Sometimes it’s good to think and understand the meaning of the key concepts that underlie the existence of human society. In particular, such as "people" and "nationality." These are fundamental definitions, without a clear understanding of which it is impossible to understand the patterns by which human society lives and develops.
What the classics say about it
General ideas about national identity were different in different historical eras. According to modern, encyclopedically verified definitions, a nation is a community of people formed from clans and tribes that historically lived in a particular territory. Nationalities are characterized by the unity of language, customs and common traditional culture, which can vary within certain limits. In accordance with the classical materialist theories of social development, it is believed that the world's nationalities arose at the time of the transition from the historical tribal era to the slave and feudal types of society. It is characteristic here that on the earth there are territories, primarily in Equatorial Africa and South America, where people live in a tribal system. In certain nationalities, they never formed.
Nations and nationalities
As trade and craft production develops, the capitalist system is gradually being formed. With the development of capitalism, changes in the social structure are taking place, the concept of national identity is expanding significantly. A nation united by statehood forms a single nation. It should be noted that in the composition of a single state two or more nationalities can live and develop peacefully. The concepts of nation and nationality are very close, but far from always completely identical. A nation may include several ethnic groups, and a state may include several nations. The existence of one state within their borders is impossible without a language and a common cultural space that is understandable to all.
the Russian Empire
The Russian state, with the expansion of its geographical borders, has incorporated many large and small nationalities, historically living in territories annexed to the empire. The main state-forming nation has always been Russian. But all the numerous nationalities of Russia as part of the empire were not only not oppressed, but also got an opportunity for national development and progress. By the complexity of its ethnic composition, the Russian Empire had no equal in the history of human civilization. Only ancient Rome could compete with her in this respect. In the imperial understanding of state-building, each nationality is an integral part of a single whole.
Soviet Union
The national policy of the Soviet period of history was complicated and contradictory. In the Stalin era, some nations were subjected to repression and resettlement from the territories they historically occupied. In many respects, Soviet national politics echoed the best traditions of the Russian Empire. The cultural policy of the Soviet Union was absolutely unique, from the point of view of which each nationality is not just a part of a single whole, but also something unique. This was expressed in the financing and development of the culture of small nations. But the most important difference was that the largest nationalities of Russia received their state formations in the form of union and autonomous republics as part of a single state. This approach led the legal framework for the future destruction of a single state. During the collapse of the Soviet Union, its collapse occurred exactly along the borders of the union states.
Global trends
In modern national and social development, two seemingly mutually exclusive trends can be distinguished. This is nationalism and internationalism. Modern industrial production is increasingly becoming interethnic in nature. Such processes of global integration cannot but influence the lifestyle of different peoples. Both the lifestyle and the level of consumption of material goods are more and more unified and aligned. But at the same time, the features of national culture and identity are leveled and destroyed. And this can not be considered a positive trend. And she meets with increasingly strong rejection from many social groups. But the attempt to build a strategy of social development on the basis of nationalism does not lead to any positive results. Existence in isolation and autarchy inevitably leads to decay and degradation of society and the state. The best option for social development is to build a middle line between two existing concepts. They do not exclude one another.