Неомодерн vs ретроспективний недомодерн у битві за просвітництво

Abstract

The article is devoted to the understanding of the war waged by russia against Ukraine in the context of enlightenment projections of post(non/pre)modern. The article reveals a nihilistic orientation towards (self)destruction of the simu­lacrum of the russian empire, which was formed in the situation of post(non/pre) modernity, which created a certain fork between the (post)modern perspective and the retrospective fall into premodern barbarism. From this point of view, the war against Ukraine unleashed by the putin regime is seen as a clash between the (post)modern perspective chosen by Ukraine and the retrospective of the barbar­ic (post)non-/pre-modern imperialism that russia has chosen. It is emphasized that (post(under))modern trajectories of development, and in particular war, re­veal certain failures of the modern/enlightenment project, which took place in the compatibility of three mediations: monetary/market, discursive/communicative, sexual/erotic. russian authorities and propaganda demonstrate the pre-modern rejection of these mediations, deny the referentiality of language and communica­tive discourse, devalue market freedom and sexual freedoms, and destroy any dis­tinction. Thus, the destructive barbarism that manifests itself in russian aggres­sion is the embodiment of the retrospective nature of the impulse non/pre, whose negative logic tends to Nothing. Thus, it is a post(non/pre)modern incarnation of archaism in (schizo)fascism, characterized by internal divisions and the practice of external division, fueled by the movement of return / repetition. It is noted that the choice of civilization requires not only resistance to any manifestations of (non/pre)modern barbarism, but also requires the actualization of neomod­ern. Focused mainly on high-quality consumption and spectacles Western civili­zation should recognize the need to defend itself with the help of an army/force against the threat of its destruction by barbarians and assert itself not through the constant narrowing of its own borders, but through their radical opening, not through the constant postponement of decisions, but through immediate accep­tance of the challenge to its being.