The Sociolinguistic Situation: Past, Present and Future in Bashkortostan

Auty, Robert, and Dimitri Obolensky. 1976. "An Introduction to Russian History (Companion to Russian Studies;1)." Brisol, Great Britain : Cambridge University Press Ltd.

Russian Federation has a long and interesting history. Many different events the structure and development of the country. Nowadays, Russia plays one of the most important roles in our world. Russia is located at the intersection of different cultures and contains multinational population and ethno-cultural diversity. Russia is an interesting country to discuss its issues of ethnicity and religion, try to predict the future development and economics of the country. How different country’s issues such as class distinction, equity and equality, race, religion, nationalism and other political variables are solved or considered by the state at least. The main goal of this work is to show weaknesses and struggles which Russia faces on the road

Between 1900-1960 CE, Russia/Soviet Union had undergone major developments in which their political ideologies progressed from an absolute monarchy to communism. Another major development in Russia was the change in the status of religion as the power of religion progressively decreased as communism arose. Although Russia’s political ideologies and the status of religion has changed, the forms of governance in Russia generally remained the same. Russia at the time were faced with millions of casualties from both World War I and World War II, this caused their government to be in turmoil which then lead to the major changes in the Soviet Union.

It is the middle ground of Europe and Asia, and as a result, which cultural aspects to draw from had a great deal of influence over Russian culture. For example, Peter the Great’s transformation of Russia into a more modernized Europeanized nation had some traces of cultural inferiority. The only need to modernize and imitate a nation into a replica of a European state is because there is a sense of loss of identity. This is important to understanding the key similarities and differences that played out when comparing and contrasting Imperial Russia and the Soviet Union.

Twenty-five years ago, the Soviet Union collapsed taking by surprise therewith not only the international community, but also its own leaders. What brought the superpower down? Its authoritarian and corrupt political system, failure of the planned economy and stagnation, or consistent celebration of national diversity throughout the whole history of the Soviet Union? If the question is why the USSR disintegrated into 15 independent states, then the answer lies in the republican lines which were drawn around ethnicity. In this essay, I argue the primacy of the ethnofederal system and Soviet nation-building policy to the fall of “the last European empire”. First, I will address the main tenets of and motifs behind the Soviet approach to the “nationality question” and how it backfired on the Communist Party and Russian democrats, who strived to preserve the union, seven decades later; then I will discuss political and economic structural flaws of the Soviet system and give reasons for why they could not solely account for the actual break up when examined from a broader perspective; lastly I will analyze mechanisms, predetermined by ethnofederal system and Soviet ethno-cultural policies, that facilitated an avalanche of secessions from the USSR, and sum up my arguments.

Russia has formed the core of two great historical-political formations now faded away: the Tsarist Empire (until 1917) and the Soviet Union (1922-1991). Since 1991 is the political heart of the Russian Federation, which is part of the Commonwealth of Independent States. For much of its history, Russia was a backward country socially and economically, and authoritarian political point of view. In many ways it has also been - and still is - a country poised between East and West. After the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 and until the beginning of the nineties of the 20th century its history has coincided with the parable of the rise and then the fall of Communism

Russification formally began in 1899 and ended in 1917, however the stigma and attitude towards ethnic minorities in Russia was always present in the very nationalist country. Ethnocentric, authoritarian Russian nationalism was on the rise, as manifested both in an aggressive foreign policy and in a growing intolerance of non-Russian minorities within the empire. The Russian government began implementing a program of Russification that included the imposition of the Russian language in schools and in governmental administration. It meant that children could not be taught their own language in schools and non-Russians were restricted from practising their own religions. This caused a great amount of tension within the many states and ethnicities living within Russian borders as it was seen as an attack on their own culture and language and was extremely invasive. The goal of these measures was to bring non-Russian people into the Russian cultural scope and thus, in doing so, under more direct political control. The Russification policies initially targeted the Polish, but eventually other non-Russian groups also began to feel its pressure. Nearly all important officials were Russians and all official business was conducted in the Russian language. Additionally,

Prior to Putin’s 2001 State of the Nation address, Russia was dealing with the overwhelming effects of economic and political reform. The fall of Communism and the Soviet Union left Russia in a fragile state. When Putin references “the period of disintegration of the Statehood” he is referring to the lack of stability and legitimacy in Russia’s era of reformation in the 1990s that threatened the very existence of the nation. The sources and indicators of this disintegration can be found through an analysis of Russia’s economic, political, and social struggles throughout this period of reform. However, 21st century Russia no longer is grappling with the same issues of the 1990s. Russia has removed itself from a state of disintegration which can be seen through economic growth, moderate population growth, formation of a common identity, effective foreign policy initiatives, and an ability to provide some level of legitimacy to the Putin regime. Yet, in the coming decades Russia still faces political and economic challenges that could lead the nation back on a path of disintegration.

However, once Stalin took control of the Soviet Union many of these elements changed and set national policy concerning minorities in a different direction that affected policy even after Stalin’s death. In my paper, I will determine exactly how socialism and the Russian nationalism affected policy. How was language policy affected? How did the Soviet Government see its satellites and their perspective desire to communicate in their own ethnic language? How did ordinary Soviet citizens see these desires? Was Russification a policy? And if so, was it a socialist centered policy or was it nationalistic? There are many former Soviet satellites who are still affected by these past policies, it is important to determine if they inherently nationalistic

Chapter one in our textbook taught me much about Russia’s geography and people. The chapter creatively described Russia’s characteristics so that it can be easily imagined. The chapter described how Russia remains the largest country in the world, it is almost twice the size of the United States. The exact length of Russia from east to west is about 10,000 kilometers, and from north to south measures more than 4,000 kilometers. Some of the physical features of Russia include many large rivers and lakes. The longest rivers include are the Siberian ones, the Lena, the Irtysh and the Ob. Another unique characteristics of Russia is climate. Due to Russia’s extreme northern location, it has caused its climate to be brutal. Average winter temperatures

Many Russian today consider the North Caucasus to be a “separate but unequal entity”, and “the belief that the republics of the North Caucasus are not part of the Russian Federation is a sentiment that is now shared by 60 percent of Russia’s population” (Rodeheffer, 2013, para. 5). In order to increase stability in the region, Russia must begin to reintroduce control of the North Caucasus to those who reside in the area. The Russian army appears to be little more than an occupation force, as no officers from the Caucasus exist, and military commanders admit that “ an unspoken policy of discriminating against North Caucasians exists not only at the conscript level but throughout the entire chain of command” (Rodeheffer, 2013, para. 6). If control is given in increments back to the natives, and the brutal police-state like restrictions are relaxed, Caucasians may be less drawn to the radical islamic movements which are drawing in many youth from the region

Nationalism has been on the rise in Russia ever since their embarrassing defeat in 1989 when the Soviet Union fell. However, the world has seen a recent upsurge in racist and xenophobic sentiments in Russia as well. These feelings can be seen in the population and also in current political occurrences like Vladimir Putin’s invasion into Crimea and his anti-gay laws that have recently been passed. The three main causes of the rise in this type of sentiment are Russia’s economy, immigration, and Putin’s form of nationalism affecting Russia’s population. This paper will discuss one of the three reasons: Putin’s form of nationalism.

Language is the medium that has various meaning and forms. According to some researchers, language is a cognitive system that has consistent rules which people use to both write and speak (Gee & Hayes, 2011, p. 6; Vendryes, 1997, p.16). Alternatively, other study claim language as dynamic phenomena, which has changing characteristics and influenced by socio-cultural context (Green, 2006, p. 2). Also, Grugeon and Gardner (2013, p. 105) explain language as a physical object that people use for social interaction which is influenced by the relationship between the speaker and the listener, and can vary due to the social and cultural context. Hence, language is a material and a systemic object with set rules that are used as a social process and changes due to the geographic location, social context and relationship of those who are communicating (Ellis & Larsen-Freeman, 2009, p. 3). Teachers should realise that classrooms would have students from various cultures and languages (Cremin & Myhill, 2012, p. 19). In addition to this, Cremin and Myhill, (2012, p. 20) claim that it is essential that teachers should ensure to meet the nature of multicultural classrooms with various language resources and text based on socio-cultural artefacts to support the diverse learners. This essay will discuss that a language has the interconnected phenomena of an object, systemic functions and the social process. Additionally, this essay will explain how teachers can adapt to an inclusive and

In theory, this policy was introduced to unify all the “Non-Russians” and make them feel Russian, all it did, however, was make them feel alienated. Despite in the short term giving the autocracy greater dominance, which could be consider as one of the few successes of Russification, it weakened social cohesion.

Russia’s stumble from Soviet rule and rejection of democratic values has piqued scholars’ interests in learning how Russia was left behind. Its contemporary leaders have each contributed to the regime’s transitions in different ways. Mikhail Gorbachev’s attempts to normalize Russia shortly before the collapse of the Soviet Union through the reforms of perestroika (restructuring or transformation) and glasnost (transparency) were an attempt to steer the country towards democracy, a trend experienced in other communist Eastern European countries that were ripe for democratization . As a result, these reforms opened political spaces for citizens to express dissent fearlessly which contributed to the demolition of the USSR . Afterwards, in