political myths. Myths are political Myths of political and public life

Federal Agency for Education GOU VPO

Kemerovo State University

Belovsky Institute (branch)

Department of Social Sciences

Test

By discipline: Political science

Subject:Political mythology

Completed by: student Nurmagambetova A.S.

Checked: K. and. n. Verchagina I. Yu.

Belovo 2010

Introduction

Chapter 1. The study of the concept of political mythology

1 Myth and reality

2 The space of politics as an active space of myths

Chapter 2. Political mythology: eternity and modernity

1 Specific types of political myths

2 Psychology and theory of mythomania

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

The society of the transitional period, which is going through the modern world, has a need for new myths.

In society, there are certain social expectations, the need for such ideas about the world and the social environment that would help a person survive in new conditions. These ideas are necessary for understanding the new situation and the processes that are taking place in society. They allow you to find simple and clear answers to complex questions.

Myths are embedded deep in the subconscious of people who need clear, understandable images that clearly explain to them the processes that they face daily. Myths have advantages over reality. First, they are consonant with our ideas and emotions. Secondly, they are virtual. Thirdly, unlike reality, they can be easily changed. These advantages and properties of myths make them a universal tool for influencing mass consciousness.

Who is more in need of myths - the authorities or society? On the one hand, myth-making should be present in the activities of the state, especially if society is limited in access to political information. Each state should have its own myths, and their direction and content will be determined by the form of the political regime. Mythologization requires everything - the main directions of politics, ideas, interests and values.

But society also needs myths no less: it seeks to free itself from the analysis and processing of political information and is interested in receiving ready-made and optimistic forecasts of the future. So, both the government and society need myths, which means that as democracy develops, political myths do not disappear, only the role, mechanisms of formation and the degree of their impact on society change. In this sense, talk about the virtuality of our world, "virtual" politicians and parties is a reality.

Political mythology is not a new subject of science and philosophy. Most of the studies of myth are devoted to its archaic forms, and anthropologists (Taylor, Fraser), ethnologists (Malinovsky, Durkheim), social psychologists (Durkheim), sociolinguists (Bart), social philosophers (I.S. Gurevich), political mythology proper , in fact, few were interested. A special place in these studies is occupied by the work of E. Cassirer "The Myth of the State".

The space of politics has become the most active space of myths and mythology.

aimThis test is to study the features of mythology in politics.

To achieve the goal, the following tasks:

To study the essence of political mythology;

To study the types of political mythology;

To study the psychology and theory of political mythomania.

Chapter 1. The study of the concept of political mythology

.1 Myth and reality

mythological consciousness behavior politics

The virtual world is created in society by manipulating information and public consciousness. Hiding information, dosed information, misinformation, selective information, rumors, hints - all these techniques and technologies for creating myths and virtual reality. With the help of myths, you can mobilize society, release the energy of the masses and direct it in the right direction. It has been noted that the more artificial tasks the rulers set for society, the more myths they are forced to construct and impose on society.

In the ideology of modern times, the concept of myth is used to refer to various kinds of illusory representations that have an impact on the mass consciousness. Therefore, the political myth can be interpreted as a static image based on beliefs and allowing ordering and interpreting facts and events, structuring the vision of the collective present and future. H.G. Tkhagapsoev writes that one of the important features of the myth is that it performs the functions of modeling social life, its phenomena and processes: history, culture and politics, the present, past and future, while blurring and erasing the boundaries between the real and the virtual. He believes that the myth is an effective means of social and mental construction, and therefore - a means of manipulating people's consciousness; myth in our time acts as an integral element of politics, its ideas and technologies. A special place is occupied by the political myth, in which knowledge and understanding of politics is replaced by images, symbols, fictions, legends and belief in them.

When dealing with political technologies and working with mass consciousness, the question always arises of whether there are myths, the impact of which on mass consciousness is universal.

In the everyday sense, myths are, first of all, ancient, biblical and other tales about the creation of the world and man, as well as stories about the ancient deeds of Greek and Roman gods and heroes. One of the common scientific definitions mythology is: “Mythology is a fantastic reflection of reality in primitive consciousness, embodied in the creativity characteristic of antiquity, and myth is a narrative that arose in the early stages of history, the images of which were an attempt to generalize and explain various phenomena of nature and society.”

Man from the earliest times had to comprehend the world around him. Mythology also acts as the earliest form of perception, understanding of the world and oneself by primitive man, corresponding to ancient and especially primitive society. H.G. Tkhagapsoev believes that the myth is one of the most important products of consciousness and social creativity that determine life, the spiritual world and the behavioral dispositions of modern man. The semantic boundaries of the myth are so wide and mobile, and its functions and structural forms are so diverse that it is difficult to give a specific, meaningful and operational definition of myth - one has to limit oneself to stating that it belongs to the most general form of human spiritual activity, to consciousness, which in itself indicates to its universality. Mythology is expressed in the construction of a virtual space that repeats the original structure of the world. Myths are re-actualized in the virtual space, which contributes to the revival of the finished historical experience. The study of a wide range of myths made it possible to establish that in the myths of various peoples of the world - with their extreme diversity - a number of themes and motives are repeated.

1.2 The space of politics as an active space of myths

Specialists in political technologies are increasingly turning to the knowledge of depth psychology. It is the knowledge of the intricacies of working with myths that helps the successful conduct of election campaigns.

For example, given the knowledge of myths and their properties, it is possible to prepare such a form and content of messages that will bypass all the “perception filters” of voters and directly influence their behavior. One of the main properties of a myth is that there is no causal hierarchy in it at all. This blurs and removes all boundaries between cause and effect, desired and actual, reality and illusion, fact and fiction.

Another important property of a myth is that it cannot be verified. It should also be noted that events in a myth take place outside the framework of a logical and rational judgment, and at the same time all events in a myth are significant and interconnected. According to a number of researchers, a myth is a special condition for communication, since it has a listener, but no author of the message. For this reason, the myth becomes irrefutable, since there is no one to argue with. The myth can be considered as a certain operator of universality, since it is confirmed by phrases like "everyone says so, thinks so", "everyone thinks so", "everyone knows about it".

The main function of the myth is that for voters, as it used to be for an archaic person, it brings order into chaos, introduces predictable lines into a completely unpredictable world around. The myth also overestimates the stability of the surrounding world, giving rise to positive and negative lines. In any society, myth and fairy tale are often the most important information. One of the tasks of mass communications is to create a certain (required) image for a person, organization, state, etc. This task is solved most effectively when the impact occurs at the subconscious level. It must be understood that effective communication does not so much set new messages as it connects to the ideas already existing in the mass consciousness. A myth is exactly the type of information that is present at a deep level in each of us, and the task is to activate this symbolism in a direction that is beneficial for the communicator.

Considering that the mass consciousness accepts only clear pictures of the world, during the pre-election struggle, parties and politicians adjust to certain myths. Left parties are actively exploiting the mythology of socialism. The right actively uses the mythology of the Western world. The ruling parties include state myths in their arsenal. The mythologization of images of politicians in elections also enhances the impact on the mass consciousness.

Research and observations of E.V. Grishina, A.P. Sitnikov in the framework of election campaigns of various levels show that most of the pre-election plots and scenarios fit into the seven main archetypal myths. And connecting to these myths is the most effective in terms of influencing the mass consciousness. These are myths about a conspiracy, about a golden age, about a hero-savior, about unity, about the justice of a higher being, about a father of peoples and about the heroic past of a nation.

The myth of the conspiracy interprets negatively perceived phenomena as the result of the secret action of the forces of darkness. These can be "enemies of the people", agents of secret special services, sects, conspirators, etc. The covert actions of representatives of these insidious organizations are necessarily aimed at conquering or destroying a group, society, state, person. Since the conspiracy is created by demonic forces, it is possible to resist them using any means of struggle. To fight the dark forces you need to unite.

The myth of unity is based on the opposition of "friends" - "enemies", "ours" - "strangers", "we" - "they". They or, otherwise, enemies are the cause of all our disasters and misfortunes. "They" seek to take away our values, and therefore salvation lies in unity and opposition to "them." We must unite and come to a happy life together.

The myth of the golden age either calls for a return to the origins of a bright past, where love, equality, fraternity reigned, where the world was simple and understandable, or calls to a bright future, considering previous periods as “prehistory”, the existence of which is justified only to the extent that how she prepared this ideal future. A hero can lead us into the golden age.

The myth of the hero-savior endows specific characters with charismatic features. The hero must have the gift of a prophet, the unsurpassed talent of a warrior commander, and the highest moral qualities. He acts, sets an example, inspires steadfastness, transforming a certain national type, a model. He is distinguished by tremendous strength, but this strength is not quantitative, but qualitative, and physical strength is accompanied by moral strength. He has such qualities as calmness, steadfastness, simplicity, complacency, modesty, restraint of character, inner freedom. He embodies love, kindness to people, inspires even mercy to defeated enemies. The main task of the hero is to fight enemies and overcome obstacles.

The myth about the father of nations tells us about a just and kind politician (father) who takes care of his people. He knows in detail about the problems of people, about their hard lot and is ready to help them. He fights with his deceitful and corrupt environment for the happiness of the people. It is a symbol of consciousness, reason, sophisticated thought. He is a real strategist.

The myth of a just higher being is based on the fact that God sees everything and will definitely help us. We have patrons in heaven and they will not leave us in trouble. They will reward us for our suffering.

The myth about the heroic past of the nation, the people says that our great ancestors lived on this land. They were special people, they performed feats, valiant deeds. They were distinguished by intelligence, ingenuity and resourcefulness. We are proud of them, they did everything to make future generations (us) live better.

These seven myths are universal to use in any election campaign. With the help of these myths, it is possible to "translate" the majority of electoral plots into pictures of a simplified order. Mythological interpretations make it much easier for the mass consciousness to operate with the image of a politician, make it more understandable and predictable.

Thus, the analysis of regularities and forms of communication with the help of "connection" to archetypal myths in the election campaign deserves close attention and study. In theoretical terms, it can make a significant contribution to the development of approaches to electoral technologies, explain the reasons for the coming to power of certain political forces, help understand the psychology of the masses, and in practical terms, successfully develop strategies, tactics and individual messages within the framework of election campaigns. .

Chapter 2. Political mythology: eternity and modernity

.1 Specific types of political myths

Historical myth is a powerful political weapon, moreover, there are probably more myths in history than reliable facts, traditions and legends - myths that themselves have become facts of history.

The sublimation of history (“heroic feat”) is an effort of consciousness to rise above reality, and above all to remove the negative and unworthy from the past, which, even without any special fiction, already turns history into a myth about the past. Myth in history provides a "link of times": the glorification of the past prepares the heroic present and future. Myth turns out to be a means of social mobilization if society is unable to solve its problems rationally and without neurotic efforts, and, consequently, without their mythologization. When this or that myth becomes the organizing and mobilizing social principle, one can speak about the effectiveness of mythology, but one has to admit the undoubted weakness of society, which cannot do without it.

The stimulating properties of myths are largely explained by the emotionality of the myth, its direct sensuality, which allows you to replace the actual forms of social stimulation with transformed ones, which is why the myth becomes a strong individual and collective dope, makes you live and work in a state of passion, in constant tension. "Five-year plan - in four years", "overfulfillment of the plan", "we will catch up and overtake", the mythology of the growing pathos: "leading worker", "drummer", "hero of labor", "Stakhanovite" turned the business life of society into a "heat of passions", which it could not withstand for a long time and it became fictitious, turning into a myth, especially since one-day myths arose and disappeared against the backdrop of grandiose historical myths about the construction of a new society, the creation of a new people (Soviet) and a new social formation. The connection between these two levels of mythology was provided by special instrumental myths of the middle level: from the arsenal of myths about heroes - “beacons”, labor, myths about outstanding production workers, about wise omniscient leadership, its guiding force, the power of the state, etc.

In fact, the incentive system, which could be recognized as one of the effective methods of management, turns out to be myth-making; it provided, along with real achievements, hyper-exploitation, manipulation, cruel coercion and unbridled demagoguery.

In epochs of high and all the more spasmodic political activity, the presence of a myth deeply determines the state of public and individual consciousness, and bursts of myth-making are especially strong in periods of crisis of historical breakdown - wars, revolutions, reforms. Mythological consciousness in such epochs is most mobile and differentiated.

The modern myth (unlike the traditional, archaic one) collides with the freedom of individual consciousness, which can accept or reject it. In a sufficiently active individual consciousness, a myth can arise and function before it can become collective. Myth and myth-making can be conscious, individual in origin, come from one or another person (leader, ideologist, initiator) or a group of persons representing some political or other force, since rationalization of myth and myth-making is possible. If we talk about a modern myth, and even more so a political one, then it can be purposeful, designed to cultivate illusions, heroics, the greatness of a leader or any idea, create a fictitious, illusory reality that has to be reckoned with, and therefore, move away from reality. Therefore, in the mythology of both the past and our time, the conscious and the unconscious, the rational and the irrational are combined. The rational beginning in this case is usually associated with a deliberate plan, the irrational - with an unreasonable perception and the spread of a myth. The emotionality of the myth, the craving for illusions, the thirst for consolation and a sense of reliability affect the stage of the unconscious.

Being a symbolic, transformed form of reality, the myth turns out, according to E. Cassirer, one of the symbolic forms of culture created by imagination and rethinking of reality, like the creation of art. Mythology, myth-making is a kind of art of creating fictitious likenesses of true reality.

The rational forms of myth include international mythological universals, such as the omnipotence of Reason among the Enlighteners, the cult of nature and history among the Romantics, the connection between religion and the national principle (A. Schlegel), the historical and social functions of feeling and aesthetics in Novalis, the combination of the omnipotent sovereign and his weak-willed environment, cosmism and rationalism of politics and power, a semblance of heaven and earth.

One of the most common myths about power, along with the most ancient myths - the myths of people's rule, the indisputability of the law, the sovereignty of the people, the ruler, infallibility (of the Pope, the modern political leader), and many others. - the myth of the state. He played and continues to play a major role in politics and received a fundamental political and philosophical justification. Its essence is in proving the unusual nature of the state, its transcendental nature, i.e. the ability to ascend to the highest values, embody them and surpass the functions of other political formations.

The cult of the state has rich traditions - from the divine predestination of state power to the apology of absolutism and totalitarianism.

2.2 Psychology and theory of mythomania

In every era of mythologizing history (past, present, future), mythomania arises in society and its bright representatives (Nietzsche, Wagner), chroniclers and prophets appear. For political parties myth-making is one of the main specialties, an indispensable component of social design: a thirst for faith, hope and promise, indestructible irrationality is an integral part of attempts to cognize the unknowable political present and unknowable political future.

General scheme psychological foundations of mythological consciousness and behavior is presented as follows:

.Formation of individual and collective mythological consciousness, emotional and sensual aspect.

irrational stage. Situational affects and emotions (for example, the occurrence of an incomprehensible and undesirable event; the appearance of a symbol - “enemy”, “alien”, etc.; the appearance of hearing, the onset of panic, etc.) - emotional, instinctive, sensual reaction - an emotional impulse to setting consciousness to the perception of fictitious information and the formation of false associative links, preparing the transition to the choice of behavior and decision making.

Pathogenic variant: hypertrophied emotionality - increased reactivity - emotive behavior (panic, fear, individual or collective hysteria, neurosis and psychosis).

Functioning of mythological consciousness. Movement from situational to stable states of false consciousness; the rationalized stage of the formation of ideas, beliefs, norms, values - the formation of public opinion, mass actions, movements, parties, associations on a mythological basis. At the same time, a direct connection of a specific emotion with a certain myth is not necessary, often some general emotional background is enough (for example, dissatisfaction with the state of affairs, irritation, rejection of any ruling person), the rest is a matter of fantasy, deliberate hints or rumors.

Disorders of collective consciousness: pathological reactivity, individual and collective hysteria, neurosis and psychosis (spy mania, search for enemies, conspiracies, ideological and political apostates, heretics, etc.). In this negative version (conspiracy theories, intrigues of enemies, heterodox and dissidents), the conscious stimulation of nationalist, ideological, political and other prejudices is the justification for intolerance, persecution, and repression.

Conscious myth-making can also orient public consciousness in a positive direction (myths of social, economic, political development, ideas of desirable and beneficial). The function of the myth is to objectify individual and collective emotions and their transformation into a kind of social experience, into a system of positive social values. Freedom, equality, law, progress are both achievements and illusions. Myth frees from knowledge, from mental efforts associated with the perception of the world. The myth thus frees its bearer from individuality with its obligations - self-knowledge, critical orientation of consciousness, objective self-assessment, from that individuality that the myth dissolves in general opinion, in established and, as a rule, conditional ideas.

The ratio of rational and irrational is not reduced to the displacement of irrational principles by rational ones. It is much more complicated: both principles interact in the mythological consciousness. Another important - protective - function of the myth. Non-rationalized direct sensual, emotional perceptions of psychological and other influences and responses to it form a protective "buffer zone" between a person and his environment. In this zone there is a flash of direct reactions and immediately the process of generalizing conclusions begins. So, for example, a message that traumatizes the mind (about some embezzler or fraudster) can lead to a common logical error: a hasty and unreasonable generalization, to the conclusion (“all “they” are officials, certain bosses, people of any nationality - crooks"). There is an outburst of emotion followed by a widespread collective myth. For all the irrationality of the specific mechanisms of the "protective zone", its ecological, therapeutic function is quite rational, although, in essence, it is this rationality that forms the myth.

Myth gravitates toward the discovery of a certain secret, the mystery of being, which allows it to be explained, and therefore orients itself towards the expectation of events that may or may not exist, i.e. waiting for a miracle. In natural myth, this is a calculation for omens, for the exhortation of supernatural forces, gods or idols. In politics - faith in communication, obligations, oaths and other mysterious, from the point of view of their feasibility, promises. Of course, the mythology of political riddles - all sorts of guiding ideas, programs, slogans - by no means excludes the sincerity of projects, intentions and expectations. Whether they come true or not does not change the essence of the magical technique of suggestion, which also opens the way to real accomplishments and mythology, from which it can be difficult to get out. The French researcher D. Dute defined myth as a personified collective desire.

A vivid example of such political magic is the pre-election and post-election process, which begins with riddles and ends either with their solution or with an even more confusing mythological situation of already unfulfilled and new promises.

This kind of magic is associated with the manipulative function of myth, which organizes political and other activities in a special way and begins with the cult of the hero-leader. He is the main "sorcerer", he creates a hierarchy of "people-magicians", very similar to the structure "high priest - his priestly environment". This is how the social generals of wizards appeared: in biology - Lysenko, in ideology - Suslov, in economics - heads of ministries and departments, in art - "the most talented poet of our era", the most outstanding musicians and artists, etc.

Political mythology also has its own secret writing: a special hidden meaning of reports, debates, speeches, publications, innocent formulas (“limited contingent”, “privatization”) and the secrecy of documents, compromising evidence, etc. that are not subject to publicity. Mythology, like politics, is a communicative process in which the word can be used not in its own, but in a symbolic sense, capable of generating an illusory consciousness, and the direct meaning of the word takes on a symbolic meaning (“father of the people”, “leading and guiding force”) . Political leaders run the risk of becoming like the sorcerers of archaic communities when they use the language of allegories, spells and magic formulas (propaganda slogans), promise healing of social ailments, guess the will of historical destinies, predict the future and rule on behalf of higher powers - the people, the laws of society and history.

Myth is a powerful means of suggestion, a political weapon capable of subordinating, grouping and directing people, forming parties, movements from them and educating fighters for an idea.

In the political spectrum of any country, there will always be parties of blunt-pointed and pointed-pointed ones who will captivate adherents with undeniable mythology. But even a fairly serious policy is not complete without a certain dose of myth-making. Otherwise, it is impossible to explain, for example, the appearance of one or two dozen applicants for any one post. Political choice, like any choice, is not without illusions, deceitful promises and deceived expectations. This is an objective phenomenon generated by the subjective and probabilistic principles of the political process. Finally, some of the candidates deliberately mystify voters, deliberately planting myths about themselves.

Mythology serves as a means of social organization with the corresponding myths (order, freedom, justice, historical heritage, bright future, true path, historical vocation, state power). The power of myth parallels rational forms of power, approaches and competes with them and often penetrates them. “... The images in which the myth lives are never perceived as images. They are not considered symbols, but reality. There is no desire to criticize or reject them; they must be accepted without a shadow of a doubt.”

Myth is not just an inevitable shadow side of reality. In politics, it especially often goes over to its side illuminated by knowledge and is consciously cultivated as an effective irrational means of solving rational political problems. Therefore, once debunked, a myth is reborn, takes on new forms and does not disappear. That is why it is so important to recognize and suppress it, in the hope of minimizing myth-making.

Conclusion

Political mythology - mythological consciousness, emotionally colored, sensual representation of political reality, replacing and displacing the real idea of it and its true knowledge. In politics, the consciousness of leaders is especially strong. Myth replaces the objective in politics with its subjective perception, subjective image, internally meaningful, essential in politics - external and fictional.

The modern political myth meets the eternal aspirations of man, but, unlike the archaic one, it is relevant and specific, characteristic of the time itself. This is a myth about a great leader, a wise policy, the expectation of change. Usually it disappears along with changes in circumstances and the passage of time, and often with disappointment in the object of veneration or the discovery of its true appearance. Nevertheless, the myth is widely cultivated in politics, sometimes persistently inculcated and exploited as a strong argument for legitimizing power and politics. Since the myth becomes the property of the collective consciousness, it forms a certain worldview, psychological and ideological attitudes that have the persistence of prejudice.

The myth establishes fictitious causal relationships between real objects, generates false objects (heroic images of ordinary political figures), legends about the glorious past, connects reality with fiction, introduces fictional relationships into the true fabric of political relations.

Myth replaces real knowledge, and therefore political mythology is not cultivated by any politics. Political mythology is invoked by internally weak or vicious politics, it is lived out in a democratic and open society that has access to political information, mature enough to judge genuine political events, relationships and prominent figures in politics, not to expect any political miracle and not count on it.

List of used literature

1.Brandes, M.E. Ideology and myth: common features./ M.E. Brandes.// Political science.- No. 4.- 2003.- pp. 45 - 59.

.Kravchenko, I.I. Political mythology: eternity and modernity./ I.I. Kravchenko.// Questions of Philosophy.- №1 .- 1999.- p.3 - 17.

.Political science: encyclopedic Dictionary./ Ed. Yu.I. Averyanova.- M.: Publishing House of the Moscow Commercial. un-ta.- 1993.- 431s.

.Sitnikov, A.P. Myths and their role in electoral behavior. / A.P. Sitnikov, E.V. Grishin. / / Philosophical sciences. - No. 11. - 2008. - p. 135 - 143.

.Shcherbakov, A.E. Place of myth in political ideology./ A.E. Shcherbakov.// Polis (Political Studies).- No. 4.- 2003.- p.175 - 180.

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

See what "Political Myths" is in other dictionaries:

MYTHS POLITICAL- (Greek mythos word) stable false, uncritical, emotionally colored images and ideas about political events, phenomena and processes. Political myths are a powerful tool for manipulating political consciousness. ... ... Political Dictionary-Reference

For a long time existing in the public consciousness (in Russia and abroad) and periodically appearing on the pages of printed publications, information from the history and modernity of St. Petersburg does not correspond to reality. Some of them: ... ... Wikipedia

Newspaper report about the Red Terror in Vitebsk. Red terror mass repressions carried out by the Bolsheviks during the Civil War in Russia against the aristocracy, officers, bourgeoisie, priests, opposition parties, individuals ... ... Wikipedia

Main article: Civil War Storming of the Winter Palace in Russia. A frame from the feature film "October" 1927. The Bolshevik regime in Russia has always tried to justify its activities by the need to create true order from the chaos of anarchy ... Wikipedia

POLITICAL STEREOTYPES AND MYTHS- - schematized, as a rule, emotionally colored and perceived without evidence, as an axiom, ideas about a particular subject of politics, a social or political phenomenon. P. s. and m. can be folded under ... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy

CULTURE POLITICAL- a set of individual positions and orientations of participants in a given political system; the subjective sphere that forms the basis of political actions and gives them meaning (G. Almond, G. Powell). The concept of political culture was introduced in ... ... Political Science: Dictionary-Reference

I Ancient Greece, Hellas (Greek Hellás), the general name of the territory of the ancient Greek states that occupied the southern Balkan Peninsula, the islands of the Aegean Sea, the coast of Thrace, the western coastal strip of Asia Minor and spread their ... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

I Medicine Medicine is a system of scientific knowledge and practice aimed at strengthening and maintaining health, prolonging people's lives, and preventing and treating human diseases. To accomplish these tasks, M. studies the structure and ... ... Medical Encyclopedia

ANCIENT GREECE- the territory in the south of the Balkan Peninsula (see also the articles Antiquity, Greece). The history of DG covers the period from the beginning. II millennium BC at the beginning. I millennium AD Geography and ethnography Phaistos disk. 17th century BC (Archaeological Museum in Heraklion, ... ... Orthodox Encyclopedia

Wikipedia has articles about other people named Zaitsev Alexander. Zaitsev Alexander Iosifovich A.I. Zaitsev in 1974 Date of birth: May 21, 1926 (1926 05 21) Place of birth ... Wikipedia

Books

Political myths about Soviet biologists. O. B. Lepeshinskaya, G. M. Boshyan, conformists, Lamarckists and others, A. I. Shatalkin. The book examines the scientific, ideological and political aspects of the post-war confrontation between Soviet scientists in biology and the subsequent reflection of the tragic events associated with this in…

Home > Fairy tale

Political myths A political myth is a myth used to achieve political goals: the struggle for power, the legitimization of power, the exercise of political domination. Used as an instrument of political struggle, political myths have a tremendous impact on the whole society. Political mythology could be called applied mythology, since behind any political myth there are always completely material interests of certain individuals and groups. The peculiarity of the political myth is that it always strives to become a reality. Those individuals and groups that exploit this myth are extremely interested in this. Attempts to change reality often ended tragically. But, on the other hand, without these attempts there would be no history. Gustave Lebon wrote: “All our artistic, political or social concepts certainly bear the powerful imprint of illusions. Man sometimes throws these illusions to ashes at the cost of terrible upheavals, but he is always forced to pull them out again from under the ruins. Without these illusions, he would not have been able to get out of the state of primitive barbarism, and without them he would soon fall back into the same state. All these are empty shadows, the daughters of our dreams, but they forced the peoples to create everything that now constitutes the glory of art and the greatness of our civilization. The main factor in the evolution of peoples has never been truth, but always error. The illusions that Le Bon writes about are political myths - the true "locomotives" of progress. Political myths can be divided into two main types. The first type is technological myths that are created to implement momentary political tasks. For example, when the process of sovereignization of the republics was going on in the USSR, the democrats, in order to justify the "independence" of Russia, came up with the myth that Russia "feeds" the union republics and therefore lives poorly. “It is worth getting rid of this burden, and the Russians will live in prosperity,” the supporters of “independence” argued. Today, few people remember this myth, but in those years it played a role. There are many examples of such one-day myths. The life of these myths is short, because they are based on market changes in the public consciousness, on emotional impulses, without affecting the deep layers of the subconscious. Technological myths can be quite effectively combated by exposing them on a rational level, creating counter-myths, and so on. In this confrontation, the winner is the one who works more competently and has comparable or superior resources to the enemy. There are other kinds of myths that can be called "eternal". They are based on archetypes and are almost impossible to destroy because these myths are deeply rooted in the mentality of the people. They can either be updated, i.e. bring to life, or drive back into the depths of the subconscious, putting them a powerful barrier. For example, Hitler actively used ancient Germanic archetypes in his propaganda. After the defeat of Germany, the Germans drove the "demons" into the subconscious and put a barrier in front of them in the form of a "guilt complex", which still keeps them from even a hint of a possible revenge. Germany is now realizing its ambitions in the economy. The myth of the superiority of the Germans disguised itself as politically correct clothes, but did not disappear anywhere. Mercedes and BMW conquer the world even more successfully than Tigers and Panthers. The strength of "eternal" myths is in their ability to return to life in a different guise. In Russia, for example, the myth of a “bright communist tomorrow” in the late 1980s and early 1990s was replaced by the myth of “capitalist abundance”, which was to come with the start of market reforms. In turn, the communist myth is only a renaming ancient myth about the Golden Age. Similar "adventures" in the course of historical development undergo other "eternal" myths. Politicians have always been interested in the practical side of the problem we are considering: how to use myths to your advantage? Ukrainian researcher G. Pocheptsov believes that a myth is a universal construction that can always be filled with specific content. “The myth appears before us as a scenario for the development of an image, in which the previously empty roles of friends and enemies of the protagonist are immediately filled. The myth is a whole construction, this is its fundamental advantage, since a large number of the necessary characteristics will now pop up automatically. In the case of connecting a myth, there is no longer a need to generate entire texts, one can only hint, suggesting the essential characteristics that lead the mass consciousness to this or that myth. The construction of a myth really has a number of universal features, which allows political strategists to construct artificial technological myths, which have already been discussed above. However, the point is not only in the construction of the myth. The technological myth is by and large a pseudo-myth, since it does not rely on archetypes. Meanwhile, they are the energetic nourishment of the myth. Each nation has its own archetypal features, because. archetypes were formed at the beginning of its history. Having formed, they accompany the people throughout the entire historical path. Therefore, in order to become a mythological character, a politician must not only create some kind of construction, but fit into some kind of national, “eternal” myth. The most important function of the political myth is the legitimization of power institutions and holders of supreme power in the country. The myth is the basis of the legitimacy of power and its guardian at the same time. Therefore, an attack on the basic political myths of this or that state is an attack on the foundations of the legitimacy of this state. Thus, the destruction of Soviet mythology ultimately led to the de-legitimization of the power of the CPSU and the collapse of the Soviet Union. In other words, myths can act not only as guardians of legitimacy, but also as its destroyers. In the USSR, Soviet myths were shattered into a whole system of "democratic" counter-myths. The ideologists of the massacre of Soviet mythology were the “sixties”. The technology of destroying Soviet myths is considered in more detail in the third chapter. National myths Among the "eternal" myths, a special place is occupied by national myths. It is they who constitute the "soul of the people", if we follow the terminology of Lebon. Formed during the formation of the nation, national myths accompany it throughout history. National self-consciousness is formed on the basis of myths and is inseparable from them. According to G. Pocheptsov, “all bright events from the point of view of the nation are mythological through and through”1. It would be more accurate to say that historical events become significant for posterity when they are inscribed in the structure of the national myth. In this sense, the history of a nation is a myth it has created about itself. Historical events serve only as building material for the myth of the nation. As an example of historical mythmaking, let's take battle of Borodino. During the battle, the French, at the cost of huge losses, took Bagration's flashes, Raevsky's battery, but the Russian army did not take flight, but retreated in full battle order. Napoleon waited until the next day to wrest victory. Kutuzov, too, at first was going to continue the battle. But when the losses were calculated, it became obvious to the field marshal that the resumption of the battle was tantamount to the loss of the army. The Russians lost 58 thousand people on the Borodino field (the French 50 thousand)2. It was half of Kutuzov's army. Napoleon had another 30,000 guards, which never entered the battle, which finally convinced Kutuzov of the need to retreat. Napoleon, of course, regarded this as a flight and recorded another victory for himself. However, in Russian history, the battle of Borodino remained as a moral victory for the Russian army over the invaders. Of course, Russian writers played a big role in the mythologization of the battle - they immortalized this battle in their works. But the writer only responds to the public demand, clothe those ideas that roam in the minds into an artistic form. The myth existed even before it was artistically designed by the masters of the word. Why was the myth of Borodino born anyway? The Russian army challenged the most powerful monarch in Europe. “We retreated too long,” the poet would later write. Borodino was perceived as the last frontier, beyond which it was impossible to retreat. Moscow is behind us. It was the same "last and decisive battle", which was subsequently sung by the communists. By the way, this line from the "Internationale", written by a Frenchman, organically fit into the Russian historical archetype. "The last and decisive" was Borodino, before him Poltava, the Battle of Kulikovo, Battle on the Ice etc. The archetype of the "last and decisive battle" is an integral part of Russian national mythology. That is why Borodino was of such importance to the Russian army. It can be objected that Moscow was surrendered after all. In reality, yes. But not in myth. Napoleon occupied Moscow and settled in the Kremlin. However, he did not wait for the keys of the city. “But my Moscow did not go,” wrote Lermontov. Moreover, Muscovites themselves set fire to the city so that the enemy would not get it. In the mythological space, Moscow remained undefeated. The enemy left with nothing, or, as Russian fairy tales say, "slurping without salt." A striking historical fact - a military victory turned into a defeat for the conqueror. The national myth crushed the "great army", which was not afraid of any guns. There are curious details in Lermontov's poem. For example, he expressed the Russian archetype of the enemy with the line "the French moved like clouds." In Russian epics, enemies were often represented as "darkness-darkness", a faceless horde of "basurmans". Clouds are associated with a dark, terrible and hostile force. Thus, the mythology of the "last and decisive battle" in the Battle of Borodino found its historical embodiment. During the Second World War, this mythology was borrowed by the communists. It is no coincidence that the Great Patriotic War was declared. It was a direct reference to the Patriotic War of 1812, as evidenced by the portrait of Kutuzov, which Stalin hung in his office. True, Stalin did not just borrow, but "creatively modified" the mythology of the war of 1812, based on his practical needs. The historical school of M. Pokrovsky, which dominated before the German attack on the USSR, did not attach much importance to the Patriotic War of 1812, explaining the defeat of Napoleon by his own mistakes and the cold winter (Napoleon himself, having arrived in Paris after the failure of the "Russian campaign", immediately introduced into circulation the version of the defeat his army from "General Zim"). Stalin did not like this. Therefore, the Communist Party issued "historical" resolutions on the mistakes of the Pokrovsky school, and Soviet scientists sat down to write a new history. First of all, the “genius commander and diplomat” M. Kutuzov was exalted (in the image of the “genius strategist” Kutuzov, the familiar profile of the “leader of peoples” was easily guessed). The retreat of the Russian army and the surrender of Moscow should have been interpreted as Kutuzov's "cunning plan" to lure the enemy into a trap, and not forced actions (according to the myth, Kutuzov foresaw Napoleon's collapse already during the council in Fili). Battle of Borodino historian E. Tarle at first described as the defeat of the Russian army, forced to retreat due to losses. But after the highest cry, he changed his point of view and began to prove that Napoleon was the first to withdraw his troops from the battlefield, i.e. admitted defeat. According to Stalin, Kutuzov retreated deliberately in order to lure Napoleon into a trap. Subsequently, Tarle justified himself: “Kutuzov’s strategy led to Borodin and then created a deeply conceived and unusually quickly carried out counteroffensive,“ ruining Napoleon. And the heroic behavior of the regular army in all combat battles with the enemy, the active assistance of the partisans, the popular character of the entire war, the consciousness of the complete justice of this war deeply penetrated into the people - all this, in turn, served as an indestructible bulwark for the emergence, development and victorious completion of the ingenious strategic combinations of Kutuzov. This myth was needed in order to present the tragic mistakes of the Soviet command as a “brilliant” plan, so that the millions of Soviet armies that surrendered were inspired by the resilience of their ancestors, so that even lost battles were considered as a guarantee of victory in the future. The strength of the Stalinist myth was also in the fact that it gave a clear image of the future. Soviet troops will drive Hitler all the way to Berlin, just as Napoleon was driven to Paris. “The Nazi fascist army can just as well be defeated and will be defeated, as the armies of Napoleon and Wilhelm were defeated,” Stalin stated in his speech of July 3, 1941. NAPOLEON ON THE RETREAT OF THE RUSSIAN ARMY Napoleon himself did not consider the retreat of the Russian army to be the reason for the failure of his campaign. “Kutuzov's retreat is the height of mediocrity. Winter killed us. We are victims of the climate. If they wanted to lure us inside the country, then it would be necessary to start with a retreat and not endanger Bagration's corps, i.e. not to keep his troops on too close to the border and, therefore, an extended front. There was no need to spend so much money on the construction of houses of cards on the Dvina. There was no need to concentrate so many warehouses there. Russians lived from day to day, without definite plans. They never managed to fight in time. I stayed too long in Moscow. If I had left it four days after joining it, as I thought to do when I saw the fire, then Russia would have perished. In general, Napoleon had a low opinion of the Russian military leaders: “What did this Kutuzov do? He risked the army near Moscow and is responsible for the Moscow fire. If the Russian soldiers had other commanders, then it would be possible to lead this army far”6. A special role in national mythology is played by the idea of the nation about its historical mission, about its destiny, place in history. Actually, the history of a nation is a struggle for one's place among other nations, for the fulfillment of the mission taken upon oneself. Thus, the Russian Empire defended "brothers in faith" from external aggression. Bulgarians, Serbs, Armenians, etc. used the protection of Russia. Sometimes this protection cost the "brothers in faith" sovereignty, but Russia never realized itself as an invader and aggressor. The Soviet Union acted as the defender of the "humiliated and insulted" of the whole world. Even while fighting in Afghanistan, the USSR remained a "stronghold of the world." There is no paradox in this. National Russian mythology did not allow a simple capture of Afghanistan. Another thing is "international debt". It is no coincidence that the word "duty" is used here. The Russian man was obliged to defend the Afghan revolution, since his mission was to bring liberation to the “humiliated and insulted” of the whole world. Similarly, American soldiers today are doing their "democratic duty" in various parts of the world. Post-Soviet Russia has not yet found its mission and is still in search. This is also reflected in Moscow's controversial foreign policy. On the one hand, Putin comes up with initiatives for Russia to join NATO, the WTO, and create a visa-free regime between European countries and Russia. On the other hand, he opposes the US operation in Iraq, cooperates with the countries of the "axis of evil", seeks to restore Russia's control over Georgia by force, and so on. These two strategies are fundamentally incompatible. You have to choose. Either play by the rules adopted in the West and integrate with it, or follow your own “special path”. Integration with the West is not supported by the corresponding political mythology, while the mythology of the “special path” is firmly rooted in the minds of Russians. Therefore, the second path will most likely be chosen. Among the national Russian archetypes, the archetype of the “good king” occupies a special place. The concept of the "tsar-father" was formed at the stage of formation of the monarchy in Russia. The tsar seemed “kind” because, in the words of the classic, he was “terribly far from the people” in every sense. The landowner was the direct owner and tormentor of the peasant, while the tsar personified a distant, some other and, I would like to believe, more just power. The myth of the "good tsar" was used not only by Russian monarchs. For example, the leader of the "ruthless Russian rebellion" Emelyan Pugachev adopted this myth, realizing what benefits it promises. Pugachev pretended to be Tsar Peter III, a kind guardian of the needs of the people, who was overthrown from the throne by an insidious wife. The restoration of the false Peter on the throne would mean the restoration of justice, and therefore Pugachev was very popular. In the 20th century, the debunking of the myth of "the good king" led the country to a revolution. On January 9, 1905, when the troops shot down a peaceful demonstration of workers heading to the Winter Palace with a petition to the autocrat, the myth of the “good tsar-father” was, in fact, shot down. Alexander Kerensky, an eyewitness to those events, wrote: “The events of Bloody Sunday produced a fundamental revolution in the thinking of the working masses, on whom propaganda had had little effect until that time. General Trepov and those who allowed him to commit this insane act severed the spiritual ties that bound the tsar and ordinary workers. From that moment on, revolutionary propaganda began to capture the hearts of people who had parted with the old myth and were suffering from a new one. FROM THE DIARY OF NICHOLAS II Nicholas II did not understand the importance of the events that went down in history as Bloody Sunday. This is evidenced by an entry in his diary: “January 9. Sunday. Hard day! Serious riots broke out in St. Petersburg as a result of the desire of the workers to reach the Winter Palace. The troops had to shoot in different parts of the city, there were many killed and wounded. Lord, how painful and hard! Mom came to us from the city right in time for mass. We had breakfast with everyone. Walked with Misha, Mom stayed with us for the night. The tsar did not even doubt that the troops were supposed to shoot at the workers. He did not understand that this was not an ordinary dispersal of the demonstration, but a significant political event. For him, it was just a "hard day". But neither the revolution nor the execution of the royal family did not put an end to the myth of the "good king." The myth found its new incarnation in the image of the “leader of all times and peoples” Stalin, day and night concerned about the needs of his subjects. In Russian political mythology, the “good tsar” is always surrounded by evil and vile people who intrigue him and profit at the expense of the country. In the days of the Moscow kingdom, these were "evil boyars", then landlords, in Soviet times - "enemies of the people." In our time, this role is assigned to the "oligarchs". From the very beginning of his reign, Putin successfully fit into the archetype of the “good tsar” opposing the “evil boyars” - the “oligarchs”, which earned him the fiery love of the people. When there was a “showdown” between the Kremlin and NTV, with all the sympathy for journalists, public opinion actually supported the authorities. For the simple reason that the Kremlin acted within the framework of national mythology - the "good tsar" Putin punished the "evil boyar" Gusinsky, who had strayed from the hands. And no appeals to the defense of "freedom of speech" could help. Democracy in Russia is ten years old, but autocracy... The strategic mistake of Media-MOST was that it based its propaganda on American mythology, opposing it to national Russian mythology. Naturally, the national myth turned out to be stronger. National myths have crushing power. In fact, they are indestructible. For seventy years in Soviet schools they taught that tsars were bad, but the archetype of the “good tsar” continued to live. For the past ten years, the Soviet period in the life of the country has been mixed with such dirt that it seemed that the mere reminder of it should cause people to shiver. But in reality, the majority treats the Soviet past with warmth and regrets the collapse of the USSR. No matter how much is written about the crimes of the Soviet government, the myth about the great mission that the Russian people shouldered in those years turns out to be stronger than the facts about executions, torture, camps, etc. Myth tightly squeezed the country in its tenacious embrace. The myth of the state The state is one of the grandest political myths. The word "state" is surrounded by legends, prejudices, a heap of all kinds of "theories" and, of course, myths. This is quite understandable. The origin and development of civilization was inseparable from the origin and development of the state. The history of mankind is the history of states. Without a state there is no history, no nation, no national mythology. Therefore, the concept of "state", the attitude of the population towards it play a crucial role in the history of the people. Let's make a reservation right away that the real state (ie the state machine, bureaucracy) has nothing in common with the subject of the myth about the state. The state referred to in the myths has never been and never will be. At least for the simple reason that the mythological state is an animated and deified being. Recall the common clichés of Soviet propaganda: the Soviet state took care of pensioners, fought for world peace, opened the way for talents, protected ordinary citizens from crime, punished traitors and traitors, glorified heroes, etc. Thus, the state was always in action, guarding the interests of its citizens. But this is not a lone hero, but rather some kind of supernatural, divine power. The supernatural nature of the Soviet state was reinforced by the cult of Lenin. The mausoleum served as a temple consecrating Soviet power. The state is a myth that is the cornerstone of national mythology. The bureaucratic machine is not a myth. This is a machine that lives by its own laws. But these are not the laws of myth. The destruction of the myth of the state lies at the heart of every revolution. Thus, the Bolsheviks, led by Lenin, came to power under the slogan of destroying the state as a machine of oppression. They were able to undermine faith in the divine origin of the power of the king. The state ceased to be a myth, becoming a machine. And the proletarians perceived the machine as a means of oppression and exploitation. The autocracy has lost its legitimacy. However, when the Bolsheviks came to power, they needed new myths. Revolution is a negation of myth, a revolt against it. “Revolution is a kind of cathartic act, in which the fullness of the world with politics is made obvious; she makes the world, and her whole language is functionally absorbed in this doing. By making the word completely political from beginning to end (as opposed to myth, whose word is political in the beginning and ultimately natural), the Revolution thus eliminates the myth. Revolution is identical with the absence of myth. Thus, the revolution destroys the myths and makes it easier to seize power. But it is no longer possible to hold on to power without new myths, without new grounds for legitimacy. The revolution does not provide such. In the absence of a new political mythology, a revolutionary government can only be kept in power by terror, as was the case during the French Revolution and the first years after October. Therefore, in order to strengthen the new government, it is necessary to stop the elements of the revolution. This can only be done with the help of a myth. Myth makes the world immobile, while revolution absolutizes change and movement. For example, Napoleon was able to defeat the revolution with the help of the national myth; Stalin created the cult of Lenin, thereby reviving the mythology of the governorship, and so on. The "democratic revolution" in Russia was also accompanied by the destruction of the myth of the Soviet state. After the establishment of a new political regime in 1993, the state created a class that was supposed to serve as its support - the oligarchs. But the oligarchs could not become the guardians of the foundations new Russia . They continued the revolutionary destruction of society. The oligarchs assumed the function of transforming the world around them, finishing off the Soviet myth. The apotheosis of their activity was 1996. However, by destroying the old myths, they did not create new ones. Yeltsin's power was losing legitimacy day by day. Therefore, there is a need to curtail the revolution and revive the myth of the state. On this wave, Putin came to power. To establish a new state mythology, it was necessary to put an end to the priestly caste, which carried out the ideological dismantling of the state. This caste was the oligarchic media empires. The largest and most influential of them were the empires of Gusinsky and Berezovsky. Therefore, immediately after Putin's inauguration, the authorities "ran into" MediaMOST. War was declared on the media, which undermined the myth of the state. The "family" that nominated Putin intended to carry out the project of creating a bureaucratic state. An attempt was made to construct an adequate mythology. The mythology of the bureaucratic system “is composed of two foundations: 1) the real and exclusive professional advantage of the bureaucracy over other elites, and 2) the absolutization-deification of this advantage, up to the deification of the state and the symbols of statehood themselves. The combination of these two foundations justifies for the public consciousness the sovereignty and non-accountability of the bureaucracy to the people and the eternity of its corporate right to power. The supreme symbol of the bureaucratic hierarchy is the head of state, who is also deified. The “deification” of Putin took place against the backdrop of the “deification” of the state. The concept of "state" was proclaimed the highest value, which no one will be allowed to encroach on from now on. Putin became the head and protector of the state. However, the absolutization of the state is beneficial not only to the bureaucracy. The “myth of the state” is also being used by the military corporation (this is how we will refer to the “siloviki” in Putin’s entourage, without making a distinction between the military and special services). It is quite difficult for the bureaucracy to contain the pressure of the military. “In relations with other elites, the bureaucracy easily absorbs the priestly corporation, but remains practically unprotected from the military aristocracy, especially in the presence of external threats. In the economic sphere, the bureaucracy is hopelessly outperformed by the oligarchies, given at least relative political stability, and therefore - under the threat from the military aristocracy - the bureaucracy is able to maintain the status of the ruling elite only in alliance with the oligarchy. The Russian "military aristocracy" seeks to seize the initiative from the bureaucracy by constructing external threats. by the most a prime example is the aggravation of the conflict with Georgia. On September 11, 2002, Putin, in his Bocharov Ruchey residence, after a meeting with the security forces, made an appeal on television in which he threatened Georgia with bombing its territory if it did not put an end to the militants in the Pankisi Gorge. The unprecedented propaganda campaign that unfolded after the president's speech aimed not only to put pressure on Georgia, but also to create a sense of external threats to Russia inside the country. The radical spokesman for oligarchic circles is the disgraced oligarch Boris Berezovsky. He created the Liberal Russia party and is playing a game of undermining the resurgent myth of the state by making Putin's "chekism" the target of his criticism. In fact, Berezovsky is leading revolutionary activities. It is no coincidence that he compared himself with Lenin in exile, and his party with the Bolshevik party. Its purpose is to prevent the re-creation of the myth of the state. At the same time, he himself turns into a mythological character. The first step towards this was the film "Oligarch", which tells about the difficult fate of a man who wants to be free in Russia and wages war with the Kremlin, i.e. with the state. This film is the first step towards turning Berezovsky into a myth, into a symbol of liberalism in Russian. Thus, in Russia, the process of restoring the myth of the state is not just going on. There is a struggle of several mythological constructions, which are covered by competing elites. The bureaucratic corporation creates its own state mythology, the "siloviki" create their own. Oligarchs benefit from liberal mythology. The central figure of all three constructions is President Putin, who appears before the people in the form of a superman, a hero. In the end, the elite group that will win him over to his side will be able to finally establish himself in power. But for this you need to win the war of myths.

Appeal to myths in politics in certain periods of historical development is typical for all states. It is associated with special socio-political and economic conditions that do not allow difficult problems at the expense of really existing means and force politicians with the help of myths to influence the mass consciousness of people and thereby distract them, at least for a while, from urgent and difficult to resolve contradictions.

An attempt in theory to present myths as something archaic, which has lost its significance in modern conditions, has not justified itself in practice. Reality proves that some myths disappear, others appear.

The replacement of some myths by others is a natural phenomenon for periods of revolutions and reformations. It is explained by the fact that political goals are changing radically and require faith in a particular idea, as well as support for relevant political actions on the part of the people.

The further society advances in its development, the more sophisticated and attractive myths become, the more difficult they are to recognize. Myths are becoming more and more topical and specific, meeting the needs of the time. Myths about “the wise policy of the government”, “about possible changes for the better”, etc. are used as a strong argument for the legitimization of power.

Researchers have shown interest in myths for a long time. E. Cassirer, Z. Freud, A. Rosenberg, J. Sorel, P. Sorokin, A. Camus and others were engaged in the study of this problem. However, the subject of their study was myths related to the sphere of culture. Of course, many of their arguments are quite applicable to political myths, since both of them have a common nature and similar properties: an uncritical, emotionally colored perception of the world, a combination of reality and fiction, the acceptance of a myth on faith without prior verification and analysis of its content.

However, political myths are a completely different phenomenon and cannot be considered as an integral part of human nature whose expulsion from people's lives would impoverish their existence.

Political myths are characterized by the following specific features:

They do not appear spontaneously, but are created artificially, consciously and purposefully;

They are based on collective aspirations and hopes realized and cultivated by politicians, assimilated by the mass consciousness;

They combine two heterogeneous qualities: sober calculation and fanatical faith, allowing politicians to free themselves from all moral barriers;

They are not amenable to destruction with the help of rational arguments, and therefore their assessment as unscientific knowledge is quite legitimate. Political myths are at best half-truths;

They are characterized by a direct connection with political reality, they are designed to justify one or another course of events, to ensure absolute confidence of people in the correctness of political actions being carried out;

Political myths appear much later than artistic myths, which is due to the creation of political structures and social differentiation.

Political myths are inherent in a certain contradiction,

On the one hand, they have a special stability, which is based on: the interdependence of the myth and the mass consciousness: the myth is created and supported by the mass consciousness, the mass consciousness is based on the myth; the vitality of the elements of the original consciousness, which has a significant impact on the nature of the perception of the myth and behavior (despite the intellectual and cultural evolution); people's interest in politics and the inability to detect its mythological character; awareness of the possibility of finding the meaning of one's own life with the help of a myth. With the stability of political systems, there are stable (main) myths that prescribe a certain system of values and ways of behavior to people (for example, in the USA, such myths are the myth of American democracy and free enterprise).

On the other hand, political myths are highly dynamic. They can disappear and be reproduced again depending on the respective needs.

What brings political myths to life in our time?

Firstly, a necessary prerequisite for the production and reproduction of myths is the existence of a collective mass consciousness, it is through it that collective desires are assimilated, which become the foundation for the creation of a political myth.

Secondly, for the appearance of myths, an appropriate psychological state of society is necessary, the presence of a tense situation when one can easily believe in persecuted enemies and a catastrophe, and when one wants to believe in it.

It is no coincidence that most researchers have come to the conclusion that there is a certain pattern - political myths are most easily established in countries where there are crisis situations, and people do not have a sufficient level of political culture. Under such conditions, any myths are assimilated, including contradictory, absurd and utopian ones.

However, the presence of this pattern does not exclude the establishment of political myths in countries with a favorable socio-political situation, where the desires and hopes of people as a collective unconscious, in need of appropriate formulation (including myth) act as a prerequisite.

political myths. Myths are political Myths of political and public life

Tutoring

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar Documents

See what "Political Myths" is in other dictionaries:

Books