Russian aspic": does silence mean agreement?

The article studies the Russian intelligentsia in its historical retrospective, analyses its role and function in society. The author seeks the answer to the question of whether the Russian intelligentsia expresses silent protest or agreement with the current government. The first part of the article is devoted to the study of the very concept of the intelligentsia which still does not have an established definition. The author provides an overview of the definition of this concept in domestic science in the last century. The impact of the theory of social stratification and class theory of Karl Marx on the domestic research in this area is highlighted in the article. The accent is made on the debate that raged in the mid-90s in domestic science of intelligentsia about the very phenomenon of the intelligentsia and its role in society. The discussion was initiated in 1993 by the publication of the work of D.S. Likhachev "On the Russian intelligentsia". Turning to the western approaches to the definition of the intelligentsia (intellectuals), the author emphasizes the pragmatic and utilitarian nature of this definition. In Western science there are two areas of research under development that are based on the theory of elites by G. Mosca and B. Pareto. The first aims at the study of stratification indicators, such as income, property, wealth, power. The second has a functional course: intellectuals have a significant impact on society (S.M. Lipset, D. Bell), intellectuals gradually lose their role and impact on society (R. Mills, E. Fromm). In the second part of the article establishing the core on the work of A. Gramsci "Prison Notebooks" the author attempts a comparative analysis of the modern intelligentsia in Russia. The author determines the reasons for which the intelligentsia lost its impact on society. The article provides a brief overview of the doctrine of hegemony by Gramsci and describes the basic concepts: a molecular process, a molecular aggression, a cultural core. The essence of the distinction between organic intellectuals and traditional ones is revealed. The author believes the distinction proposed by Gramsci is reasonable and worthwhile attention of contemporary researchers. The main features of modern Russian intelligentsia are described, following the proposed distinction. The author examines the intelligentsia not as an established social layer, but as a dynamic structure in which there are internal contradictions and problems of reproduction, and indicates the reasons for the silent protest of traditional intellectuals in Russia. In the third part, the author draws attention to the epithet that Gramsci used against the Russian nation, calling the inert and passive national forces "Russian aspic". The author emphasizes that this epithet accurately reflects the essence of traditional intellectuals in Russia. The main conclusion of the author is that it is necessary to merge the organic and traditional intellectuals basing on the proposed definition of the role of intellectuals by Gramsci as a core cultural hegemony.

Keywords

Authors

References