In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

360 Рецензии/Reviews Martin BEISSWENGER Milan Subotić, Put Rusije: evrazijsko stanovište (Belgrade: “Plato,” 2004). 326 pp. (=Biblioteka “Koinonia ,”Vol. 26). ISBN: 86-447-0231-0. After the collapse of the Soviet Union many observers both within the newly created Russian Federation and abroad were contemplating if any new ideology would take Marxism’s place and, if so, which ideology that might be. There is quite some evidence that one of the most prominent contenders in this competition has become Eurasianism .1 As an ideology Eurasianism was invented in the early 1920s by a few young Russian intellectuals, who had left the disintegrating Russian Empire in the wake of Revolution and Civil War and found refuge in Central and Western Europe. The Eurasianists claimed that Russia was neither Europe nor Asia but “Eurasia ,” a unique geographical, historical and cultural world of its own, different from both Europe and Asia, к правительству несколько смяг- чилась, но эта трансформация, равно как и частичное принятие капиталистических ценностей, случилась слишком поздно для того, чтобы направить ход исто- рии в иное русло. Безусловно, книга Бальмута занимает исключительное место в историографии либерализма и периодической печати. С убеди- тельно обоснованными выводами работы сложно не согласиться. Но для дальнейшего изучения роли “Русских ведомостей” как “голо- са либерализма” представляется перспективным, во-первых, рас- ширить круг источников за счет привлечения других периодиче- ских изданий либерального толка, на фоне полемики с которыми позиции редакции газеты предста- нут, скорее всего, в новом свете; во-вторых, внедрить в работу при- емы компаративистики, что по- зволит провести более обширное исследование по сопоставлению взглядов, отстаиваемых периоди- ческими изданиями различных идейных течений. 1 For discussions, see: Evraziiskaia ideia: Vchera, segodnia, zavtra. Iz materialov konferentsii, sostoiavsheisia v Komissii SSSR po delam IuNESKO // Inostrannaia literatura. 1991. No. 12. Pp. 78-88; Evraziistvo: Za i protiv, vchera i segodnia (Materialy “kruglogo stola”) // Voprosy filosofii. 1995. No. 6. Pp. 3-48; James Billington. Russia in Search of Itself. Washington, 2004. 361 Ab Imperio, 1/2008 as a unified body of philosophical, economic, historical, political and other ideas.4 Milan Subotić’s fine study provides the first detailed account of classical Eurasianism in the Serbian language. Methodologically Subotić sees himself as a historian of Russian political ideas; his approach is based on a traditional close reading , comparison and analysis of the movement’s published key texts. The result is a sober, comprehensive, well-written and well-argued examination of classical Eurasianism that provides an informative and reliable introduction to one of the most fascinating phenomena of Russian intellectual history. The book is divided into four parts: the first part gives a brief account of the movement’s organiza2 Bruno Naarden. “I am a genius, but no more than that.” Lev Gumilev (1912 – 1992), Ethnogenesis, the Russian Past and World History // Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas . 1996. Bd. 44. Pp. 54-82; Hildegard Kochanek. Die Ethnienlehre Lev N. Gumilevs: Zu denAnfängen neu-rechter Ideologie-Entwicklung im spätkommunistischen Rußland // Osteuropa. 1998. Bd. 48. S. 1184-1197. 3 Andreas Umland. Formirovanie fashistskogo “neoevraziiskogo” intellektual’nogo dvizheniia v Rossii: Put’ Aleksandra Dugina ot marginal’nogo ekstremista do vdokhnovitelia postsovetskoi akademicheskoi i politicheskoi elity // Ab Imperio. 2003. No. 3. Pp. 289-304. 4 Until the 1990s the only monographic examination of Eurasianism had been: Otto Böss. Die Lehre der Eurasier. Ein Beitrag zur russischen Ideengeschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts. Wiesbaden, 1961.After the collapse of the Soviet Union the following studies appeared in print: Marlène Laruelle. L’Idéologie eurasiste russe ou Comment penser l’empire. Paris, 1999 (published in Russian: Marlen Lariuel’. Ideologiia russkogo evraziistva ili mysli o velichii imperii. Moscow, 2004); Roman Bäcker. Międzywojenny eurazjatyzm: Od intelektualnej kontrakulturacji do totalitaryzmu? Łódź, 2000; Iwona Massaka. Eurazjatyzm: Z dziejów rosyjskiego misjonizmu. Wrocław, 2001; Emil Voráček. Eurazijství v ruském politickém myšlení: Osudy jednoho y porevolučních ideových směrů ruské meziválečné emigrace. Prague, 2004. and, at the same time, combining and synthesizing the best qualities of both. After 1991 Eurasianism found numerous propagandists and adherents in post-communist Russia. The most prominent “neo-Eurasianists” were the orientalist and ethnographer Lev Gumilev,2 and the nationalist intellectual Aleksandr Dugin.3 No doubt, the surprising popularity of neo-Eurasianism in Russia since the early 1990s was one of the factors stimulating Western scholars to more intensively examine the legacy of the “classical” Eurasianist movement of the inter-war period and its potential relevance for today. As a result we now have several monographs in various European languages that attempt to reconstruct the original Eurasianist teachings as a more or less coherent ideology, 362 Рецензии/Reviews pro-Marxist and anti-Marxist wings, a result of the movement’s gradual politization throughout the 1920s and possible infiltration by the GPU. We do not get to know much about other less-known events and the many less-prominent rank-and-file Eurasianists, who in...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 360-366
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.