Social Tradition: Theoretical Problems and Practical Implementation

Abstract

The article examines the historical, logico-conceptual and politico-pragmatic content of an ideological trend, such as “social traditionalism”. The idea of combining socialism with the core tradition of Orthodoxy can be traced back in our history to the last quarter of the nineteenth century. In Konstantin Leontiev’s statements, in particular. Later on, it appeared among the members of the “Christian Brotherhood of Struggle”: Valentin Sventsitsky, Vladimir Ern, and the Priest Pavel Florensky. Nikolai Berdyaev upgraded this idea to its logical finish, by describing the phenomenon of “Russian communism” as the metamorphosis of Russian religiosity: they created the Third Rome, but got the Third International instead. Alexander Shchipkov’s thesis, according to which the traditional ideological paradigm of modernity (“liberalism — conservatism — socialism”) is undergoing the reformatting stage and is being replaced by the “nationalism — socialism — traditionalism” paradigm, implies that “liberalism” is being driven out by “nationalism” as its alternative. However, in the field of international relations, “nationalism” can be interpreted as a projection of liberal individualism justifying the right of a national state to freedom, that is, sovereignty. Against the background of evaluating the outcome of the Cold War, the USSR breakup can be understood as the victory of liberalism over socialism. Today, China embodies the idea of socialism, while the liberal West faces inner culture wars: liberalism is being attacked by supporters of multiculturalism and the “cancel culture”. In the course of evaluating the prospects of “social traditionalism” as a Russian state ideology, one should take into account that both the United Russia party and President Vladimir Putin define their ideological position as “conservatism”. At the same time, the latest edition defines presidential conservatism as a political management technology. In this regard, the definition of traditionalism as a “set of methods” and “procedures for ethicization” proposed by Alexander Shchipkov can also be considered technological rather than ideological. But in this case, a contradiction emerges: social traditionalism claims to replace conservatism precisely as an ideology, striving to synthesize socialism and Christianity. Socialism becomes the result of an arbitrary choice procedure, while Christianity remains a tradition, but not in the sense of the basic definition of traditionalism.