print

The risks of the spread of «new ethics» in Russia:
will we become a society without a hero?

Zarubina N.N.,

MGIMO University, Moscow, Russia, n.zarubina@inno.mgimo.ru

elibrary_id: 649039 | ORCID: 0000-0001-8120-3376 | RESEARCHER_ID: I-4213-2017

Article received: 2026.04.02 10:11. Accepted: 2026.05.11 10:11


DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2026.04.08
EDN: RWFEAI

Rubric: Russia today

For citation:

Zarubina N.N. The risks of the spread of «new ethics» in Russia: will we become a society without a hero? – Polis. Political Studies. 2026. No. 4. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2026.04.08. EDN: RWFEAI (In Russ.)

Abstract

This article studies the social and cultural nature and consequences of the “new ethics” that has become widespread in the West, as a result of transformations of moral regulation under the influence of the “applied turn of postmodernism” and digitalization. The article aims to analyze the prerequisites for the spread of “victim culture” (B. Campbell, J. Manning) in Russia and the possible consequences of its penetration into Russian society, viewing it as the most striking and least studied manifestation of the “new ethics” in the Russian context. Drawing on the works of foreign and domestic researchers, the article demonstrates the sociocultural essence of the “new ethics” and “victim culture” as its quintessence. It identifies such mechanisms of practical implementation as identification with victimized groups, the priority of local experience over universal moral judgments, the exaltation of previously stigmatized identities, and appeals to media and social media audiences for the resolution of moral conflicts. A distinctive feature of the “victim culture” is the absence of a positive moral role model; in this sense, its spread is associated with the emergence of a culture without a hero. It is shown that Russia has social preconditions for the spread of “victim culture”, including cultural pluralism, weak social ties, and the widespread availability of digital communications. The emphasis on historical trauma and the victimized identities of certain groups, reinforced by “victim culture”, can undermine universal civic identity. Resentment and the applied turn of postmodernism are identified as cultural preconditions for the spread of “new ethics”. The latter contributes to the blurring of basic concepts of good and evil, the undermining of cultural ideals, the destruction of the pantheon of heroes, and the exaltation of destructive and therefore previously repressed aspects of culture and social life. The article concludes that postmodernism has not become as widespread in Russia as it has in the West, but still exerts some influence within intellectual and ideological subcultures. Based on available expert assessments and sociological survey data, the author concludes that neomodernism, as a return to and defense of value universals, as well as an ethic of service and responsibility, can develop in Russia as a civilizational response to the challenges of the transformation of moral paradigms and the “new ethics”.

Keywords

new ethics, victim culture, socio-cultural risks, victimized groups, victimized identities, historical trauma, ressentiment, postmodernism, ethics of responsibility.

Campbell, B., & Manning, J. (2014). Microagression and moral cultures. Comparative Sociology, 13(6), 692-726. https://doi.org/10.1163/15691330-12341332

Campbell, B., & Manning, J. (2018). The rise of victimhood culture: micro-aggressions, safe spaces, and the new culture wars. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70329-9

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241-1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

Eisenstadt, S.N. (2000). Multiple modernities. Daedalus, 129(1), 1-29.

Bauman, Z. (2008). Liquid modernity. (Russ. ed.: Bauman, Z. Tekuchaya sovremennost’. St. Petersburg: Piter).

Bugaeva, N.N. (2026). Phraseology of “New Ethics” (“wokeness”) in the mass consciousness: inversion of moral concepts “high”/“low” in network discourse. World of Culture and Culturology, 1(3-4). (In Russ.)

Butenko, I.A. (2000). Postmodernism as reality given to us in sensations. Sociological Studies, 4, 3-11. (In Russ.) https://www.isras.ru/files/File/Socis/04-2000/001.BOUTENKO.pdf

Chugrov, S.V. (2022). Cancel culture in world politics: historical and philosophical roots. Polis. Political Studies,5, 88-98. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.05.07

Gorshkov, M.K., Krumm, R., & Petukhov, V.V. (Eds.). (2011). Dvadtsat’ let reform glazami rossiyan: opyt mnogoletnikh sotsiologicheskikh zamerov [Twenty years of reforms through the eyes of Russians]. Moscow: Ves Mir. (In Russ.)

Granovetter, M. (2009). The strength of weak ties. Economic Sociology, 10(4), 31-50. (In Russ.)

Guseinov, A.A. (2021). What’s new in the “New Ethics”? Vedomosti Applied Ethics, 58, 91-106. (In Russ.)

Karavay, A.V. (2022). The social capital of Russian society in the face of external shocks of different nature. Issues of Economic Theory, 4, 134-148. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.52342/2587-7666VTE_2022_4_134_148

Kortunov, A.V. (2017). From postmodernism to neomodernism, or memories of the future. Russia in Global Politics, 15(1), 8-19. (In Russ.)

Krotovskaya, N.G., & Kulagina-Yartseva, V.S. (2022). “New ethics”: review of origins and modernity. Context and Reflection: Philosophy of the World and Human Being, 11(2A), 241-259. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.34670/AR.2022.20.96.020

Nietzsche, F. (1990). Zur Genealogie der Moral: Eine Streitschrift. (Russ. ed.: Nietzsche, F. K genealogii morali. In Sochineniya v dvukh tomakh. T. 2 (pp. 407-471). Moscow: Mysl’. (In Russ.)

Panarin, A.S. (2003a). Pravoslavnaya tsivilizatsiya v global’nom mire [Orthodox civilization in the global world]. Moscow: Aspect Press. (In Russ.)

Panarin, A.S. (2003b). Politicheskoye polozheniye Rossii: vzglyad v budushcheye [Russia’s political situation: a look into the future]. Moscow: State Academy of Slavic Culture. (In Russ.)

Panarin, A.S. (2005). Russkaya kul’tura pered vyzovom postmodernizma [Russian culture facing the challenge of postmodernism]. Moscow: Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russ.)

Pluckrose, H., & Lindsay, J. (2020). Cynical theories: how activist scholarship made everything about race, gender, and identity–and why this harms everybody. (Russ. ed.: Pluckrose, H., & Lindsay, J. Tsinichnyye teorii. Kak vse stali sporit’ o rase, gendere i identichnosti i chto v etom plokhogo. Moscow: Individuum).

Radaev, V.V. (2025). Increasing engagement in social media and addiction of users from younger generational cohorts. Sociological Science and Social Practice, 13(4), 127-158. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.19181/snsp.2025.13.4.6

Sztompka, P. (2001). Social change as trauma. Sociological Studies, 1, 6-17. (In Russ.)

Tikhonova, N.E., & Dudin, I.V. (2024). Identities of Russians as a factor in the consolidation of Russian society. Sociological Studies, 11, 18-33. (In Russ.)

Titarenko, A.I. (1984). Antiidei. Opyt sotsial'no-eticheskogo analiza [Anti-ideas: an experience of socioethical analysis]. Moscow: Politizdat. (In Russ.)

Toshchenko, Zh.T. (1999). Sociology: paths of scientific reformation. Sociological Studies, 7, 3-15. (In Russ.)

Toshchenko, Zh.T. (2002). On the conceptual apparatus of sociology. Sociological Studies, 9, 3-16. (In Russ.)

Weber, M. (1994). Die Wirtschaftsethik der Weltreligionen. (Russ. ed.: Weber, M. Khozyaystvennaya etika mirovykh religiy. Popytka sravnitel’nogo issledovaniya v oblasti sotsiologii religii. Vvedeniye. In Selected Works. The Image of Society (pp. 43-73). Moscow: Yurist).

Zaslavskaya, T.I. (2005). Human potential in the contemporary transformation process. Social Sciences and Modernity, 3, 5-16. (In Russ.)

Zavadskiy, A., & Dubina, V. (Eds.). (2021). Vse v proshlom. Teoriya i praktika publichnoy istorii [All in the past: theory and practice of public history]. Moscow: Novoe Izdatel’stvo. (In Russ.)

Zhadunova, N.V., & Grishneva, A.A. (2025). “New Ethics”: normal and abnormal. Social Norms and Practices, 2, 81-93. (In Russ.)

See also: