「俄羅斯思想」與俄羅斯社會轉型

Abstract

「俄羅斯思想」是指俄羅斯民族所特有的、具有本質意義的思想觀念和俄羅斯民族獨特的思維方式。俄羅斯思想滲透在俄蘇發展的各個不同階段上，無疑也在當今俄羅斯的社會轉型過程中有所表現。 一、「俄羅斯思想」：俄羅斯歷史文化的聚結點對「俄羅斯思想」歷來有著不同的解釋。擬可作以下幾方面的概括： 1.東西方結合部文明、「非東非西」，「既東又西」的特點。表現爲不同文明在這裏碰撞、結合、吸收和改造。在斯拉夫文化的基礎上，廣爲吸收歐洲文明、伊斯蘭文明、猶太文明乃至遠東文明。就宗教形態而言，東正教這一最有俄國特色的基督教，成了維繫俄羅斯民族的精神紐帶。 2.王權與專制主義。「沙皇」最高統治者地位和形象的確立，從彼得大帝到歷代沙皇，到蘇聯時期，直到葉利欽、普京時代都有中央王權爲中心的統治特徵。 3.「強國」意識。俄羅斯傳統文化和民族性中的國家意識佔有重要地位。歷史學家謝․索洛維約夫認爲：「在俄羅斯的歷史中，我們發現一個重要的現象，即國家，統治不斷擴展的國家」。 4.村社精神。農村公社這一俄國歷史進程中獨特而又深厚的社會基礎，成爲俄羅斯民族滋生民粹主義、社會主義的土壤。 二、俄羅斯社會轉型時期的「俄羅斯思想」 1.蘇聯時期，實行列寧主義爲指導的社會主義制度，然而在經濟、政治制度及社會生活的許多方面，仍滲透著傳統「俄羅斯思想」的基因。表現爲個人崇拜、擴張主義、「強國」和爭霸，以及教條主義的盛行，等等。 2.蘇聯解體後，「俄羅斯思想」重新被塑造爲俄羅斯民族的精神支柱，重建「俄羅斯思想」成了各階層人們的共同心聲，不能不在俄羅斯社會轉型中發揮其獨特的作用。具體說來： (1)葉利欽初期單純強調把西方式的自由主義政治、經濟體制運用於俄羅斯社會轉型，外交上也向西方一邊倒，後來逐步轉爲東西方並舉，左右派並重，既吸取東西方社會政治經濟體制中有用的東西，有與之根本區別；普京試圖走一條既非史達林模式，又非西方化的「第三條道路」。 (2)葉利欽時期的社會轉型，在政治權力上表現爲「超級總統制」，強調個人高於集體；而普京時期則強調集體高於個人，他實行的也是集權主義，如調整中央與地方關係，劃分聯邦區，但這種集權主義是爲了實現社會的穩定。 (3)葉利欽時期的俄羅斯，由於聯盟國家解體，社會急劇變化，喪失凝聚力；普京時期則大力強調國家主義，呼籲重振俄羅斯的大國地位，國家主義崛起。 (4)在葉利欽時期的社會思潮中，自由主義占主導地位；而普京時期，儘管強調要保衛自由，但同時也強調不丟掉過去70年來有用的東西，強調俄羅斯的民族意識與民族尊嚴，走一條自由主義、民族主義與社會主義相結合的道路。 三、「俄羅斯思想」與中國 中國具有古老深廣的東方文明----儒教文明。但自近代以來，由於外來民族的侵略，社會結構的變化，西方文明的進入，使中國社會生活和社會進程發生巨大的變化。自十月革命以後，「以俄爲師」、「走俄國人的路」成爲先進知識份子的時尚。蘇聯模式及俄羅斯思想曾對國共兩黨的不少領導人都有過相當的影響，從而在戰略選擇、政策制定、建黨治國模式乃至思維方式等方面都留下它的印痕。尤其是「俄羅斯思想」與中國傳統文化中相吻合的某些內容，在兩岸的政治生活和社會生活中都有所體現。世界文明的相互交融，是人類社會進步的重要標誌。研究俄羅斯思想，對認識當今俄羅斯的社會轉型、對推進兩岸關係的改善具有現實的意義。

”Russian Thought” refers to concepts and notions, ways of thinking unique to Russian people. ”Russian Thought” was prevalent in the development of Russia at different stages. Without doubt, it would be noticeable during the process of social transformation in Russia. A. ”Russian thought” is the summation of Russian history and culture. There have been different interpretations of what constitutes ”Russian thought,” including a. the combination of East and West civilizations. It is characteristic of ”non-East, non-West” or ”both East and West.” The manifestation is that different civilizations met here, collided, combined, and reconfigured. On the basis of Slavic culture, it absorbed European, Islamic, Jewish, or even Far Eastern civilizations. In terms of religion, the Russian Orthodox Church, the most ”Russian” Christian Church, became the spiritual core that bonded the Russian people. b. Monarchy and authoritarianism. The ”Tsar” was the institutionalization of the status and image of the top leader. From Peter the Great to various Tsars, to the Soviet period, to Yeltsin and Putin, centralized authority has been the characteristics of Russi`a political regime. c. ”strong state” consciousness. State plays an important role in traditional Russian culture and national characteristics. As the historian S. Soloviev pointed out, ”in the history of Russia, we discover an important phenomenon, that is the state, a state which expands its rule without interruption.” d. communal spirit. Village commune is a unique and deeply-rooted social fabric in Russian history and the soil of Russian nationalism and socialism. B. ”Russian Thought” during social transformation During the Soviet period, Russia implemented socialism guided by Leninism. However, the traditional ”Russian thought” was still implicitly prevalent in economic, political, and social life. It was manifested in personal worship, expansionism, ”strong state”, and hegemony, doctrinism, etc. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, ”Russian thought” was re-constructed as the spiritual stronghold for the Russian people. The resurrection of ”Russian thought” became the common wish across all walks of life. It exerted unique influence on the social transformation. For example, 1. Yeltsin in his early administration only stressed the wholesale application of Western liberal democracy and economic system to Russia`s social transformation. His foreign policy also heavily tilted toward the West at first. Yet late on he gradually attempted to strike a balance between the East and West and between the Left and the Right. He tried to take advantage of what was useful to him in the socio-economic and political systems of both without losing his own mark. Likewise, Putin is trying out a ”third” way that is neither Stalinist nor Western. 2. The power structure in the Yeltsin administration was one of ”super presidential” system. It emphasized the supremacy of individual over the collectivity. On the contrary, Putin put collectivity above individuals and practiced collective leadership. It was illustrated by the adjustment of the central-local relations and federal divisions. Nevertheless, such collective leadership was aimed at maintaining social stability. 3. During the Yeltsin`s rule, Russia experienced rapid social change and lost solidarity since the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Putin stressed nationalism. He appealed for the rise of Russia. Nationalism rose again. 4. In the Yeltsin`s time, liberalism was the mainstream social thought. While in Putin`s era, even though he put emphasis on the defense of liberty, he also stressed the importance of not discarding what had been working in the past seventy years. He underscored Russia`s nationalism and national pride, and adopted a way that combined liberalism, nationalism and socialism. C. ”Russian thought” and China China has a time-honored Eastern civilization-Confucianism. However, in recent decades, foreign invasion, social structural change and the introduction of Western civilization have effected sea change in China`s social life and development. Since the October revolution, ”Learn from the Russians,” and ”follow Russia`s steps” had become a fad among the intellectuals. The Soviet Union model and Russian thought had certain influence on both the leaders of the Kuomintang (KMT; the nationalist party) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Thus, in terms of choice of strategy, policy-making, party structure and governance style and even thinking patterns, there were traces of Russian influence. In particular, ”Russian thought” was compatible to Chinese traditional culture in certain way. This has been shown in the political and social life in the two side of the strait. The exchange and integration of different civilizations is an important indicator of progress of human society. The study of Russian thought provides a pragmatic way to understanding current Russian social transformation and promoting the improvement of cross-strait relations.