| 1804 | Napoleon Bonaparte becomes the Emperor of France. |
| 1860 | Abraham Lincoln is nominated for president. |
| Born on May 18 | ||
| 1868 | Nicholas II, the last Russian czar. | |
Nationalism and legitimation for authoritarianism: A comparison of Nicholas I and Vladimir Putin
Abstract
This article draws parallels between Tsar Nicholas I and current Russian President Vladimir Putin with respect to their use of nationalism to justify statist policies and political authoritarianism. Building upon insights by Alexander Gerschenkron about the economic development of “backwards” states, it argues that both Nicholas and Putin have rhetorically used Western concepts such as nationalism and democracy to legitimize their rule but have modified them to give them more statist content. Under Nicholas, this was exemplified in the tripartite (Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality) Official Nationality policy. Putin has emphasized patriotism, power, and statism to justify centralization of power and authoritarian policies. Putin's policies and rhetoric are strong analogs to those of Nicholas. Ultimately, the goal of this paper is to explain state-inspired Russian nationalism and how it has been aligned with authoritarian politics, as well as specifying similarities between present and past in Russia.
Keywords
1. Introduction
Much attention has been devoted to the issue of how Vladimir Putin is a product of the Russian/Soviet past. It has become a veritable cliche that his rule resembles that of Russia under the tsars.1 Biographies of Putin stress his background as a KGB agent and desire to emulate his former boss, Yuri Andropov, a former spy-chief who sought to modernize and save the Soviet system (Gessen, 2012). The search for historical analogs to explain contemporary Soviet/Russian leaders, has, of course, a venerable history, with the Ivan IV–Stalin pairing perhaps the most well-known (Yanov, 1981).
This article aims to give more content to the at-times simplistic label of Putin as the newest in the long line of Russian tsars, who, it should be emphasized, varied greatly in terms of the style and substance of their rule. While it is clear that Putin is not a Westernizing liberal, it is also apparent that comparisons to Stalin or Ivan IV are grossly exaggerated.2 Despite his roots in St. Petersburg, the comparison with Peter I is also, in our view, off the mark.3 This article instead finds an interesting and insightful parallel between Putin and Nicholas I (1825–1855), the “Iron Tsar.” Like Putin, Nicholas was conservative, insofar as he valued the old order and was against sweeping reforms to transform Russia or re-make it in the Western image. At the same time, however, he faced a crisis and had to bow to certain political realities, making some rhetorical nods to new political ideas and movements, in particular the notion of nationalism. However, he adapted these ideas to suit his own agenda, giving them a highly statist character. Putin has done the same, both in terms of invoking nationalism and modifying the idea of “democracy” in accordance with his own priorities. The result, in both cases, was the adoption of some elements of contemporary political discourse but very little of its substance, particularly with respect to political liberalization.
This article will explore aspects of Nicholas' and Putin's rule, focusing on the use of nationalism and efforts to preserve and even extend state power. In both cases, leaders invoke history and aspects of Russian exceptionalism to both define the Russian nation and justify authoritarian rule. In this way, they can be viewed as innovative, albeit with the aim of preserving much of the old order. Like Nicholas, however, Putin is finding that such a strategy is not cost-free and is arguably having diminishing returns
|
||
| 1897 | Frank Capra, film director (It’s A Wonderful Life). | |
| 1902 | Meredith Willson, composer and lyricist (The Music Man). | |
| 1919 | Margot Fonteyn, English ballet dancer.“My day-to-day person wasn’t there; it was like another me”: A qualitative study of spiritual experiences during peak performance in ballet danceHighlights
Abstract
This study reviews spiritual lived experiences (secular and religious) reported during peak performance in the performing art of ballet. This review is located in academic discussions of mystical and spiritual experiences in the Western cultural tradition. A small sample of seven selected former professional ballet dancers was interviewed using qualitative research with an interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) approach. The findings made evident four major themes: the peak performance lived experience was ‘extraordinary’; the experience continued in a ‘post-performance high’; the experience was described as spiritual; and an overall love for ballet. These findings not only confirm previous research but also provide in-depth insights into the spiritual aspect of peak performance in a way other studies in contemporary times do not. A summary table of the findings is included.
Keywords
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
| |
