law", 1972, N 17, p. 122; R. F. Its. The Soviet people are a new type of historical community of people. "Bulletin" of the Leningrad University, series "History, language, literature", 1972, no. 4, No. 20, p. 33; "Rozkvit and rapprochement of nations in the SRSR at the current stage". Kyiv. 1975, p. 93; "The Formation and Development of the Soviet People and the Development of the Socialist Nations". Kyiv. 1978, p. 119, etc.

82 See V. I. Kozlov. Nation and National Statehood, pp. 20 - 21; Yu. I. Semenov. The place of the Soviet people among the historical communities of people. "Peoples of Asia and Africa", 1973, N 5, p. 45.

83 See N. Dzhandildin. monolithic unity. Alma-Ata. 1975, pp. 58 - 59. For criticism of the views of N. Dzhandildin, see M. I. Kulichenko. XXV Congress of the CPSU on strengthening the unity of the Soviet people. "Scientific Communism", 1976, N 5, pp. 54 - 55.

84 "Multinational Soviet State"; "The Soviet people and the dialectic of national development"; "Leninism and the national question in modern conditions". M. 1974; N. Dzhandildin. Decree. op.; V. P. Sherstobitov. The Soviet people are a monolithic community of builders of communism; E. A. Bagramov. Lenin's National Policy: Achievements and Prospects. M. 1977.

85 "The multinational Soviet people - a new historical community of people". M. 1966; "The Soviet people - a new historical community of people." Volgograd. 1969; "Regularities of the Formation of the Soviet People as a New Historical Community of People". In 2 vols. M. 1975.

86 P. N. Fedoseev. The Soviet people are the builders of communism; A. G. Egorov. The CPSU is the party of scientific communism, creative Marxism-Leninism. "Questions of Philosophy", 1978, NN 3, 4; T. Usubaliev. The leading role of the CPSU in the development of the Soviet people along the path to communism. Frunze. 1977; G. E. Glezerman. Classes and nations. Ed. 2nd. M. 1977; "National relations in a developed socialist society". M. 1977; V. S. Semenov. Improvement of the social structure of a developed socialist society. M. 1978, etc.

Many specialists of the most diverse profiles have already joined in working out the problem of the education and development of the Soviet people as a new historical community - historians and philosophers, economists and sociologists, lawyers and ethnographers, philologists and psychologists. Not having the opportunity here not only to analyze all the works, but even to list them, we will limit ourselves to indicating those aspects of the problem in which each of the researchers contributed to the increment of knowledge about the new historical community: (characterization of the theory and methodology of studying the Soviet people, its main features - P. N. Fedoseev, A. G. Egorov, E. A. Bagramov, M. P. Kim, Ts. A. Stepanyan, A. I. Kholmogorov, V. P. Sherstobitov; Agaev, A. F. Dashdamirov, V. I. Zateev, K. N. Khabibulin, the leadership of the Communist Party and the leading role of the working class - T. Yu. Burmistrova, L. S. Gaponenko, V. E. Malanchuk, T. U. Usubaliev, analysis of economic factors - L. I. Bulochnikova, Yu. M. N. Rutkevich, the importance of socialist statehood - E. V. Tadevosyan, I. P. Tsameryan, S. I. Yakubovskaya, the correlation of international and national nal, the role of friendship between peoples - Zh. G. Golotvin, F. Ya. Gorovsky, L. V. Metelitsa, V. K. Sulzhenko; the formation of spiritual foundations - A. I. Arnoldov, L. M. Drobizheva, S. T. Kaltakhchyan; the formation of patriotic and internationalist consciousness, national pride - I. F. Anoshkin, M. S. Dzhunusov, G. O. Zimanas, M. N. Rosenko, N. I. Tarasenko; elucidation of the moral and psychological aspects of the consciousness of the Soviet people - S. M. Arutyunyan, A. I. Goryacheva, N. Dzhaldildin; analysis of language processes - I. K. Beloded, Yu. D. Desheriev, M. N. Guboglo, M. I. Isaev, K. Kh. Khanazarov; analysis of ethnic processes - Yu. V. Bromley, S. I. Bruk, V. I. Kozlov, N. N. Cheboksarov; coverage of the problem "the Soviet people and the fraternal unity of the countries of the socialist community" - F. T. Konstantinov, A. P. Sertsova, V. F. Samoylenko; exposing the falsifications of anti-communism on the issue of the Soviet people - E. D. Modrzhinskaya, L. A. Nagornaya, M. Kh. Khalmukhamedov.

In studying the essence and social role of the Soviet people as a new historical community, Soviet scientists are guided by party documents, primarily by the decisions of the 24th and 25th Congresses of the CPSU and the decisions of the Party Central Committee. Particularly important in this regard is the provision of the Decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU on preparations for the 50th anniversary of the founding of the USSR that the Soviet people "was formed on the basis of public ownership of the means of production, the unity of economic, socio-political and cultural life, the Marxist-Leninist ideology, interests and communist ideals of the working class. L. I. Brezhnev, in his report on the 50th anniversary of the USSR, called the formation of the Soviet people as a new historical community our great achievement. "We have the right to consider it," he stressed, "as a kind of generalized result of those economic and socio-political changes that have taken place in our country over the past half century." Much attention is paid to the analysis of the essence of the Soviet people as a new historical community in the documents of the May (1977) Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU, in the reports of L. I. Brezhnev on the draft Constitution of the USSR, in its preamble and articles.

87 "On preparations for the 50th anniversary of the formation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics". Decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU. M. 1972, p. 16.

88 L. I. Brezhnev. Lenin's course. T. 4. M. 1974, p. 61.

The Soviet people is a new historical socio-political and international community, which is an indissoluble unity of classes and social groups, nations and nationalities on the basis of mature socialism, Marxism-Leninism and its inherent internationalism, on the basis of the unity of interests and goals, economic, socio-political and cultural life, common character traits, morality, way of life and traditions of the builders of communism. The new community was formed as a result of the laws of socialism and visibly embodies its advantages over capitalism. It acts as a historically necessary factor in the movement of Soviet society along the path to communism, while at the same time exerting a significant influence on the development of the world socialist community, on the progress of mankind in general.

The theory and methodology of studying the Soviet people at the present stage of development of a new historical community and its study allow us to formulate a number of criteria for interpreting and revealing its essence. The Soviet people is a completely new historical community, born of the era of socialism, and its analysis cannot be approached as to other, already existing communities. The new community, embracing all aspects of the life of Soviet society, is nevertheless not identical with it, since it mainly reflects the results of its socio-political development. The education and development of the Soviet people can only be understood in close connection with the social nature of ownership of the means of production, the socialist economic relations generated by it, and the merging of the economies of all the union republics into a single national economic complex in the process of internationalizing their economic life. The decisive role in the socio-political content of the Soviet people is played by social class factors, which, however, does not mean that the importance of international and national factors in the commonality of economic and political life, in spiritual and moral-psychological unity, is diminished. One of the important features of the Soviet people is that the signs and features of the communities included in it cannot become its signs, if they do not become, as is the case with the signs of the working class, the common property. The strengthening and development of the Soviet people does not lead to a weakening of the social role or, moreover, to the disappearance of the communities that make it up - on the contrary, their entry into the Soviet people means that they acquire a new source for their further and all-round progress.

In the light of these criteria, it is obvious that the new historical community is an extremely complex and multifaceted historical phenomenon in the era of mature socialism. The Soviet people, if considered in a number of other historical communities and in comparison with them, represents a community of a higher level of development - in terms of the nature and scale of social ties, in terms of their degree of maturity, in terms of their level of cohesion, in terms of their role in social progress. It differs from the communities that preceded it, as well as from its constituent communities, in that, firstly, it represents the final formation of not some kind of "single historical series of development" of communities, but mainly two of them - social-class and national. Secondly, that is precisely why it organically combines a certain independence in the development of classes, nations and their unity, as well as the union of the working people, regardless of belonging to one or another community.

The Soviet people took shape as a natural consequence of the new developments in the social development of our country that the victory of socialism, its consolidation and development brought with it. At the same time, the influence of the democratic

and - in elements - the socialist traditions of the unity of the working people of all classes and social strata, nations and nationalities, their liberation struggle against external and internal enemies. The transformation of intra-class and intra-national ties, inter-class and inter-ethnic relations under the conditions of the socialist system, the formation of a new man served as the foundation for the formation and development of the Soviet people. The decisive role is played by the common features of classes, nations, and Soviet people that arise on this basis and manifest themselves in all areas of life and the struggle for the establishment of a new society. We are talking about qualitatively new, harmonious relations between classes and social groups, nations and nationalities - relations of friendship and cooperation that have developed in joint work, in the struggle for socialism, in the battles for its defense. The new social ties are characterized by the unity of the objective and the subjective, the international and the national, the public and the personal.

The new historical community is a living, constantly developing social organism. As this development progresses, so will its role in ensuring the progress of Soviet society and its influence on the improvement of social relations in other socialist countries. At the same time, the Soviet people are a historical category. Its existence and social significance are limited to a period until the class and national communities that make up it die out.

Despite the great work that has already been done by researchers in the course of developing the problem of the education and development of the Soviet people as a new historical community, there are still significant gaps in a number of aspects of its study, which have already been partially mentioned above. First of all, such theoretical and methodological issues as the place of the Soviet people among other communities, their relationship with them, criteria for analysis, etc. deserve special attention. It is also important to study in more detail the role of objective and subjective factors, the significance of the leadership of the CPSU, the leading role of the all stages of the formation and development of the Soviet people. At the same time, it is obvious that the main thing now is to shift the center of gravity of research from an analysis of the formation of a new historical community and its essence to a more detailed disclosure of the processes of its development in modern conditions, to an in-depth study of its significance in strengthening and improving a mature socialist society. Here, questions about the patterns of development of a new historical community and their place in the system of patterns of a mature socialist society come to the fore. All phenomena and processes in development under the influence of a new community of classes and social groups, nations and nationalities, the formation of their common features, the reflection of these features in the consciousness and behavior of Soviet citizens deserve serious study. Among the issues requiring research, there should still be an analysis of the forms and methods of leading the CPSU in the development of the Soviet people, the correlation in this development of class and national, international and national, and the increasing role of the new historical community in solving the problems of communist construction.

Permanent link for scientific papers (for citation):

MI KULICHENKO, EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOVIET PEOPLE AS A NEW HISTORICAL COMMUNITY // Minsk: Belarusian Electronic Library (website). Date of update: 02/08/2018. URL: https://site/m/articles/view/EDUCATION-AND-DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOVIET-PEOPLE-AS-A-NEW-HISTORICAL-COMMUNITY (date of access: 03/31/2019).

Author(s) of the publication - M. I. KULICHENKO:

M. I. KULICHENKO → other works, search: .