Autarky is a system of closed community reproduction, with minimal dependence on exchange with the external environment. Recent events: scandals at the Olympics, sanctions, hysterics of the British premieres and many other acts of Western countries, push Russia to the road of isolation. And many elements of our power and a large share of the people support this way. We will grow the bread ourselves, we will assemble the machines ourselves and fly ourselves into space ourselves. Similar events happen to great nations with some regularity. But care in the shadows can be different.
As the late Mr. Mikhail Zadornov joked: "In the very center of Europe Belarus sits in a partisan detachment among the marshes and does not surrender to the West" ... Well, or somehow close to the text. So this is an example of isolation. Another bad example is the DPRK. Good examples of countries striving for autarky are the Russian Empire of the mid-12th century and the British Empire of the same period, which surrounded itself with protectionist barriers.
Yes, of course there are no complete avtarky. In the DPRK, the GDR wagons roll around, and Russia, even with complete political isolation from Europe and the US, will continue to sell gas, as was the case with dear Leonid Ilyich. But this is a lyrical digression. What is the difference between good and bad autarky? Between the DPRK, Zadornovskaya Belorussia and the Russian Empire of Nicholas I?
Bad autarky it defends. Good, it develops and covers its cocoon with new territories, markets. It reproduces culture, culture is competitive. After all, the age of the autarchy (and quasi-western) is not long, and it will be published either hopelessly backward or ready to become a leading power politically, culturally, and economically.
So, what is now looming on the horizon is the specter of bad autarky for Russia. We leave, they leave us not to forge the intergalactic fleet, do not grow trillions of tons of rye and do not shoot movie masterpieces. They leave us to stop talking. To completely disappeared. And we are leaving just this. Sometimes isolation can be extremely useful, it is even sometimes necessary. China withdrew to isolation in the middle of the twentieth century, but he left under the slogans of the Cultural Revolution, monstrous in its destruction, but nevertheless has a powerful charge to make and destroy these destruction.
There is nothing like this in modern Russia. At best, we have a slogan: "We will preserve the legacy of the USSR," although there is no legacy of it.
If we are thrown into isolation, if we go ourselves into it, then we must go not to rot in the cell, but to become stronger.