2.6. Antagonism Between the Government and Right-Wing Nationalists

Despite the fact that two nationalisms have commonalities on the definition of “Russian” and are both anxious about Chinese migration, they are currently in the state of fierce conflict and show deep distrust towards each other.

Russian nationalist groups are mainly suppressed by the government and being excluded from participation in the decision making today - this exclusion is enforced in the Russian Criminal Code, which contains the following article “Inciting hatred and hostility or humiliation of human dignity”; it is usually referred as article 282. Article includes such punishments as significant fines and allows long-term imprisonment. In a nutshell, this article causes discontent among nationalists who claim that it is used as a political repression tool by the government; because nationalists are subject to it due to harsh racist rhetoric, it effectively prevents them from participating in public policy or appear on significant and well-known media sources as well as empowers government with the ability to imprison prominent nationalist leaders or activists (Zhermelova, 2012).

This exclusion from power is explained by the authoritarian nature of the government, which tends to suppress potential competitors. Modern Russian political system is often characterized as an electoral or competitive authoritarian regime; hence, the focus is brought on providing the conditions under which elections serve to stabilize the regime (Bogaards, 2009; p.415). Hale, for instance argues that Russian society is actually dualistic as it seeks to have some sort of democratic institutions, however, wishes the power to be exercised by a “strong hand” leader; as the result, “Russians enable a regime that, while still hybrid, is now closer to dictatorship than to democracy” (2009; pp.19-21). anrajectortrajectorie000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Empirically, this can be proved by observing reports of Freedom House, which, in its 2013-2014 analysis of Russia, provided examples of state expanding its control over the media: it is either being completely abolished, (the case of RIA Novosti) or falls under governmental control through state ownership or replacements of an editorial board (2014).

2.7. Discourse of Two Nationalisms on Chinese Immigration

Consequently, such constrain on nationalists sets a very specific frame of discourse between the two nationalisms in Russia. Not only right-wing representatives disagree with the official definition of the “Russian” and what government has been doing in the sphere of immigration policy, but they alsond waand want itsly to allow wo camps,o perform sian politics and compare these views.000000000000000000000000000 express the desire to remove the government from power, including by force.

Despite the fact that key features of two Russian nationalisms were explained above, one must understand that these theoretical concepts represent the “ideal types” which are harder to be found in reality. Hence, in order to have a complete understanding of how two nationalisms perceive Chinese immigration and affect each others’ attitudes, it is important to provide actual examples from the Russian politics such as documents and statements from prominent members of the two camps as well as explanation of their background, in order to make a productive comparison of their views on the issue.

Therefore, the BA thesis employs discourse analysis to perform this task: this approach proves to be the best framework due to the fact that “it is grounded in an explicitly constructionist epistemology that sees language as constitutive and constructive rather than reflective and representative” (Phillips, Hardy, 2002; p.13), what basically means that actors involved in the discourse shape perceptions and attitudes. Hence, politicians, by engaging in the discourse, define the way current and future trends in the field are going to develop: this point is supported by Waever, who points that “discourse analysts are often more interested in how a politician argues than what he says; whether he argues for or against a specific decision is less interesting than what he does to the general political language and therefore to long-term possibilities” (2004; p.200). In addition to that, Willig claims that explanatory strategy of the frame is “claiming for the cognitive processes of individuals the central role in shaping perception and action” (Willig, 2003; p.160). Additional advantage of this approach is that it is particularly suitable for analyzing the issue of ethnicity and racism and can actually help to reveal insights into construction of these concepts: “stories about minorities generally function as complaints by majority group members or as expressions of negative experiences or prejudices about minorities” (Phillips, Hardy, 2002; p.31). nally, discourse analysis is one of the most suitable frames re to long-term possibilities"the field are going