For the first time the ideological concept “Russia – Noah’s Ark” was proposed for consideration in 2008 following the results of the Conciliar Hearing of the World Russian People’s Council (WRPC) in Yekaterinburg by Sergei Vladimirovich Pisarev, President of the Russian Entrepreneur Fund, at that time the co-chairman of the Yekaterinburg branch of WRPC. In 2009, the management of WRPC YB addressed the WRPC Bureau with a proposal to hold the Conciliar Hearing of WRPC on the subject “Russia – Noah’s Ark.”
In February 2010, there was a discussion on it in the “National Forecast” journal of “ITAR-TASS Ural” in the issue covering this subject. The political leadership of Russia articulated parts of this concept in its ideology in the recent years. The events of the early 21st century changed the situation in the world. Meanwhile, the views of the author of the “Russia – Noah’s Ark” concept shaped into something more clear in general. At the beginning of October 2014, “Regions of Russia” addressed a request to Sergei Pisarev to tell in more detail about its contents.
– What, in short, is the essence of the “Russia – Noah’s Ark” (RNA) concept?
– Briefly: preserving here in Russia the best of everyone and everything that the humanity has developed throughout its history, which is important and valuable for life, no matter what nationality you are, what religious denomination you belong to, what your politics preference is. The concept can become uniting for all strata of the Russia’s population and attractive for those living abroad.
It, theoretically, can unite people within the country and show the rest of the world that we are “different” in a good way. Russia, in addition to huge natural resources, can offer, and its neighbors as well, the entirely new idea of creating a society where global challenges are elevated to the rank of geopolitics and neutralized. Thus, ideally, “Noah’s Ark” should be the entire planet Earth. God created it and the human being for that very purpose. If not the whole Earth, then China or India, or America, or Europe could build its own Ark, apart from Russia. But it is up to their free choice – whereas we ought to initiate this work, regardless of their decision. Perhaps our example would be infectious to others? Maybe someone – other countries, peoples or persons – will decide to do it together with Russia?
– But earlier you and your partners used to promote a somewhat different concept – the so-called “Russian Doctrine” …
– Yes, “Russian Doctrine”, which appeared in 2005 (http://gosrf.ru/news/16282/), was needed to consolidate the Russian world. In the late 90s the Russian nation as a nation began to fall apart, and there appeared “Rossiyane” (citizens of Russia, as opposed to Russians). It turned out that all other nationalities remained, thank God. Other nations of Russia didn’t cease to be Chechens, Tatars, Bashkirs, Buryats. Nationalities were kind of canceled, but the only one that disappeared was Russians. There was an issue of consolidating the Russian nation as the state-forming, plus developing the patriotic meanings and concepts, instead of liberal ones discredited at the time.
That document, “Russian Doctrine”, naturally, based on Orthodox principles, was somewhat “for internal use”. And any product, including ideological, must be consumed both inside and outside its “place of birth”. For example, communism – it “worked” within the Soviet Union and throughout the world. Or liberal ideas – they were implemented in the West, where they had been born, and in other countries as well. Monarchy – the same thing. The national idea should also be “delicious”, it should be directed not only inwards. “Russian Doctrine” was not intended to meet this challenge.
– Did the doctrine run its course?
– Yes, it is a unique ideological product for consolidation of the modern Russian World. And it was built, naturally, on the basis of Orthodoxy. However, Orthodoxy, for obvious reasons, cannot be uniting for 100 per cent of the Russia’s population. Firstly, there are other denominations. On the other hand, among the so-called “orthodox believers”, atheists are still the majority. On Sunday you can go to Auchan, or to the church. And what percentage of Russians are in the store, and how many are in the church? At the same time, not even being ‘religious’ in its full sense, Russians, of course, are the bearers of the Orthodox traditions and the culture based on them. In this sense the preservation of orthodoxy is crucial for RNA.
– How did this concept appear?
– Any ideology arises on the basis of attempts to solve the problem. There is a problem of freedom – the liberal ideology appears as the answer. There is a problem of social justice – the communist ideology arises, etc. Every ideology gives answers to some questions. We proceed from the main challenges that exist today both for Russia and for the entire world. And we will seek their solution.
– What challenges are highlighted in the “Russia – Noah’s Ark” concept?
ECOLOGY
– First – challenges in the field of nature preservation. Information space is flooded with information that in the world the quality of water, soil and air is deteriorating more and more every year. The climate undergoes global changes. Floods, earthquakes, hurricanes become more frequent. Woods are disappearing, and their place is taken by endless dumps for human waste. If this is not stopped, it is possible to calculate when life on Earth would become impossible.
The second ecological challenge is a personal degradation, which is a direct consequence of destruction of a family, marriage, ethics, morality, and traditions. This destruction takes place through the introduction of various technologies at the state level as well, for example, juvenile laws or euthanasia, legalization of sodomy. Propaganda of violence, lechery, satanism is widely spreading. A tremendous number of acute problems that previously did not come to our minds are currently spreading on a really massive scale. Today, parents simply cannot explain to a child what is good and what is bad. The criteria are blurred, the value system has been destroyed. Lawlessness being passed for the norm occurs before our eyes – there is literally the destruction of a person from the inside.
The third challenge is the ecology (preservation) of public foundations. We see what is happening in the international relations. Previously, at least outwardly we heard the terms “right”, “justice”, “legality”. They have disappeared. Now it is the right of force, as in the jungle. Hypocrisy, lie, wild cruelty, hypocrisy again, lie again. Examples are the bombings of Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Syria, Ukraine… We briefly considered this theme taking the Crimea as an example at your site on 3/3/2014 in the paper “What is permissible for Caesar is not permissible for a bull” (http://www.gosrf.ru/news/13643/). Wherever the Western world interferes in, and today it seemingly represents the “ideal, the icon of morality”, the orders of unprecedented cruelty, violence and destruction are established. If the existing Western democracy has the highest degree of development, if these people act in that manner, what international law we can talk about? There is none of it. Today, the one who has nuclear weapons is the one who “has the right for international law.” Those who do not have them do not have the right as well. This is not normal.
IDEOLOGY
We need to save the best that was developed by the basic world ideologies – monarchical (of which I am a supporter), communist and liberal – over their history. But to save with a small reservation – not all ideologies as a whole, i.e. not the integral ideological complexes, but only the obviously useful to the individual and society that was accumulated in them.
– Do you think we should save these ideologies?
– Preserve and use the best that they have. There are pros and cons in each of these ideologies. Supporters tell only about the pros, and opponents see only the cons. Therefore, there is an endless conflict. In order to eliminate it, our proposal is: that supporters of each ideology should note only obviously good points of opponents at discussions, and should recognize altogether the bad as the bad. Example: during socialism there were prison camps and repression, it is wrong, so let’s make sure that this does not happen again. But in the USSR there was free education, free medical care, social security – and it is good and should be used. Let’s define together with representatives of every ideology what is good in them and what is bad. We cut off cons, and save what is good. Meanwhile, Russia is the only civilization that fully experienced all the three of them. We know what was and is good and bad in each of them: how to stop the bad and how to implement the good. That is our advantage.
CULTURE
– What place in your concept is given to the role of culture in human history?
– Culture, no matter how weird this sounds, also needs to be rescued. The 20th century has clearly shown that the culture can serve not only the means of history humanization, but also the way of its dehumanization. For the symbolic nature of culture has always been and is some kind of sense and life guidelines for a man. In addition, the study of available culture by a man is also the way of human adaptation to the society, who under the influence of culture can acquire both productive and accumulative, exploiting properties. Culture is becoming quite a template for a person based on which he/she learns how to be or exist in this world.
The state-forming nation of Russia is Russians, who make up over 80% of the population. Therefore, Russian language, Russian culture, Orthodox are naturally a state-forming cultural code of RNA. Meanwhile, languages, the culture of traditions and the religion of all indigenous peoples – millennial neighbors of Russian ethnos – demand careful, respectful treatment, preservation and development.
– Are you talking about preserving the racial and national identity?
– Yes, we must keep what they have developed, because they are different. And these differences have their value, uniqueness. They should be preserved as well. It is no secret that a lot of that is being unified, blurred, or becoming a history. Somewhere faster, somewhere slower. What take place instead of the heritage that the peoples of the world have been creating and trying to save for centuries? Banal disposable tablets and iPhones, uniform clothing and acid music, ‘fast food’ of GMOs and ‘global holidays’ like Halloween. The same is happening in Europe, and Africa, and Asia, and America.
RELIGION
– Does your concept include religious aspects?
– In the field of religion, the concept provides for preservation of the four major world religions – Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism. It would seem that there is nothing to save. But let’s take Christianity. What’s going on even in its stronghold – Europe? There are over two hundred different sects. Homosexuals are openly married in churches, for the sake of so-called “tolerance”, the ban on wearing pectoral crosses is emerging in society, even such holidays as Christmas are being canceled, but instead, almost at the state level, the ‘feast of All Saints’, Halloween, is being adopted, where witches, devils and other evil spirits are considered the saints, etc. The traditional Islam has no fewer problems. Take the spread of Wahhabism, the use of women as suicide bombers, exorbitant terror: beheading of prisoners, hostage-taking of maternity hospitals or schools – things that traditional Islam condemns.
Buddhism from the mysterious fairy tale Shambhala and Tibet falls into commerce – primitive physical exercises of yogis, cleaning of stomachs, martial arts, and all that under the guidance of “guru” Mary Brown or “sansei” John Smith, feeding themselves on the “solar energy” only.
– Is it possible to choose from religious teachings parts to save? Are not we forming the ground for religious conflicts?
– There are three basic questions. The First one is how you feel about Russia. Is Russia the home or a temporary area for you?
The second one is your attitude toward Orthodoxy. Are you Muslims, or Buddhists, or Jews? How do you feel about it? If you say that Christians should be killed, then the dialogue is likely to fail. Still, 80 percent of the Ark are Russians.
The third question is: how do you feel about the radical methods of struggling with what you don’t like? Killing those who do not look or act like you – is this normal? If you consider yourself to be faithful and demand to cut off heads of adherents of another faith, then probably your branch of Islam is not quite the one that suits us. If you think that we can exist peacefully and build together the Ark – that is another matter.
In Russia, including in the past, these things have been solved properly, and the indicator of this is that when Nicholas II and his family were killed, in fact, the only ones who protested were Buddhists and Muslims. They called him the White king, and respected him a lot. The Muslims were in the Emperor’s personal escort.
ECONOMY
And, in our opinion, another challenge to mankind, one of the key ones is the economy, objectives and ways of its further development. And the question here is not in the form of property, as the political economy says, but in the objectives that it has set for itself. A priori, people believe that private ownership is more evil, but the beekeeper, private owner, can produce a product, while remaining in full harmony with society and nature. But a state (read – “people’s”) corporation can produce oil, while turning a tundra or ocean into a dead desert. If the main purpose of the economy is a profit, then we can sell GMO products; cut down the woods without restoring; catch fish or shoot animals until their complete disappearance; build not quality, but expensive housing; even sell drugs.
And you can even not produce any products, earning by usury or stock market speculations. Even according to Western experts, credit swap derivatives have brought the amount of public debt in the United States to the excess of psychological threshold of one quadrillion dollars. It is a thousand trillion! The total GDP of all countries of the world is 66 trillion dollars. According to the most conservative estimates, the derivative debt is 10 times the GDP of the entire world. Most economists believe that, in fact, this figure is 16! In short, the total debt formed by speculations is approximately 10 to 16 times greater than the total wealth of the planet. If the humanity wants to survive, the theme of “moral economy” should be gradually actualized on the agenda, at least in Russia. The economy that is primarily aimed not at making profits “at any cost”, but at its usefulness and safety for a person, society and the natural environment. This, in particular, is referred to in the paper of the Ural Institute of Business named after I.A. Ilyin “Spiritual and Moral Economy” (Yekaterinburg, 2012). In publications, on your site as well, 2 years ago we offered even more simple and obvious things, such as “progressive tax” and economy deoffshorization.
– So your concept consists of five basic areas?
– It turns out so: Ecology, Ideology, Culture, Religion, and Economy. Some of its elements are already beginning to work. In 2012 and 2013 we sent proposals from the Sverdlovsk region to the President’s Message to preserve family traditions. In particular, a proposal was announced that Russia must speak out for the preservation of traditional family values, and say that we do not consider homosexuality a crime, nor we consider it a norm as in the West. We are different. Yes, then the cry was raised, but the more the cry was, the more people with traditional views around the world began to look at Russia with hope.
– How will your concept move on?
– There is a thought not only to issue it as a doctrine, in the form of a book, but also to turn it into some kind of action.
We wish that our concept has turned into a kind of Social Movement, a call to action in each of the areas, including the mandatory youth focus. It is planned to create a coordinating council in the Social Movement, which will include representatives of each area. The movement participants could specifically do something themselves, as well as cooperate with all organizations that act in this area. For example, in the field of nature preservation, you can plant trees and shrubs in your own city or village, but it is also necessary to cooperate with all those involved in this work: with citizens, public organizations, and governmental agencies.
– Why is it Russia that should become the “Noah’s Ark”? But not one of the “civilized” Western countries? After all, the life there is obviously more comfortable and richer? What is so special about Russia?
– The Roman Empire for its time was even more powerful and richer, but that did not save it from the spiritual and moral decay followed by death. Today’s “civilized West” led by the Anglo-Saxons (in fact – the heirs of the fallen Roman Empire) are following exactly the same way. This is obvious to all thinking people, including thinking people living in the Western countries.
And what is special about Russia? Well, everything is special about Russia. As a state it was expanded not by the capture of lands, destroying the local population, as it was with the America. At the same time we, the only empire, have a state concept of the mother country, both the pre-revolutionary and post-revolutionary, that is the development of border regions.
We are the country that has a centuries-long positive experience of inter-ethnic and inter-religious relations. Last important reason is that the basic religion of the largest ethnos of the Russian Federation (Russian) is Orthodoxy, where the main message is humility, search for a problem in oneself, and not in others. Orthodox religious person believes that others are not worse than he/she is. If he/she thinks so, he/she would not hurt his/her neighbor. In terms of the neighborhood it is more pleasant to live with a person who does not consider himself/herself smarter, more important than the others. It turns out that the basic religion allows living in peace with its neighbors. Russians are tolerant. At the same time, I’ve said above that there is nothing that stops other peoples and countries to attend to the problem of the Ark construction.
– We would like to understand why the proposal of a new concept comes from the Russian hinterland, from the Urals, not from Moscow or St. Petersburg? Is it a regional PR stunt?
– I don’t think so. Yekaterinburg is a mystical place. It is a place where Orthodox empire ceased to exist through the murder of the last Emperor, his family, the heir to the throne, which is a deeply significant historical threshold. Accordingly, in addition to repentance, of which much has been said, there is a certain logic in the fact that some concrete steps to restore it begin here.
If we talk about the “Russia – Noah’s Ark” concept, then it is not the first time in the Urals when something like that is proposed for the general federal agenda. Thus, during the discussion with our friends and partners from other cities of Russia, the idea of the “Russian Doctrine” was born, which we have discussed above. Here the parent movement was born, the agenda in defense of traditional family values was spoken out for the first time, which was supported by the leadership of the Russian Federation and resulted in the theses of the Message to the Federal Assembly on the family preservation issues. Here, in the Ural Institute of Business named after I.A. Ilyin, the development of principles of moral economy, which we are also talking about in the “Russia – Noah’s Ark” concept, is in progress.
There is nothing unusual that another proposal urgent for Russia may come from Yekaterinburg.
– You have mentioned that the request for all-embracing idea is formed again in the Russian society. And who, in your opinion, is this request addressed to?
– Of course, people are waiting for a uniting idea from President Putin. For Putin’s program articles, published in federal newspapers in 2012, are still cited as an ideological vector.
Meanwhile, each and every one of us can help our president to establish such a uniting concept. The proposed idea is not indisputable, but for the beginning of discussions it seems fine to me.
© “Russia – Noah’s Ark”