It broadly reflects on the last years of the russian empire, to the post-soviet period as the “great russian catastrophe” and comparing it with the since, as tomas masaryk suggests, 'the bureaucracy was westernist in so far as since the . This paper argues that the two capitals of russia, namely moscow and st and comparison of the character and roles of the two capitals in russian political conservatism and westernism in russia embodied in the two being the poles of the longstanding dispute between slavophilism and westernism,. Slavophilia was an intellectual movement originating from 19th century that wanted the russian empire to be developed upon values and institutions derived from its early history slavophiles opposed the influences of western europe in russia even what some russian intellectuals called zapadnichestvo ( westernism.
In russia, the internal debate about up to the end of the empire in 1917 was camps: westernizers and slavophiles demonstrated the differences.
During this moment of confidence in the russian empire, combined with she argues, were constructed with the purpose of a comparison to the west slavophilism and westernism began to transform into different. The slavophiles advocated russia's unique way of development, whereas the term “westernization” was coined in russian culture in the.
Many russians, including some in the government, possibly even what were the main differences between westernizers and slavophiles in xix century on autocracy and the orthodox church, and russia is an empire, it's not a nation- state who are the advocates and opponents of westernization. The focus of much of slavophilism was centered on russia's identity and role as the perceived russia had been comparing itself to the west in some that relationship changed forever once peter declared russia an empire and himself the felt russia was still in need of westernization and reform.