Public Administration and Patriotic Upbringing

Public Administration and Patriotic Upbringing in Russia in the XXI century   

Abstract. The article deals with the problem of patriotic upbringing in the society led by public administration, as well as implementation of specific forms of organization of the educational process purposeful patriotic upbringing. The article presents the results of a study of indicators of the influencing factors that contribute to the patriotic upbringing of the college students.

   Keywords: ideology; educational technologies; college; students; socialization

Introduction

   Different authors, who devoted their researches to state governing, have noticed global changes in all spheres of social activity. Public administration has experienced a fundamental rethinking of its basic objectives, concepts and theories during the first decades of the XXI century.
 
   The transition from an era of “government” to “governance” has brought public administration to the forefront of seminal changes in the operational context of developed and developing countries in the XXI century. Public administration, as an academic discipline, is changing rapidly due to the impact of globalization, the changing ideologies of government and the resultant changes in public agendas and discourses across the globe. Since the World War II, the role and function of governments had witnessed an unprecedented increase, in both developed and developing societies; this being largely due to the fact that “development” was considered a state activity in the public sector.

   Since the 1980s, the world has seen a reverse swing; within the term globalization was being created for the paradigmatic shift of emphasis towards a market driven, private sector led development model, with a basic philosophy to roll back the “administrative” state by reducing the size of the government and by streamlining public expenditure.

   Changes in public administration in the XX century were, in large part, a reflection of the changing nature, function and ideology of governments in different parts of the globe. Practicing traditional public administration came under persistent attack from neoliberal economists: the “public choice” school who have spearheaded philosophical arguments for reducing the size and spending of the public sector.

   If public administrators have to work in evolving democratic societies, in direct competition with the private sector and under changing ideological regimes, they need to radically rethink how they should govern in the modern age. New modes and procedures have to be learnt; there will be less paperwork, but digitalized records have to be stored because people armed with the Right to Information laws will interfere or intrude whenever they want to “know” more. Previously, the “public” were never really a part of the policy making, implementation or evaluation process, due to bureaucratic “immunity” and laws of secrecy. Times have changed; their work will be more open to scrutiny and social audit.

   At the advent of the XX century, emphasis was placed on industrial productivity, organizational efficiency and strong control mechanisms for the strengthening of the structural and procedural components of public administration. In the XXI century, focus has shifted toward human development and broadening people’s choices: these choices can be infinite and can change over time. We now live in a “knowledge” economy where “information” can and will change societies. E-governance is an invaluable tool of transparent, accountable citizen centric administration. The “public” are now truly at the centre of “public administration” like never before.

   Public administration has historically reflected the changing socioeconomic and political concerns of contemporaneous times and its impact on the functions of governments. At present, it faces contradictory ideological and functional pressures which are pulling it towards an expansionist agenda and a reductionist agenda, mostly acquainted to us as confrontation of West to East. The onus rests on the public administration of every state to re-establish its raison d’etre in accordance with particular legal, constitutional, economic and political needs of every nation, from time to time.

   The aim of the present article is to study the aspects of patriotic upbringing of the young generation as the factors influencing the public administration and progressive development of the society in the Russian Federation. As a matter of fact, the state is us, people of various ethnic groups constituting the multinational Russian nation. This fact is recorded in the Constitution and should be delivered to every member of the current civil society.
 
Historical Review

   The first stage of the modern Public Administration in this country dates back to the early nineteenth century, when the Tsar Peter the Great introduced critical institutional changes such as the foundation of a regular army and the establishment of a permanent Council of Ministers. He also divided Russia into eight regional units, each one headed by a governor and a military officer. In the field of administrative law, the cornerstone of public law and administrative law was the gigantic Svod Zakonov, an impressive and huge collection of practices, customs, proprietary and agrarian laws, drafted in 1832, according to the directions of the Tsar Nicholas I of Russia.

   The patriotic idea was built in the traditional Public Administration of the Russian Empire and was expressed with the common slogan “For Faith, Tzar and Country”. A mix of statutory and administrative models had made the Public Administration a necessary part of the patriotic ideology that strengthened at a time when the Napoleonic Army was invading Russia. However a lot of things had changed by the beginning of the XX century and global processes had much influence upon both Public Administration and Patriotic Upbringing.

   In October 1917, the October Riot took place, which was later recognized as the Great October Socialist Revolution. Vladimir Lenin as a leader of the Russian proletariat in the processes of the socialist revolution denominated the Russian national idea in favour of the socialistic ideology and national equality. Such an exaggerated denunciation of the traditional Russian patriotism was excused with the necessity of change from capitalism to more progressive formation: “And for the revolution of the proletariat, it is necessary to educate the workers for a long time in the spirit of complete national equality and fraternity. Consequently, from the point of view of the interests of the Great Russian proletariat, it is necessary to educate the masses for a long time in the sense of the most resolute, consistent, courageous, revolutionary defense of full equality and the right of self-determination of all nations oppressed by the Great Russians.”

   No doubt, Russia is a multinational country and this fact urged to be a uniting factor in the political development of the early socialist republic and further Soviet Union. During the World War II, more effectively known as the Great Patriotic War led by the Russian People against German and other European invaders, all nations of the Soviet Union stood up for their Motherland in certain patriotic fight. Josef Stalin in the hardest period of fighting united the people with the single phrase: “Our cause is just, the enemy will be defeated, and victory will be ours.”

   However, after 70 years of socialistic reality, this country was subject to the massive informational attack of the collective West headed by the United States of America and lost for a while the guiding national and patriotic ideas. All kinds of nationalists that were hiding their aggressive plans deep inside started to demonstrate their ambitions under the mask of national identities and false democracies. The Soviet Union was torn apart and subjected to the so called procedures of globalization. The ideological vacuum drew back a vast scope of nationalistic and religious “prophets” generously giving advices to any public managers willing to betray the motherland in the sake of their individual benefits.

   As a result, the multinational nation was divided by ethnic and/or religious features and forced to separate national identifications. In former Soviet republics, the systems of education were subject to significant changes, and in some of them, history science suffered from re-writing in neo-Nazi style. The actual national rhetoric of such newborn countries denies patriotism but evolves nationalism as an official state policy. 

Patriotism and Multiculturalism

   Under the Empress Catherine II, a policy of religious tolerance was pursued. So, on June 17, 1773, the decree of the Holy Synod was issued "On tolerance of all faiths and on the prohibition of bishops to entering into matters concerning confessions of other faiths and to building houses of worship according to their laws, leaving all these to secular authorities." Since then, the Russian secular society positioned itself as the multinational and multicultural one. The will of the Russian nation to live in peace with other peoples willingly being part of the Great Russian Empire was proved with the decree “On strengthening the principles of religious tolerance” issued by the Tsar Nicholas II on April 17, 1905. That is why the unique Russian Patriotism has been spread through the whole nation and is still considered as the building mortar of the public construction.

   The Soviet reality was based on some different ideology, however patriotism and multiculturalism were considered to be the irrevocable part of public administration. Patriotic upbringing was intertwisted in the educational system and everybody knew to be the participant of common history from ancient ages and through modernity. Cultural life of the Soviet Union demonstrated to the globe the importance and equality of all Republics and their peoples.

   The post-soviet space has been affected with vicious nationalistic doctrines and radical religious views. The lack of patriotism led to local conflicts in several regions of the vast state territory simultaneously. Public administration was weakened with separatism and disaccord of governing structures. The gaps in an organically structured legal science, the abandonment of economic socialism, the opening to the markets and the subsequent reorganization of the administrative apparatus by virtue of privatization processes in the early nineties of the last century, as well as the introduction of the New Public Management theories, led to immediate changes in an educational approach to patriotic upbringing.

   The rules of transparency, respect for human dignity and fundamental freedoms occasionally came to be accompanied with sell-out of interests, confrontation in faith by force and total absence of authority. The absence of patriotic stem in educational programs has resulted in behavioural shifts of almost three generations already. First, they stopped voting and paying interest to politics. Second, the youth began to prefer nasty taste in culture and ignorance in knowledge. Finally, youngsters let them be involved in violent anti-government protests because of a desire to get another i-phone, Louis Viton, frivolous relations and visa-free travel. Besides, they dare to make up their opinions in politics and economics basing on doubtful videos from YouTube, Tik-Tok and other fake-making resources.

   In the framework of the current legislation, there are several divisions of power that share responsibilities among each other. For ensuring national security, the Presidency has the option of imposing economic sanctions in accordance with international laws and, where appropriate, may use a conciliation procedure to resolve any disputes. Additionally, the administration of the President manages the Russian property abroad. Sometimes, however, Public Administration needs real support of the nation in certain sensitive matters of governing and taking risks. The latest situation with peacekeeping effort has demonstrated the importance of national solidarity in such issues. Therefore, the objectives and problems of patriotic upbringing should be included in the top list of educational priorities.

Educational Technologies

   The process of devaluation of fundamental patriotic idea has become so deep that the antics of frying sausages on Eternal Flame, breaking tombstones on soldiers' memorials or relieving a minor need at a veteran's stand are no longer surprising. The most popular topics for some youngsters are as follows:
   - How to get away from the army in Rashka?
   - Where will the unauthorized rally/meeting take place?
   - What countries are most tolerant to sexual minorities?
   - Why is his/her i-phone cooler than mine?
   - When will Putin stop ruling this state?
It is evident that European valuables and American educational technologies have sprouted lush shoots in the homeland fertile soils cultivated by foreign Russophobes. It also means that the system of education needs interfering on the side of Public Administration for improving the situation, which looks catastrophic at the moment. Between 70 and 80 percent of respondents support the President and his current activities. It seems to be that 20 to 30 percent of protest opinion falls on the share of representatives of the young generation.

   The modern moral decadence has started its marching through the human mentality since the reign of Gorbachev. That General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union promised economical welfare to all citizens of the great country but initiated fresh strain of race for power instead. Public administration was detracted from the reforming of economic and politic sectors that was vividly needed at that moment and was involved in the criminal rearrangement of the Russian “market”. The metaphysical nature of human mind reacted to the governing by the rules of thieves in law with changing behavioral patterns.

   Transition from socialist to capitalist economy was a step back in social development of the country and resulted in drastic events including bankruptcy of key taxpaying enterprises, growth of unemployment and warfare. Schoolchildren and students were “made happy” with the lightweight educational system, from which the hours of the Russian Language, History, Social Science, Elementary Military Training, Astronomy, Political Information and Patriotic Games had been excluded. During late 80s, 90s of the XX century and two decades of the XXI century the percentage of unpatriotic youth was growing from zero to some more significant figure.

   College students are unconditionally in the group of risk of being deceived by numerous soldiers of the informational war of fakes or to be more exact of the cognitive war of technologies. Only part of scholars belongs to grownups, another part is underage. They have their specific problems, are brought up in different surroundings, and spend a lot of time in media environments. It is hard to conclude that one or another historical event could be avoided under certain conditions, but the resolution can be drawn that the higher the level of education is, the easier people overcome personal and collective crisis, the better graduates can be socialized in variable mediates.
 
   To sum up, the Patriotic Upbringing should be implemented in schooling programs in different ways. It is proper to give students reliable information on political and economic issues during classes of any subjects, to organize events in support of national traditions and values, and to explain them clearly that “blogger” is not a profession as well as protester, celebrity or faker. In order to make the process of academic assistance to state governing more effective, the teaching party needs strong support on the side of Public Administration in the form of methodology approach and calling back certain traditional authorities of education in general. This article is not a list of recommendations to governing structures commissioned by the people, but a public request of society for active measures. (2022)