MILITARIZATION OF THE ENEMY IMAGE IN THE MODERN RUSSIAN SOCIO-POLITICAL DISCOURSE

Authors

Keywords:

state power, non-systemic opposition, securitization, enemification, hate speech, image of enemy, oc-cupant, traitor

Abstract

The article deals with the special aspects of creating enemy images in Russia in the period of the socio-political crisis caused by the 2011/2012 elections. Since 2011, securitization of socio-political space became a key strategy of Russia’s domestic policy and the official rhetoric acquired a conservative national discourse. The change in the depoliticization strategy has led to the redetermination of the key actors in power relations. The most extreme forms of enemification in modern Russia’s socio-political discourse turned to be militaristic and can be reduced to two main concepts: ‘traitor’ and ‘occupant’.The restriction of the political space inevitably leads to intensifying ‘aggressive rhetoric’ in the political discourse. In this case, those excluded have to pursue controversial policies. On the one hand, the excluded part tries to return to the political space. On the other hand, it implements a counterstrategy of securitization built around the concept of occupation.Enemification strategies in modern Russia are closely connected with memory practices.  The Great Patriotic War is supposed to be in the center of social memory and such words as ‘occupant’ or ‘traitor’ are identified with Nazism and, therefore, have extremely negative connotations.The process of enemification in modern Russia’s socio-political discourse can be examined from different points of view. Firstly, enemification is an important part of the nation-building and self-determination of any political community. Secondly, militarization of discourse indicates special cultural aspects of Russia’s social memory. DOI: 10.17072/2218-1067-2019-2-17-26

Author Biographies

Ольга Кузнецова / Olga Kuznetsova, National Research Tomsk State University

master student

Дмитрий Михайлов / Dmitryi Mihailov, Siberian Institute of Management – branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Associate Professor at the Department of International Relations and Humanitarian Cooperation

References

Гельман, В. Я. (2015). ‘Политика страха: как российский режим противостоит своим противникам’, Контрапункт, 1, сс. 1‒11. [Gel'man, V. Ya. (2015) ‘The Poli-tics of Fear. How the Russian Regime Confronts Its Opponents’ [Politika strakha: kak rossiiskii rezhim protivostoit svoim protivnikam], Kontrapunkt, 1, pp. 1‒11. (In Russ.)].

Макарычев, А. С. (2008). ‘Безопасность и воз-вращение политического: критические дебаты в Европе’, Индекс безопасности, Т. 14. 4, сс. 25‒40. [Makarychev, A. S. (2008) ‘Security and the Return of the Political: the Critical Debates in Europe’ [Bezopasnost' i vozvrashchenie politich-eskogo: kriticheskie debaty v Evrope], Se-curity Index, Vol. 14, 4, pp. 25‒40. (In Russ.)].

Макарычев, А. С. (2013) ‘Онтологическая депрессия и отсутствующий центр идеологии: Россия глазами зарубежных экспертов’, Неприкосновенный запас, 6 (92), cc. 245‒251. [Makarychev, A. S. (2013) ‘Ontological Depression and the Absence of Ideological Centre: Russia as viewed by the Western Experts’ [Ontolog-icheskaya depressiya i otsutstvuyushchii tsentr ideologii: Rossiya glazami za-rubezhnykh ekspertov], NZ, 6 (92), pp. 245–251. (In Russ.)].

Мороз, А. Б. (2012). ‘Протестный фольклор декабря 2011. Старое и новое’, Антропологический форум, 16 online, cc. 173–192. [Moroz, A. B. (2012) ‘The “Folk-lore” of Protest Demonstrations in De-cember 2011. The Old and the New’ [Protestnyi fol'klor dekabrya 2011. Staroe i novoe], Antropologicheskij Forum, 16 online, pp. 173–192. (In Russ.)].

Нойманн, И. (2004). Использование «Другого»: Образы Востока в формировании европейских идентичностей; пер. с англ. И.А. Пильщикова. Москва: Новое издательство. [Neumann, I. (2004) Uses of the Other: ‘The East’ in European Iden-tity Formation [Ispol'zovanie «Drugogo»: Obrazy Vostoka v formirovanii evro-peiskikh identichnostei]. Moscow: Novoe izdatel'stvo Publ. (In Russ.)].

Радченко, Д. и Архипова, А. (2018) ‘Укроп и ватник: язык вражды российско-украинского конфликта как нападение и защита’, Ab Imperio, 1. cc. 191‒220. [Radchenko, D., Arkhipova, A. (2018) ‘The Dill and the Watchcoat: The Hate Speech of the Russo-Ukrainian Conflict as Attack and Defense’ [Ukrop i vatnik: “yazyk vrazhdy” rossiisko-ukrainskogo konflikta kak napadenie i zashchita], Ab Imperio, 1, pp. 191‒222. (In Russ.)].

Рансьер, Ж. (2006). На краю политического. Москва: Праксис. [Rancière, J. (2006) On the Shores of Politics [Na krayu politicheskogo]. Moscow: Praksis Publ. (In Russ.)].

Якушина, О. (2012). Теория секьюритизации в международных отношениях. URL: http://www.geopolitica.ru/article/teoriya-sekyuritizacii-v-mezhdunarodnyh-otnosheniyah-ch1#.VwRmaZyLRMw (дата доступа: 05.08.2018). [Yakushina, O. (2012) Theory of Securitization in In-ternational Relations [Teoriya sek'yuriti-zatsii v mezhdunarodnykh otnosheni-yakh]. Available at: http://www.geopolitica.ru/article/teoriya-sekyuritizacii-v-mezhdunarodnyh-otnosheniyah-ch1#.VwRmaZyLRMw (Accessed: 22 January 2019). (In Russ.)].

Butler, J. (2006) The Power of Mourning and Violence. London; New York: Verso.

Buzan, B., Wæver, O., de Wilde, J. (1998) Securi-ty: A New Framework for Analysis. Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Edkins, J. (1999) Poststructuralism and Interna-tional Relations. Bringing the Political Back In. Boulder. CO: Lynne Rienner.

Gelman, V. (2015) ‘The Politics of Fear. How the Russian Regime Confronts Its Opponents’, Russian Politics and Law, Vol. 53, 5–6, pp. 10–21.

Lipman, M. (2013) ‘The Kremlin Turns Ideologi-cal: Where This New Direction Could Lead’ in: Lipman, M., Petrov, N. (eds.) Russia 2025: Scenarios for the Russian Future. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 220–239.

Makarychev, A., Yatsyk, A. (2014) ‘A New Rus-sian Conservatism: Domestic Roots and Repercussions for Europe’, Notes Inter-nacionals, 93, pp. 1–6.

Makarychev, A. (2008) ‘Politics, the State, and De-Politicization’, Problems of Post-Communism, Vol. 55, 5, pp. 62–71.

Morozov, V. (2015) Russia’s Postcolonial Identi-ty. A Subaltern Empire in a Eurocentric World. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Rieber, R.W., Kelly, R.J. (1999) ‘Substance and Shadow: Images of the Enemy’ in: Rieber, R.W. (ed.) The Psychology of War and Peace: the Image of the Enemy. New York: Plenum Press.

Robinson, N. (2014) The Political Origins of Rus-sia's “culture Wars”. Limerick: University of Limerick.

Žižek, S. (1998) ‘A Leftist Plea for “Eurocen-trism”’, Critical Inquiry, Vol. 24, 4, pp. 991–993.

Žižek, S. (2004) The Lesson of Rancière in: Rancière, J. The Politics of Aesthetics. London & New York: Continuum, pp. 72–75.

Published

2019-07-11

How to Cite

Olga Kuznetsova О. К. /, & Dmitryi Mihailov Д. М. /. (2019). MILITARIZATION OF THE ENEMY IMAGE IN THE MODERN RUSSIAN SOCIO-POLITICAL DISCOURSE. Bulletin of Perm University. Political Science, 13(2), 7–26. Retrieved from http://press.psu.ru/index.php/polit/article/view/2355

Issue

Section

Статьи