A. I. YAKOVLEV. OCHERKI MODERNIZATSII STRAN VOSTOKA I ZAPADA V XIX-XX vvakh [ESSAYS ON MODERNIZATION OF THE EAST AND WEST COUNTRIES IN THE 19th AND 20th centuries]. Moscow: Vostochny University, 2006, 504 p. (1)

A. I. YAKOVLEV. EASTERN COUNTRIES: SINTEZ TRADITSIONNOGO I SOVREMENNOGO [SYNTHESIS OF TRADITIONAL AND MODERN], Moscow: Vostochny University, 2007, 168 p. (2)

Peer-reviewed books are notable from several points of view. First, as an achievement of the Eastern University (EU), which has moved beyond the stage of development when the main attention is paid to the organization of the educational process, and has moved to a higher level of combining the actual pedagogical and scientific-educational activities. Established by the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 1994 and largely staffed by its staff, the University" by definition " has a good base for preparing educational and scientific manuals and books. Starting with the publication of thematic programs, the university in recent years has moved to the regular publication of courses of lectures prepared by leading teachers, as well as a periodical1.

Secondly, as a significant personal achievement of a university lecturer, a specialist in the history of Arab countries and general problems of modernization. He wrote works on the history of the oil monarchies of the Middle East, primarily Saudi Arabia, a popular science book about the Saudi reformer king Faisal, as well as a fictionalized "plump" book about the Russian Emperor Alexander II.2
Third, from the conceptual and content side. There are some questions and specific comments here, although I will immediately note that both books are written at a high professional level, in excellent language, testifying to the author's broad erudition and his ability to touch on extremely important, key issues related to the processes of modernization of the East and West, the development of the world, including our country.

The first of these books is primarily historical and descriptive in nature. In addition to the section on the conceptual apparatus, the reader, first of all a young person who is getting acquainted with the subject, is addressed to five more parts devoted to 1) the origins of modern, modernized general education.-

1 Mosyakov D. V., Tyurin V. A. History of Southeast Asia. Moscow: Vostochny Universitet Publ., 2004; Landa R. G. History of Arab countries. Moscow: Vostochny Universitet Publ., 2005. Since 2007 it has been published (twice a year) Bulletin of the Eastern University (editor - in-chief-N. B. Lebedeva).

2 Yakovlev A. I. Faisal is the reformer king. Moscow, 1999; Yakovlev A. Alexander II Moscow, 2003.

page 184
2) the capitalist modernization of nineteenth-century Russia, 3) modernization in the East in the same century, 4) similar processes in the twentieth century, and 5) modernization of Russia in the second half of the twentieth century. Despite the educational and auxiliary nature of the publication, the book also has scientific and methodological significance. It is not often that our Oriental literature discusses general problems of formation and civilization, the role of tradition in the process of modernizing society, and revolutions and reforms as tools of modernization. In the introduction, the author defines and then actively uses such concepts as" social revolution"," reforms within the system"," system reforms","revolutions from above". In addition, he highlights the stages of reforms carried out by the government: first, it initiates social (capitalist) transformations, then creates legal foundations, then forms a new social pillar of power for the reformers (the bourgeoisie), and finally brings the political system into line with the new social structure.

Even from this list of concepts, it can be seen that the author relies mainly on the ideas about the essence of modernization, as a transition from a pre-capitalist (feudal) formation to a capitalist one, and about the role of the state (power), which are quite rooted in our social literature, including Oriental studies as the "midwife" of such a process. At the same time, the author introduces new aspects to the consideration of this issue. Thus, in contrast to the Soviet-era stereotypes, he prefers not a revolution from below, radical and violent, but reform - a gradual and careful capitalist transformation of society. Nor does he agree with the rigid Marxist division of society into classes, which is simplified and does not correspond to the "actual state of affairs".

The chapters devoted to the formation of modern society in the West in the XV-XVIII centuries are read with interest. The author draws attention to an important achievement of the world historical science of the XX century, which revealed in this process not only economic and political, but also spiritual, cultural, and ideological roots. At the same time, he quotes the works of K. Polanyi, J. Huizinga, M. A. Barg, introduces the reader to the position of conservative thinkers of the considered era (E. Burke, etc.), illustrating his thesis about the preference of reform over revolution, the historical experience of England over the path followed by France.

A. I. Yakovlev considers capitalist modernization of Russia from the same positions. Alexander II's" Great reforms " are defined in the book as necessary, but not completed due to the tsar's hesitation, difficulties in implementing changes that do not have support among the socially dominant strata. State policy under his successor, Alexander III, is characterized not as a counter-reform, but as a slowdown in the pace of reform, as a "respite" before the beginning of the final stage of transformation, which fell on the reign of Nicholas II. Noting that the government was unable to "firmly and consistently" perform the functions of a reformer under his rule, the author concludes that the revolutionary events in Russia in 1917 were caused not by the failure of the project of "radical reforms" itself, not by objectively inevitable, but by more specific reasons.

Modernization in the countries of the East in the 19th and 20th centuries, as well as modernization in Russia in the second half of the 20th century, are analyzed from the same methodological positions. Before touching on these sections, it is worth noting that apart from the dichotomy "reform-revolution", another pair of concepts is important for A. I. Yakovlev - "formation-civilization". The latter is understood as "a stable ethno-demographic and socio-cultural community inhabiting a certain territory" (1, p. 16). The boundaries of a civilizational community may shrink or expand over the course of historical development, but the "unchanging core of civilization"remains. The concept of "civilization "was introduced, according to the author, in order to avoid" obvious one-sidedness", because the formative approach remains in the first place, supplemented by taking into account country and regional specifics. At the same time, the role of macro-regions (ideally typical) is played by the West, East, and Russia.

An indication of the place that Russia occupies in this series is contained in the second book, where it is noted that in civilizational and cultural terms, our country is "genetically" related to the West, in contrast to Eastern society, which feels its own identity and self-sufficiency in relation to the Western world.

The content of both books, in my opinion, fully meets the goals and objectives of an advanced training course. They are quite organically, apparently, consistent with the training and theoretical baggage that modern youth receive in secondary school and higher education.-

page 185
educational institutions. But if we dissect the "peculiar fusion of scientific research and a textbook" (V. A. Isaev's description from the preface to the first book, p. 6), it turns out that A. I. Yakovlev's works bear the imprint of a certain and, as it seems, not the only possible theoretical approach.

Its essence lies in the fact that modernization is conceived primarily in the context of a separate state-political and" socio-industrial " (the author's term) system. At the same time, its capitalist transformation is carried out by the ruling circles of a particular country, acting, to a greater or lesser extent, independently of the outside world. However, the external factor, which in the case of the modernization of the Eastern countries in the XIX century represents the colonialist West, and often already capitalist Russia, is not ignored by the author: it is given, on the one hand, the role of an initiator (first push), and on the other - a force holding back autonomous national development.

I would like to emphasize that this approach is undoubtedly productive. The sections of the book devoted to the modernization of Egypt, the Ottoman Empire, Persia, Japan, Thailand and other countries are written vividly and vividly, and help to present in a systematic and chronologically coherent way the options for modernizing these countries stimulated from the outside, but conducted from the inside. At the same time, A. I. Yakovlev successfully uses a significant layer of literature, primarily domestic, belonging mainly to the "school of N. A. Simony"3. In addition, the author cites a number of books published in pre-revolutionary Russia and the USSR before the 1970s (i.e., the time of the formation of the mentioned school), as well as works by foreign authors (G. Norman, R. Pipes, etc.). The literature published in Russia in recent years is not ignored.

The same can be said for the chapters on modernization of the Eastern countries in the twentieth century, where the main focus is on development after the Second World War up to the beginning of this century. Very useful for readers, and not just students, is the chapter on the modernization of Saudi Arabia, where the author relies mainly on his own vision of the process. But no less convincing are the chapters on the modernization of Iran, Taiwan, and South Korea written based on the research of A. I. Yakovlev's colleagues. Interesting parallels are drawn between the activities of rulers who sought reforms from above, in one case more successful (King Faisal, Generalissimo Chiang Kai - shek), in the other-less (Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi). This also applies to the experience of the PRC. At the same time, Mao Zedong's policy is critically assessed as too revolutionary - "the tasks of modernizing society cannot be solved by revolutionary means" (1, p. 435, author's italics), while Deng Xiaoping's reforms are hailed as a successful revolution from above.

In a short section devoted to the experience of the People's Republic of China, the issues discussed in more detail in a separate part of the book on modernization in Russia in the second half of the XX century are discussed. It is in it that there are ratings that cause confusion and disagreement. In principle, they boil down to the fact that the author does not give an interpretation of socialism, does not reveal its place on the scale of modernization. Without describing socialism as a certain opposite of capitalism, i.e., as a special (roundabout) way of modernization, A. I. Yakovlev defines preferences and accents that are methodologically central for him. Based on them, he puts on the same level the revolutions in Russia in February and October 1917 and the events of August 1991. What allows it to find typological similarities between them? After all, in the first case, it was about the transition to capitalism, in the second - about its denial and choosing a different path of modernization, and in the third - about the denial of this denial. According to the author, they are united by the revolutionary methods of coming to power in one case of liberals, in another - of Bolsheviks, in the third-of liberals - "neo-Bolsheviks", as well as the disastrous consequences of this for the country, for the state system (1, p. 442, 444).

A. I. Yakovlev consistently evaluates the history of Russia in the 20th century and the leaders of its destinies, putting the modernization of the state, not changes in people's lives and activities, but changes in the political system first. It is important to note that in this section, as in other sections of the book, the concept of "society" most often hides a different phenomenon -

3 N. A. Simony's book is of fundamental importance for this direction "Countries of the East: ways of development" (Moscow, 1975). But in essence, almost all regional studies of the late Soviet and even post-Soviet periods are conceptually related to it. Moreover, we are talking about both the parallelism of views (Yu. A. Petrosyan) and their development (Z. A. Arabajyan).

page 186
"state". For example, the main problem of revolutionaries of various stripes, according to the author, is that they turn out to be "bad statesmen". It was they who led to the collapse of the USSR, the ruin of Russia through "shock therapy" and "privatization" and the establishment in it "criminal-oligarchic-bureaucratic capitalism" (1, p. 476, author's italics).

I do not want to dwell on the particulars of the analysis of events proposed by A. I. Yakovlev. I recognize that this is one of the ways to treat them, and the author has the right to defend it. Although as a textbook, this part of the book looks quite controversial. At the same time, starting from it, you can once again look at the entire analysis undertaken in the work. It becomes clear, for example, why the book does not address the modernization of India, Indonesia, and many other Eastern countries. Being colonially dependent in the 19th and first half of the 20th centuries, they did not have statehood, and it is the modernization of the state that attracts the author's main attention, from these positions he mainly assesses the success or failure of the modernization process. For him, it is really not a question of changing formations or replacing the agrarian system of the economy with an industrial one, but of the degree to which the state, i.e., a certain system of power, adapts to the challenges of such changes.

Moreover, A. I. Yakovlev pays almost no attention to the differences between the methods of industrialization, its implementation through the mechanism of the state primarily or the private sector, with the predominant use of administrative tools for modernization, planning, or through the market and openness to the outside world. Hence the subtle differences between the types of capitalism in different countries and at different stages of evolution in a particular country. The reader gets the impression that any modernization in the East is generated by the government, the state. Private institutions and agents of development, as independent ones, practically do not appear when considering modernization processes; the whole society acts as a stagnant, resistant force to change. By way of illustration, I will give a characteristic passage about the modernization of the" four tigers " of the Far East - Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore. As the author notes, they managed to "make a leap out of deep backwardness (sic?)". in modern times "due to" the modernization that was compressed in time, but effective as a result of the results, purposefully carried out by the authorities " (1, p.423).

This does not at all cast doubt on the possibility and justification of such a consideration of the topic. There is no doubt that the main agent of modernization is precisely the bearers of power who implement the corresponding policy. Other factors, external and internal, operate less prominently and indirectly, often focusing on public policy. There is no objection to the above-mentioned emphasis on the modernization of countries, since it is precisely within their framework that it is specifically implemented. But without denying the scientific relevance and validity of this approach, including for teaching purposes, I would like to emphasize that this is not the only angle of consideration of the topic of modernization, and if we limit ourselves to it, we risk losing the idea of the development of humanity as a whole as a deeply interconnected and unified process.

The second book reviewed by A. I. Yakovlev largely answers the question posed in the title. Central to it is not the reform-revolution opposition, but the East-West dichotomy, which is supported by the dilemmas of modern world development. In several lecture chapters, the author consistently examines the main concepts of the course, highlighting the phenomena of traditional and modern, their manifestations in the social and economic life of Eastern countries, the topic of personality in the context of modernization of Eastern society, the synthesis of Tradition and Modernity in the field of culture and the political process, and finally, the prospects for the development of Eastern countries in the context of globalization.

I note that the author's interpretation of the concept of "countries" in this book is characterized by a turn towards society and contains many interesting observations and assessments. Successfully, in my opinion, marked "focal stability of traditional consciousness in the midst of large-scale socio-economic transformations " (2, p. 50, author's italics). There is also a contradiction between the economic and social aspects of life in Eastern society, which is associated with a slow rate of increase in employment in the industrial sector and the service sector in comparison with the growth of the product produced in them. I would like to note that while in developed economies the underlying increase in social productivity leads to a concentration of employment in the tertiary sector and large cities, in developing countries there is a significant increase in the number of people employed in the tertiary sector.

page 187
maintaining low-productivity employment in agriculture on average. The village, as emphasized in the book, "it was and remains the basis of Eastern society", as well as "the guardian of social and cultural traditions" (2, p. 53).

The book notes the special role of the city in the East, and provides an interesting typology of countries based on the principle of urbanization, with small non-urbanized ones, such as Bhutan, to fully urbanized ones, such as Singapore. In a special category, the author justifiably identifies large states with a low share, but a large number of urban residents, calling them urbanized enclaves-India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh.

Attention is drawn to the author's detailed interpretation of the topic of personality in the modernizing Eastern society. The book defines "personal data warehouse" how "the totality of properties and qualities common to the majority of representatives of the same culture from generation to generation loyal to the same Tradition" (2, p. 73, emphasis added). Noting the strong influence of modern Western civilization on most Arab countries, A. I. Yakovlev also emphasizes that they have preserved an original worldview and worldview, as well as such features of group self-consciousness as disregard for the individual with respect for his dignity and honor, preference for spiritual ideals, submission to power and loyalty to the family.

The leitmotif of the book can be considered two positions-the synthesis of modern and traditional in various spheres of life of Eastern society and the decline of culture in the West. A peculiar moment in the author's interpretation of the crisis of Western civilization should be considered the emphasis on the contribution of the Russian philosopher-emigrant B. P. Vysheslavtsev, who in the early 1950s proposed the term " modern industrial culture "to denote the system of industrialism that turns society into a"single factory". In order to emphasize the thesis about the industrial and post-industrial crisis in the West, the author also refers to the more famous works of O. Spengler, H. Ortega y Gasset and others, not to mention the Russian protagonists of such ideas.

In his thesis on the crisis of the Western model of development, A. I. Yakovlev follows common ideas. There are quite a lot of reasons for this point of view, but some formulations still seem too categorical, and the assessments are a little one-sided. This is especially true in the final chapter, which contains, however, the exact provisions that in many Eastern countries are ready to accept modernization, but not Westernization, there is a disintegration of society into a cosmopolitan segment and enclaves that are excluded from modern life. It is also appropriate to recall the internal evolution of the West over the past half-millennium and the overcoming of crises, including systemic ones. In the author's opinion, the use of the potential of the East can play a certain role in this process.

In conclusion, I would like to emphasize once again the absolute scientific and educational value of A. I. Yakovlev's peer-reviewed books. We should probably raise the question of reprinting them, given that the first book, which contains, by the way, well - chosen illustrations, was published in 100 copies, and the second-300 copies. Experience in re-publishing textbooks is available4 and the author's work, especially if he takes into account some critical comments and eliminates some inaccuracies (in the second book, for example, on page 84, the English publicist of Pakistani origin Tariq Ali is named an Arab author), will be useful to a wide range of readers, especially undergraduates and postgraduates.

4 See, for example: Alaev L. B. The history of the traditional East from ancient times to the beginning of the XX century. Moscow: MGIMO, 2004; Alaev L. B. History of the East. Primitive era, Antiquity. The Middle Ages. New time.

Permanent link to this publication: