The conceptual principles of formation of Kazakhstan national identity in new social and cultural realities are analyzed in this article. Philosophical foundations and spiritual values that meet the interests of polyethnic and polycultural people of Kazakhstan are discussed as well. The meaning «an interethnic consent» as real social practice is also given. The necessity of carrying out science-based policy in the sphere of interethnic relations aimed at strengthening national unity in society is proved. The importance of national unity as a factor of sustainable civilization development of Kazakhstan is approved.
The distinctive feature of the modern world is its ethnic and national variety. Therefore problems of interethnic relationship and processes of formation of national identity continue to be an important part of social development and are discussed at the most different levels of public consciousness: from narrowminded conversations to scientific discussions. In this case, it can be stated that in these discussions more emotional component often burdened by mutual suspiciousness and mistrust rather than aspiration to achieve communicative competence which the German philosopher Habermas J. connected with the development of rules of people’s joint living prevails [1]. Those communities of people which possess communicative competence Habermas J. designated as concept of communicative public. Social importance of this concept is connected with the recognition of open character of the society for all citizens who participate in realization of the ideals of discourse. The discourse, in this context, is the speech considered as a purposeful social action, as the component participating in interaction of people and mechanisms of their consciousness, that is, the speech «shipped in life». The discourse destroys false self-evidence of judgments. Moreover, it demands its comparison, correction, achievement and earlier not existing coherence. Thanks to the ability to come to an agreement with each other, people achieve consensus and certain individuals reach an agreement with themselves. According to Habermas J., rationality is the ability of people to productive communicative action. The more complex and multidimensional discourse is, the more effective it is and provides originally philosophical understanding of essence of the point. In matters connected with ethnic and national distinctions of people it’s very important to achieve the level of moral practical discourse in which «the prospect of everyone is intertwined with prospect of all», where practical mind is used not in aspect of the benefit for separate individuals but in aspect of justice for all people, for solidary unity of persons. Thereby nobody’s interests are infringed. The will of the subject as a result is completely free of spontaneity and intuition and person begins to act according to the laws that he sets for himself. The effectiveness of such discourse is checked in real social practice where forms of communication take the form of «objective education».
According to the fair remark of a well-known Kazakhstan philosopher and culturologist Nurzhanov B. G., two concepts, that is, the nation and ethnic group are mixed while discussing the prospects of formation of new Kazakhstan identity while in modern science they are clearly separated [2]. The reasons of incorrect use of these concepts are connected with insufficient communicative competence of participants of the discussions conducted in Kazakhstan society. At first, it’s necessary to remember that one word has several different meanings depending on context in which it is used at the moment. In fact, when we say: «national tradition», «national suit», «national dish» we often mean the appropriate demonstration of ethnic culture of this or that nation. At the same time such expressions as «national idea», «national interest», «national security», etc, mean these or those problems relating not to the ethnic groups but to the nation on the whole, i.e., to community of people of higher and difficult level in which ethnic factors not always are defining. Secondly, linguistic culture of modern Russian language determines clear meaning of two words, that is, «nationality» and «nation». If the word «nationality» indicates belonging of the person to this or that ethnic group then the word «nation» indicates much broader meaning, namely — a community of people that brings together a whole set of common features.
In modern socio-humanities following definitions are mainly used [3].
Ethnic group is a big group of people developing on the basis of unity of natural landscape conditions, consanguinity, anthropological features, specifics of culture, language, religion and mental mind of people, ethnic consciousness which is the only consistent feature of ethnic group.
The nation is a historically developed form of people’s community being characterized by a community of language, territory, economic life, culture and features of mental mind. Nowadays the viewpoint that the nation is not only and not so much ethnic but the state, social and economic and cultural community becomes increasingly widespread. From this point of view the nation is a community of people realizing a community of historical interests and its spiritual originality.
Therefore it is possible to agree with Mezhuyev V.M. that «the nation unlike ethnic group is that is given not by the birth but by one’s own efforts and personal choice... The nation is the state, social, cultural belonging of the individual but not his anthropological and ethnic definiteness» [4; 16].
For modern Kazakhstan the matters connected with prospects of national development have special importance as having defined the direction of economic transformations, we continue to search for ideological and spiritual moral guidelines of an interethnic harmony and all-Kazakhstan national identity in the conditions of global instability. And one of the fundamental directions in this search is, in our opinion, definition of own basis for formation of both new social institutes and for finding of new ethnocultural identity as the Kazakhstan people as well. This is what Nysanbayev A.N. wrote at the beginning of a new millennium:
«Who are we? Where did we come from? Where are we going to? What sources of spirituality should polyethnic and polycultural people of Kazakhstan focus on in order to get national dignity and consciousness which would be adequate to realities of the third millennium?» [5; 242,243]. Analyzing possible options of Kazakhstan further historical development, Nysanbayev A. N. pays special attention to «the Euroasian way» as on the most interesting and at the same time the most perspective way as it is necessary to remember historic fact that «Kazakhstan appeared between Europe and Asia geographically and even more demographically and culturally» [5; 244]. Meanwhile the scientist stressed that the Eurasian idea having arisen in the 20s of the last century stood time test and states itself with new force in new historical circumstances. Now it is important to approve this idea on the strong philosophical base and to develop with the use of an extensive and reliable and objective historical material. The Euroasian idea «means transformation of the world and perfection of the person not in a separation from each other but as complementary processes» [5; 257].
That's been going on for more than twenty years Kazakhstan is confidently moving towards the consolidation of national independence and state sovereignty. An important factor in this process is an intensive search including the scientific, philosophical foundations of Kazakhstan national identity and spiritual values that meet the interests of polyethnic and polycultural nation of Kazakhstan in finding national dignity and identity. In this case the spiritual consent can be considered without exaggeration as the basis of all other forms of consent as it is an inner core of any interhuman communications. It is pleasant to realize that today in our country thanks to joint efforts of all people such social conditions created in which not only different conflicts are prevented, not only normal relations in society remain and are maintained but also a lot of things are done to fill public life of Kazakhstan citizens with high moral contents, enriched with originally human values. Having an opportunity to speak openly about his ethnic values and to get an information about the values of other ethnic groups, any citizen of Kazakhstan learns to develop his own important vital and psychological attitude of overcoming intolerance and recognition of existence of other ethnic traditions. Firm moral attitude is formed, that is, to consider another culture, customs, world outlook, ethnic originalities as worthy, respectful and valuable. Thereby the cultural diversity remains and the policy of social compromise, national consent and spiritual unity acts.
Interethnic harmony (as well as interethnic tensions and conflicts) are generated not by the fact of the existence of ethnic groups but the political, social economic and historical conditions and circumstances in which people live and develop. The bitter experience of numerous social conflicts based on ethnic ground makes scientific community to address again and again to the problems connected with definition of nature and essence of «ethnic group». The thesis that national policy should be developed in strict accordance with theoretical, methodological achievements in science has already become an axiom for modern social humanitarian knowledge. Does this mean that it is scientific analysis that determines the nature of forming national consciousness and principles of interethnic relations in social space? Or the scientific thought is involved in the sphere of «national» and becomes an object of emotional manipulation? Unfortunately, we can note that study of problems of interethnic relationship is often conducted in epistemological coordinates of nationalist engaged installations. Scientific research in the field of ethnic and national interests are mainly connected with attempts to define and formulate so-called national idea. However, this search is loaded, as a rule, with political and economic contexts. We think that it is one-sided approach that greatly impoverishes substantial wealth of this problem space. Such situation urgently requires review of a number of outdated methodological perspectives. In this sense the modern scientific analysis must take into account structural changes and to focus on all cultural sphere caught in public consciousness. Interpretation of the concept «national unity» should be carried out taking into account consideration of its cognitive contents and social cultural conditionality [6].
Ethnic nationalism in the modern world is one of the main reasons of social processes’ conflictogenic nature. The national originality becomes very often a cover for the unseemly economic and political activity causing damage to the general wellbeing of all mankind. For the Post-Soviet states, especially at an early stage of their development, the ethnic nationalism was an effective means of political mobilization ensuring priority access to the power and resources. However, the concepts «nation», «ethnic group» and «nationalism» are mainly the subject of publicistic discourse rather than have a clear scientific and methodological definition. So at the level of state and official language the concept civil nation is mainly used as a means of consolidating co-citizenship of all ethnic groups. And at the level of ethnic communities the concept cultural ethnic group is mainly used as a means of protecting their interests, political mobilization and protection of collective cultural originality from assimilation or discrimination threat from the state and dominating culture. As no one can live without any relationship with other people, so no ethnic community can exist in complete isolation from other nations. Almost each ethnic group is to some extent open for contacts and perception of cultural achievements of other ethnic groups and at the same time willing to share its own cultural achievements and values [7]. But, unfortunately, interethnic contacts rarely bring positive results for all interacting ethnic groups. The history of ethnic and cultural relations knows quite a lot of cases where particular ethnic communities and groups were unacceptable for each other. Both certain people and ethnic groups can in general understand each other well but cannot find common language.
Numerous ethnic and cultural researches suggest that ethnic changes are the result of numerous, complex and inconsistently proceeding diverse cultural contacts between people and the content of interethnic relationship in many respects depends on ability of their participants to understand each other and to reach an agreement which is mainly defined by ethnic culture of each of the interacting parties. In ethnology this relationship of ethnic groups got the name «interethnic communication» which is understood as an exchange between two or more ethnic communities with material and spiritual products of their cultural activity carried out in various forms. According to said above, the interethnic relations in the broadest sense are understood as interaction of people in different areas of public life — politics, art, science, etc., and in narrow sense as the interpersonal relations of people of different ethnic origin which also take place in different spheres of communication — labor, family and household and different informal types of relationship [8].
The category «national consciousness» has necessary importance in the search for appropriate ways of cultural interethnic harmony which reflects presence of a special phenomenon of spiritual life of society which isn't reduced thus neither to national consciousness, nor to national psychology, not to this and that at the same time. We believe that in philosophical terms the problem of national consciousness should be considered, first of all, not from the point of view of someone who is the subject carrier of this consciousness but from the point of view of object reflected in it, from the point of view of his social and historical determination. Recognizing the nation as an objective, real community of people whose co-existence with its totality and contradictions can be reflected in the sphere of public consciousness, we propose to define national consciousness as a reflection of the nation’s life, its features in the context of all variety of cultural and historical development of these or those people. Thus, national consciousness turned out to be both awareness of its national belonging, national development needs and the relation to values of national culture, to events of national history, to national policy of the state as well. Therefore, formation of national consciousness is in organic communication with formation of the nation, with all concrete historical features of this process. All these aspects of understanding of national consciousness are connected with some characteristic features of national consciousness among which, according to our research, we consider actual the following. Firstly, the presence of ability in the national consciousness to reflect such aspects of national life which are common with other nations. The national consciousness is something exclusive, having unique features and is always a unique combination of national and universal features. Secondly, there are two interacting levels of social psychological and theoretical in the national consciousness, the latter of which shows itself most clearly in the development of national public opinion. One can even say that national consciousness is expressed in the most adequate way just in the field of social thought.
Thus, national consciousness is understood by us as unity of social actions on satisfying the variety of spiritual needs of citizens, the mutual aid of members of social community based on common interests and on need to achieve certain common goals. The national consciousness is able to function as belief of an individual in belonging to such social formation which considers itself as a unity, as a whole. On this basis a person makes for himself distinction between authenticity and inauthenticity of society’s being. When certain members of society don't exclude each other and, on the contrary, mutually believe in each other, are solidary with each other; when they don't exclude social whole and confirm their personal life on a common basis; when this social whole doesn't suppress and doesn't absorb personal self-realization and gives full space in itself revealing itself in each person and only then such being of society is admitted as original, that is, the way it should be. In contrast, violation of mutual conditionality and harmonious balance of parts of the whole generates imaginary and unworthy being of society. When a single element of society (whether individual or group) thinks himself as a special person trying to suppress and subordinate life of another; when separate elements want to replace social whole by themselves, deny its independent unity, so general communication between them; or when, on the contrary, personal life is excluded for unity independence — all this leads to development of the destructive beginnings which are expressed in various forms of social evil.
Interethnic harmony as a real social practice is possible only in the form of everyday statement that people create and change the order of social life owing to their joint efforts. «It is necessary that the state from clearly formal association of citizens would turn into the unity rallied by general values. The national and state idea differs from state ideology that it isn't spread from above but grows from real development of society. And this national and state idea is formed round the main political value — united, territorially integral and independent Kazakhstan, that is, the Homeland of all Kazakhstan citizens, regardless of nationality. The unity, integrity and independence of Kazakhstan are values which have no competitive or conflict character for representatives of any ethnic community» [9;187].
Any understanding of processes taking place in spiritual and social life always was and remains the desire to understand. However, in the modern world, in the conditions of global variety of types of social constructs, it is necessary not just to understand but also to find new and constructive ways of mutual understanding between cultures, ethnic groups and people. Former methodological principles of subject — object character are replaced in modern social humanities by setting and tendency gradually opening the way to interpersonal communication on the principles of dialogue and a polylogue [10]. Prospects for the further implementation of national consolidation in many respects depend on efforts of members of social humanistic scientific community on development of corresponding theoretical and methodological bases for their involving into social and communicative practical work. It should be recalled that in the basis of dialectic thinking there was not a monologue of repetition of truth established once and forever but continuous social and humanistic dialogue, compulsory communication with past traditions and identification of more remote possible world outlook orientations of mankind that doesn't allow to fall down from firm dogmatic positions. Dialogue differs from monologue that we not only hear but we listen attentively to the voices of representatives of other positions, we start getting used to entirely different way of communication in which the main thing is not the statement of unambiguous and final ultimate truth with reference to the quote but taking all opinions into consideration, lively discussion of opposite points of view, finding a consensus. Nowadays our society is opened for internal discussions, for discussion of questions with all interested organizations and broad masses forbidden before. And this is possible only in the way of complete rejection of logic of dogmatism. Fundamentally important condition for organizing this kind of discussion during which sincere vision and acceptance of common goals and objectives are reached, mutual trust and desire to move towards each other are. The cognition of each other happens owing to trust and openness, there is a mutual interest and mutual respect and as a result dialogue organically develops into close and mutually beneficial cooperation in achieving these or those common goals. Abdildin Zh. M. thinks that our humanities must absorb all precious spiritual wealth that has been created by mankind over the centuries. At the same time it is necessary to go deep into one’s national culture in order to reveal oneself to the world [11; 54–56].
Abdildin Zh. is convinced that since early childhood we are obliged to acquaint the child with both culture of his own nation and culture of people of the whole world, with ethics and esthetics, high moral, to involve him in the sphere of great achievements of human mind because culture of thinking is not inborn but acquired property of personality [11; 141–143].
Various forms of extremism just arise from the recognition of the right for existence of only one point of view and the denial in such right for everyone else. According to our understanding, the essence of democratic modernization of processes of national construction is in formation of socially active society capable to release independently from false ideological dogmas in the course of open joint discussion of important issues of state policy. In this society, citizens with their needs, interests and values are able to agree among themselves concerning the formation of general laws of state life, providing its implementation and punishment for its violation. People are able to be rational trying to follow the nondisjunction of their words and actions and are able to take responsibility.
In the Kazakhstan model definition of priorities and mechanisms of providing national unity occurs on the basis of civil identity, patriotism, spiritual and cultural community, preservation of stability, an interethnic and interreligious harmony in society. The national unity is understood as integrity of existence of ethnic communities as a part of the united state, high extent of self-identification of citizens of the country with the Republic of Kazakhstan with existing system of values and ideals. The basis of national unity of Kazakhstan society is the community of values which are close to vast majority of Kazakhstan citizens and consolidate society in a whole [12]. The uniting beginning and subject of deserved pride of all generations of Kazakhstan citizens is our common history. Free choice of own destiny, participation in the construction of a new state, joint responsibility for the fate of the country and future generations of its citizen have become common values of Kazakhstan citizens since they have got independence. The high level of tolerance towards a way of life, customs, feelings, opinions, ideas, beliefs of representatives of all ethnic groups, faiths, social groups are peculiar for Kazakhstan citizens. At the same time a variety and dialogue of ethnic cultures in the country are a source of constant enrichment and development of all Kazakhstan citizens.
The adoption of Kazakhstan national identity as a defining factor of person’s social status not resisting free national identification of individuals on an ethnic basis becomes a basis of formation of public consciousness of state citizens whose rights are equal and having no reasons and causes as for self-flattery concerning ethnic origin and feeling of inferiority. According to our viewpoint, definition of analytical approaches to the understanding of national consciousness in the conditions of social transformations leans both on recognition of objectivity of nation’s existence and its attributes, and on fruitful creative activities of people, public institutes for its formation and development as well. In modern Kazakhstan the matter of national consciousness’ status is inseparably connected with efforts on strengthening a new community, that is, Kazakhstan people and formation of national identity as a result of cooperation of all citizens. The consistent social and national policy of a strong state, the universal statement and development of democratic principles of self-organization and self-government, the objective and interested study of history and culture of Kazakhstan as time and space of interaction of Kazakh people with various ethnic communities will allow to achieve national harmony step by step. Therefore, it is the statement of integration model called «Unity in diversity» which will lead to ever greater unity preserving its ethnic specificity of Kazakhstan peoples [13].
Of course, we shouldn’t think that transition to civil understanding of nation and movement of ethnicity from policy to the sphere of culture will automatically remove various contradictions. The main point is not simply in declaration of multinational people of Kazakhstan as «the Kazakhstan nation» but in creation of fair and equal conditions for personal development of any citizen, improvement of system of social wellbeing in which natural ethnic distinctions will not be used for contradiction of one nation to another and human rights of any ethnic origin will become an immutable law. There is no doubt that systematic, balanced view on ethnic relations should be established at state level that when developing and carrying out state national policy a support on scientific analysis and predictions, public opinion and assessment of consequences of made decisions have to be approved. And it requires a large-scale cultural and educational activity designed for long-term strategic perspective primarily in education and training of Kazakhstan young citizens, to replace varieties of interethnic intensity available in society, household nationalism and not only tolerance came as a norm of social relationship but also original mutual respect, solidarity of Kazakhstan people. An important factor of prospects and efficiency of such policy is, from our point of view, the formation of fixed relations of offered ideas with an ordinary everyday world of Kazakhstan citizens: moral and family values and ideals, public culture of behavior showing the importance, social need of positive interethnic relations.
The aspiration of Kazakhstan citizens to become a civilization with all attributes of democratic society which originality consists in joint historical memory, various cultural traditions, solidary participation in achieving new social and economic progress in present and future has to become a spiritual core of Kazakhstan national identity. High complementarity, freedom of conscience, multiculturalism, susceptibility to all new and advanced, that is, those essential qualities that form the basis of enrichment of any person through the perception of cultural diversity is peculiar for Kazakhstan citizens. Kazakhstan declared and implemented in practice the principle that Kazakhstan is a country of equal opportunities for all people who form a united nation. It is necessary to convince people that the quality of national space in which they live depends on their knowledge, position, actions.
Thus, carrying out science-based policy in the sphere of interethnic relations directed on strengthening of national unity in society should be reflected in the following practical actions.
At first, it is further increase of efficiency of public administration on the basis of realization of social state’s principles providing social orientation of market economy’s development forming social policy aimed at implementing the principles of social justice, social protection, social partnership and social solidarity in society, promoting or ensuring stable standard of living, protection and realization of human rights and freedoms, establishment of modern systems of health, education and social security, maintenance of poor and needy social groups, prevention and resolution of social conflicts. All this, finally, will promote strengthening of civil unity and harmonization of interethnic relations.
Secondly, it is further improvement of an educational system and education as it is this sphere that makes comprehensive impact both on a person and on all other spheres of society and this sphere forms all members of society irrespective of their social stratification.
Thirdly, it is a purposeful development of Kazakhstan cultural core while creating conditions for the development of all other ethnic groups. Special mission and responsibility lies on Kazakh people as integrating, consolidating ethnic group which has rich history and which characteristic feature is tolerance, openness and goodwill to other people inhabiting modern Kazakhstan. According to some researchers, Kazakh people can fulfill its historic mission as an integrating, consolidating ethnic group in the field of culture if Kazakh people will be able to modernize and make available its unique culture that has ancient roots to all ethnic groups due to a wide propaganda.
The government of Kazakhstan shows strong determination to carry out such policy when state language develops in a natural, organic way according to logic of a concrete historical situation, not to the detriment of all other languages operating in the country. From our point of view, natural extension of sphere of using state language can occur as a result of its penetration into everyday life of Kazakhstan young generation through large-scale state system of general preschool education and training and refusal of outdated techniques of state language’s study at school substituting process of living communication with mechanical learning of separate words, expressions or grammatical rules.
Fifthly, it is a purposeful creation of centers of Kazakhstan people’s national culture and support of diasporas with its historical homeland. The significant role in it belongs to Assembly of the people of Kazakhstan. The consolidating role of national cultural centers is that they turn a lot of private interests of individuals representing different ethnic groups and social groups into collective interest by their integration. The cultural heritage of all people remains, equality of cultures and the right of each people to assert their cultural originality is provided in Kazakhstan. It is important to make efforts for creation of conditions on developing all variety of cultural heritage and spiritual wealth of people of Kazakhstan, for example, by forming the infrastructure of ethnic tourism available to each Kazakhstan citizen.
National consolidation in such multiethnic state as modern Kazakhstan is possible on the basis of a civil community, i.e. nation based on equal civil rights for representatives of all ethnic groups of state, on the primacy of individual rights, on the democratization of all spheres of social life. The people of Kazakhstan have to become a community of citizens of different nationalities but not a certain new ethnic community. As Suleymenov O. formulated: «We realize Kazakhstan as one of models of the modern world. There are American, Russian, European, Indian, Chinese models and lately Kazakhstan model has shown itself actively. Models of multinational states compete and help people to be improved in each country and on all planet. Realizing this responsibility before people, we just have to be more careful about such concepts as national unity, that is, the unity of nationalities» [14].
It is obvious that unity of ethnic groups within one State assumes voluntariness, mutual respect, civil peace and harmony. The fundamental value of our society is the belief that friendship between people in multinational Kazakhstan is not an abstract concept but expression of simply human feeling «affection for the people of other nationality living a life with you, sharing thoughts and cares with you» [15; 17]. Therefore, national unity being both the state of society and the process for its unity and consolidation is the most important condition of a sustainable development of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
References
- Хабермас Ю. Моральное сознание и коммуникативное действие: Пер. с нем. Д.В.Скляднева. — СПб.: Наука, — 380 с.
- Из выступления Б.Г.Нуржанова на круглом столе «Выбор национальной идентичности: управление будущим». — [ЭР]. Режим доступа: http://zonakz.net/articles/26355 (дата обращения 15.09. 2014).
- Словарь социально-гуманитарных терминов / Под общ. ред. А.Л.Айзенштадта. — М.: Тесей, 1999. — 320 с.
- Межуев В.М. Идея национального государства в исторической перспективе // Полис. — — № 5–6. — С. 11–23.
- Нысанбаев А.Н. Философия взаимопонимания. — Алматы: Гл. ред. «Қазақ энциклопедиясы», 2001. — 544 с.
- Карипбаев Б.И., Солощенко П.П. Национальное сознание: социо-культурные ракурсы // Европейский исследователь: Междунар. мультидисциплинарный журнал. — 2013. — № 5–2 (49). — С. 1355–1359.
- Шайкенов М.С. Этническая идентичность в системе ценностных иерархий казахской духовности // Казахстанспектр. — 2010. — № 3. — С. 46–53.
- Арутюнов С.А. Народы и культуры. Развитие и взаимодействие. — М.: Наука, 1989. — 247 с.
- Назарбаев Н.А. В потоке истории. — Алматы: Атамура, 1999. — 294 с.
- Кулешова Н.С. Теоретические и практические аспекты этнокультурной индентификации на постсоветском евразийском пространстве // Вестн. МГУ. Сер.13.Востоковедение. — 2011. — № 1. — С. 22–42.
- Абдильдин Ж.М. Время и культура: размышления философа. — Алматы: Алаш, 2003. — 477 с.
- Косиченко А.Г. Межцивилизационный и межкультурный диалог // Известия НАН Республики Казахстан. — 2011. —№ 6. — С. 67–76.
- Доктрина национального единства Казахстана. Тез. выступ. министра культуры М.Кул-Мухаммеда на заседании Правительства РК 18 мая 2010 г. — [ЭР]. Режим доступа: http://mki.gov.kz/rus/doctrina (дата обращения 19.09. 2014).
- Сулейменов О. В Казахстане аул воспитывает родоплеменное сознание, город — национальное и вместе с тем интернациональное. — [ЭР]. Режим доступа: http: centrasia.ru/newsA.php? st=1266309720 (дата обращения 19.09. 2014).
- Назарбаев Н.А. Без правых и левых. — М.: Мол. гвардия, 1991. — 254 с.