On a general basis in the major cultures of

№6. 2013  
 
 
103 
is this relationship as a key to identify the community and its place in the ethno-social organization of the 
Kazakh and Russian, many researchers have questioned. The main argument in this case is as follows: in 
the Russian ethno-organizing community considered primarily as an economic unit, and in Kazakh – as 
ethnic. 
In our opinion, in the context of Universalist research strategy most important is that the community in 
both organizations is the ethno-collective form of existence, which played a major role in the history of 
both ethnic groups. What is the culture of Kazakhstan today? It is represented, in our view, first of all, by 
the cultures of the two largest ethnic groups in our country – Kazakh and Russian. None of these cultures 
is dominant, since, on the one hand, there are attempts to institutionalize elements of Kazakh culture in the 
political system, but to secure the success of these elements is missing the real «base», as the Kazakh 
language at this stage is not wholly language employed for more than half of the population of 
Kazakhstan. On the other hand, the Russian language, with the real «base» ( it is used by more than half of 
the population of Kazakhstan), while at the same time is not an official language. 
Thus, the culture of the two largest ethnic groups in our country form a certain whole, the existence of 
which is due to the presence or absence of the above features by one hundred percent use (fixing) of their 
language. In this case, the dominant against them is the so-called Soviet culture, being displaced at the 
moment by Western culture. 
The two largest ethnic groups in Kazakhstan – Kazakh and Russian – have their own, in our view, 
largely similar values. «Platonov O., enumerates the following specific to Russia and established long 
before the Baptism of Russia, civilizational values: 
1) the prevalence of spiritual and moral foundations over the material, and  
2) the collective forms of labor democracy (community, gang); 
3) the focus on the reasonable sufficiency and self-restraint (not ¬ greed); 
4) the ideal of righteousness (moral) of labor; 
5) the idea of the earth and of nature as God's gift to all living, and therefore, the denial of private 
property in the conditions of existence « [14]. 
If you look at the above values, we can see that almost all of them are the values of the Kazakh ethnic 
group. Say, in the oral folk art Kazakhs have many proverbs and sayings that highlight the importance of 
collective forms of existence. For example: «Zhayaudyngshangyshykhpas, zhalghyzdyngunіshykhpas» – 
«Dust is not visible on foot of a pedestrian, the voice of the lonely is not heard.» Or this: 
«Zhalghyzzhүrіpzholtapkhansha, koppenzhүrіpadas» – «It is better to get lost together with others than to 
find the way walking alone.» «Tozghanқazdytoptanghanқarghazheydі» – «Wandering goose is pecked by 
the flock of crows» [15]. In turn, the famous English scientist, professor at the School of Slavonic and East 
European Studies, University of London Geoffrey Hosking in his newly published book, «Russia and the 
Russians: History» notes that while «in the last 300 years, Russia is by far part of Europe ... some basic 
institutions – Asian. The same farming community and the habit of mutual responsibility» [16]. A prominent 
Russian ethnographer, historian L. Gumilev wrote that: «Of course, the relationship of Russian and Turkic 
peoples in the XIII – XVI centuries were not cloudless, but in the era of feudal fragmentation it was 
inevitable. Does less damage inflicted by intrastate strife among lords, such as hostility between Moscow 
and Tver, or strife of steppe tribes, for example, Nogais and Tatars of the Horde. However, it was a problem 
within a single system, a single culture, a single country. Yes, if it were otherwise, would Russian explorers 
with insignificant forces have been able to go through a huge Siberia and the Far East! « [17]. 
In general, in recent years, there are the book began published, which can be called complete 
investigation and which deliberately or unfocused based on extensive archival material reveals a common 
origin in the cultures and peoples of Turkic and Russian ethnos. That is to say, are the works of M. Aji 
[18] and A. Bushkova [19]. The first of these authors find Turkic roots in the culture and Russian descent. 
And the second finds the Russian roots of the Turks. In general, it is important in these works that there 
are identified the unifying moments. Therefore, such a book, in our opinion, is desirable to include in 
relevant educational programs. 
Thus, the similarity of the civilizational values of the two main culture forming ethnic groups of 
Kazakhstan could be a good resource for sharing progressive movement, to build a common future. 
All of the above leads to the conclusion that in Kazakhstan there is no so-called «cultural fault lines» 
(though I think no one doubts the ontological references this phenomenon). Here it should be noted that 
the potential of the cultural dialogue in Kazakhstan in conditions of incomplete transition period in the 
history of our country depends on a large degree of responsibility of the elites (especially political) as the 
vector of spiritual development, the formation and replication of the basic values of society. 
Problems of consolidation and formation of new identity in Kazakhstan 
In today's world, as we have noted earlier, the state still remains the main guarantor of social rights and 
social security for its citizens. But the challenges and demands of modern civilization development (man-
singularity, post-human problems, «New World Order») may reduce the resource potential of the state in 

Известия Национальной Академии наук Республики Казахстан  
 
 
   
104  
the field of its core functions. As is known, the scope of social rights and guarantees of social security is a 
huge potential for conflict. A reduction in capacity of the state in this area (due to the factors mentioned 
above) makes it even more vulnerable. Therefore it is the most important task of the survival of both the 
state and individuals who live in them. The existence and survival of the state and its place in the new 
«world order» and international division of labor depends highly on how the citizens internally 
consolidated, as optimized and controlled its social and political organization. This is particularly 
important for countries that are still in the process of building a new state, such as Kazakhstan. 
Task of nation-building and consolidation of citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan are complicated 
and depend, in our opinion, in the first instance, on the following facts and factors: 1) the ethnic, social 
and confessional heterogeneity of the population, and 2) the socio-economic wellbeing of the population, 
and 4) to obtain the independence of the de facto, that is not on the rise of passionate energy, and 5) the 
role of elites as producers of basic values of society, and 6) the formation of new basic values. Let’s 
examine in detail each of these factors. Kazakhstan is a multiethnic state, like many countries in the world. 
But if most of the major developed nations were formed on the basis, so to speak, of «cultural hegemony» 
of ethnic groups – «dominant», the state-forming ethnos in Kazakhstan at the time of gaining 
independence of our republic was not «recognized» such by a significant part of other nationalities. A 
natural consequence of the chosen model, imposition of Western standards and values and, above all, 
individualism, is the fragmentation of society into the most different in size, interests and life goals of the 
group. And individualism erodes both the Kazakh and Russian identity, one of the bases of which, in our 
opinion, is the collective forms of labor democracy. In addition to «basic», «traditional» religions in 
Kazakhstan, in our country there were a lot of representatives of the various religious movements, 
including those of a sectarian character, which also contributes to the fragmentation of society. And very 
often the interests of these movements in our country are protected by various international organizations 
as well as at the state level in the form of expression of concerns, advice (and sometimes direct pressure) 
in the context of human rights. 
Socio – economic wellbeing of the population is also a very important factor in the consolidation and 
the problems of state-building. It is clear that the transition to a market economy contributed to the 
stratification of society, and the conditions of globalization intensified the situation of distinction between 
«subject» and «object» of globalization, both at the State level and at the level of individuals [20]. 
One of the determining factors of socio-economic well-being of the population is an ambiguous 
attitude to the question of the legitimacy of the distribution of wealth at the dawn of independence of 
Kazakhstan. This is the case for almost all the former Soviet republics. Thus, his opposition to the 
redistribution of wealth in Russia has repeatedly expressed by the Nobel Prize owner in Economics 
(2001), Joseph Stiglitz. He noted that, rather than to increase the pace of economic growth, they (the team 
of T. Gaidar) destroyed it, relying on even more fantastic than that of Karl Marx, concerning the nature of 
capitalism [21]. Jeffrey Sachs, who worked in the T. Gaidar’s government as an economic adviser in the 
early 90's, described the policy of this government as a «malignant, willful, deliberate, well thought 
redistribution of wealth in favor of a small group of individuals». 
In connection with the above, a very important role of the elites in the problems of state building and 
consolidation should be noted. It is primarily the responsibility of the elites, as in the formation of a «new 
world order» is a situation of increasing «temptation» of imitation of democratic institutions, the 
increasing trend of destruction of feedback, which is possible in the first place, with the real action of the 
two basic principles of democracy (in 19) – selectivity and accountability. In the situation described 
above, each person increases feelings of fear, concern for their future, and the opportunity to express their 
concerns, fears, and possibilities of their sublimation into concrete steps are reduced. Therefore, the 
responsibility of elites for the preservation and development of democratic institutions is increasing. 
Another important factor affecting the problem of state-building and consolidation of society is the 
occurrence of the conditions for the formation of a new identity after the collapse of the Soviet Union. 
Identity should not be seen as a property of the inherent to the individual, and as a ratio, being generated in 
the process of social interaction. According to many researchers, the identity in the strict sense of the word 
can be attributed only to individuals because only individuals have the quality of subjectivity and, 
therefore, are able to refer or not to refer to themselves certain characteristics (values). It is believed that 
the identity of the groups allowed attributing only in a figurative sense. Thus, in the Soviet period was 
declared a new identity, new community – the Soviet people. And in political science from the mid 80's, it 
was generally accepted use of the terms «Islamic identity», «Christian Identity», «Western identity», 
«Eastern identity», «Eurasian identity», etc. to identify subjects of international relations as a competing 
«identities». 
After the collapse of the Soviet Union the social relations of all the former Soviet republics have 
changed, that the condition for the formation of a new identity appeared instead of dominated the Soviet 
type of identity – the «Soviet people.» Kazakhstan has also changed the system of social relations, which 

№6. 2013  
 
 
105 
was anchored in Article № 7 in the new Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, in which the Kazakh 
language admitted as a state language. In Kazakhstan, the process of forming a new identity has not taken 
place, but the options it as «Kazakhstani nation» or «the Kazakh nation» cause considerable controversy 
and debate, not only among researchers. Let’s recall of the controversy between a journalist Duvanov S. 
and political analyst Zhunusov S. in the newspaper «Republic» in 2008 concerning the national idea [22]. 
Or publication of the same Duvanov on identity in which he offers the ethnonym «Kazakh» seen as civic 
identity. He writes: «The essence of the compromise (between the supporters of the ethnic and non-ethnic 
option of statehood – Comm. Mine – S.R.) is that all non-Kazakhs – citizens of Kazakhstan should 
become the Kazakhs, but the very notion of» Kazakh «is no longer ethnic and expresses his membership 
in the state. Everything is simple: we are all one nation – the Kazakhs. With each ethnically remains what 
he was» [23]. 
By the way, in the Russian media that option long ago (was) widespread use: they often called Kazakhs 
the citizens of our country with absolutely non-Kazakhs phenotypes and surnames. Russia, which is also a 
multi-ethnic state, as Russian scientist Vladimir Inozemtsev counts, «requires new approaches that 
combine the principle of the civil nation with the concept of group identity, reconciling various 
«specialness» and not giving them to become the basis for the approval of exclusivity» [24]. 
In the context of the problems of the formation of national identity and issues nationalism is 
considered. As noted by the Russian scientist Alexander Khazin, there are two forms of nationalism – civil 
(France) and ethnic (Israel, Germany). 
In Kazakhstan, civic nationalism implies the recognition of the existence of «a nation of Kazakhstan», 
which, in the opinion of Khazin, actually is not. And there is the Kazakh nation and ethnic minorities who 
are citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Accordingly, ethnic nationalism is recognition of the Kazakh 
nation. In this case, nationalism is seen as inevitable, an objective phenomenon, a product of post-
industrial society. Not long ago, our president first used the term «Kazakhstan nation», which is, in our 
view, with the objectives of consolidation of Kazakhstani citizens in the need to address a number of 
important tasks of modernization. However, this led to a lively debate among scientists, journalists and 
ordinary people. Opponents of the term (and they are many) think that it (the term) erodes the Kazakh 
identity. But do not forget that a Kazakh identity in our conditions, and responsibilities should include 
representatives of the Kazakh people for all Kazakhs and representatives of other ethnic groups. And this 
is no easy task. 
In Kazakhstan, however formed a new identity – as a «nation of Kazakhstan» and «Kazakh nation» 
(supporters and opponents believe that such identity is eroded «their own» ethnic identity), – it should 
include a greater responsibility for the welfare of the Kazakhs of each Kazakhstan citizen regardless of 
their ethnic and religious affiliation. But this process requires that the representatives of each ethnic group 
have to share the resource of «ethno-social well-being». Kazakhs have to understand that many of the 
other ethnic groups are also entitled to consider themselves indigenous to our state, and members of other 
ethnic groups need to understand and respect the fact that the Kazakhs have no other historical homeland 
Our country became independent de facto that is not on the rise of the passionate energy of the 
population, although this situation may be a positive background for the solution of problems of state 
building. Therefore the task of improving the activity and creativity of people cooperation is very 
important. And here science can help and, above all, synergy that helps to scientifically substantiate the 
importance of civic engagement of each person, the importance of this activity in the formation of a 
general scenario of the future. 
Well, of course, a very important basis for consolidation of the citizens of Kazakhstan and the entire 
population of the planet should be a new system of basic values, in our opinion, which should be based on 
a new ethic of responsibility and solidarity, which is based on a positive spiritual experience of mankind, 
provides for the liability of each person for the future of the Earth, which, in turn, requires a (human) 
activity, creativity and cooperation. In addition, and therefore, a new ethic of responsibility and solidarity 
should include a new understanding of spirituality. Such spirituality – is not only and not so much the 
morality or intelligence, but also the awareness of its unity with the world and the formation on the basis 
of such understanding of behavioral strategies aimed at co-operation and care about the world. Such 
spirituality and its understanding becomes a practical necessity. 
CONCLUSION 
Thus, the problems of social and cultural development of our country – is, above all, the problems of 
intercultural dialogue, social and cultural consolidation. Dialogue of Cultures involves identifying, 
updating and, if possible, institutional establishment of identical things in cultures of ethnic groups whose 
members reside in one state. Social and cultural consolidation of the people of our country, the possibility 
of its implementation has two main structural aspects: social and national. First – caring about the person, 
that is, each person has to feel that the government on behalf of all the structures really care about him, it's 
a demanding job of every official in his place, the fight against corruption. In addition, every member of 

Известия Национальной Академии наук Республики Казахстан  
 
 
   
106  
society must feel that he can really influence social processes through the electoral system, non-
governmental organizations, and civil society organizations. That is really to act feedback principle, the 
system of human communities must be based on two basic principles of democracy (among 19) – 
selectivity and accountability. The second aspect of the socio-cultural consolidation – national – linked to 
the process of formation of the new identity in Kazakhstan, the conditions for the realization of which 
were formed after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Kazakhstan's independence and fixing of Kazakh as 
the state language in the article № 7 of the Constitution of Kazakhstan. Of course, the process of forming a 
new identity would require the representatives of ethnic groups living in Kazakhstan, sharing their 
resource of «ethno-social well-being». It is important to reach a consensus on what will be this «part», but 
it is clear that the concord is necessary. 
Systematic, well-designed and scientifically sound solution of the problems of social and cultural 
development will help to successfully solve large complex of modernization tasks that are vital to our 
country. 
 
REFERENCES 

жүктеу/скачать 2,69 Mb.

Достарыңызбен бөлісу: