Перестать мыслить «власть» через «государство»: gouvernementalité, Governmentality Studies, и что стало с аналитикой власти Мишеля Фуко в русских переводах
To stop understanding “Power” through the “State”: Gouvernementalité, Governmentality Studies, and the fate of Michel Foucault’s analytics of power in Russian translations
Gouvernementalité is a neologism introduced by Michel Foucault in 1978. Today, with its English version “governmentality”, it has become one of the key concepts of social sciences.
This term is used to represent a new recherche perspective developed by Foucault, to understand and analyze the phenomenon of "power" or, more specifically, various types of power relations typical for different cultures and political communities. In the past several decades, this perspective has provided methodological basis for an emerging interdisciplinary research field referred to, in English-language social sciences, as Governmentality Studies. Among several aspects of this approach is a novel outlook on the genealogy and specific features of modern societies and modern state, which no longer conceptualizes "power" through the "state", in contrast to traditional paradigms of political philosophy. At the same time, contemporary social science in Russia has been largely deprived of an opportunity to use the conceptual instruments and research methods offered by Foucault; and, among the key barriers to this is the problem of translation.
This paper aim to: 1. Summarize Foucault’s critical analytical approach to power, referred to by the concept of governmentality; 2. Compare Foucauldian analytics of power to traditional paradigms in political philosophy; 3. Highlight how the concept of governmentality is used over the years in Foucault’s works dealing with power relations and the topic of ethical subject; 4. Describe the peculiarity of the early period of Governmentality Studies in English-speaking social sciences; 5. Demonstrate that current Russian translations of Foucault’s primary texts incorporating the term gouvernementalité are not merely imprecise, but display what the French call “contresens” -- interpretations that directly contradict the essence of the original. As a corpus, the available translations do not convey meaning, but rather close off the Foucauldian conceptual and exploratory landscape for the Russian-speaking world.
The paper reconstructs, in the context of actual problems of Russian historical memory and basing on archives of various provenance and the then publications, a biography of M.-B. Hadjetlaché (aka Yu. Kazi-Bek Akhmetukov, G. Ettinger, etc., ca 1868–1929) – a Circassian writer, Muslim journalist, Russian adventurist and double-dealer; the arguments for his being born Jewish are provided. In comparison of this biography with his self-narratives, his constructing of Circassian and Muslim identity is analyzed. In particular, ideas (and their sources) of what Muslim belonging means, both inside and outside the Muslim milieu (that of Russian Muslim intelligentsia), are investigated; the role of mass Orientalism and the crossovers of different cultural spaces in the formation of Muslim self-representations is emphasized, as well as the perception of ‘being Muslim’ as culture rather than religion. The question of whether Hadjetlaché was a Muslim is taken on the brink of forgery and forging, imposture and invention of identity, and his using the latter politically as his ‘symbolic capital’ is demonstrated.
In this article the author encourages the modern scientific community to draw attention to the fact that law being a unique institution of society, appears also a peculiar element of its culture. Thus, it is defended the opinion on the necessity of attraction of highly valuable data and progress of sociocultural anthropology (especially its legal and political directions) in investigation of state-legal problems, appearing objects of jurisprudence and other related social sciences. In turn, such formulation of the problem requires to use a new approach to law and state, the approach of their natural and inseparable connection with culture (in the broadest interpretation of this concept) of particular society. It gives reason to believe, that law and state undoubtedly bear the imprint of concrete culture. This thought is also continued by the following thesis that research (more profound than we have in traditional textbooks on jurisprudence) of the nature of law and state, their mechanisms and specificities as social institutions in fact becomes impossible without the reference to culture (as the system of values, ideas and practices) of society. In addition to the idea of law and state’s sociocultural conditionality in the article it is also explored to what useful consequences entails application of the aforesaid anthropological method in jurisprudence, useful both in theoretical and practical aspect. So, it is noted that the anthropological approach, requiring the comprehensive immersion in historical-cultural material, has its advantage, for example, that it is really impossible without using of data and methods of practically all humanitarian sciences (sciences about human, sciences of anthropocentristic nature), such as history, sociology, political science, psychology, cultural studies and even philology. Thus, the anthropological approach enriches our understanding of law and state, making it more stereoscopic.
Collective monograph of the scientists of Institute of State and Law RAS devoted to scientific analysis of the transformation process of the state and its legal institutions in post soviet period.
At conferenceare discussed social and economic problems at the federal and regional level, search of ways and possibilities for practical application of resources and potential of research developments in the sphere of interaction of business and the state, development of interaction of the educational, research organizations, the state structures and business is performed.
The article analyzes the similarities and differences in the understanding of the political by Hannah Arendt and Carl Schmitt, drawing parallels to their personal destinies. According to the author, the differences in interpretation of the essence of the political by Arendt and Schmitt are sometimes funadmental. While for Schmitt there is no place for the political within the state, it exists only in its external actions, for Arendt, on the contrary, only through participation in the inner political life a human being becomes free, rises above the basic need to sustain life, goes beyond the relations of domination and slavery. Having considered the idea of Arendt in her work "On Revolution", the author concludes that where the political begins for Arendt, it ends for Schmitt, and vice versa.
The author studies the issue of synthesis of different theories and methods used by personality self-attitude studies. The theories and methods discussed are developed within the framework of different philosophical, psychological and humanitarian sciences. The issue of self-attitude personology development based on such synthesis is brought up. Presented personological model of self-attitude is explicated from the texts by Michel Foucault and unites trans$cultural ideas of individual self-attitude. The above ideas are studied as a cultural potential of psychological studies and practice of self-attitude by a modern personality.
The paper focuses on the paradox embedded in conceptual logics of the Left and Right thought, that is the semantic amalgam of the concepts of sovereignty and legitimacy. Through the conceptual deconstruction of Carl Schmitt and Michelle Foucault theories we demonstrate the actual identification of sovereignty and legitimacy in political discourse. Since this identification forms the international legal framework, we perceive the power as legitimate one by recognizing the sovereignty. We reveal the similarities in power’s perception and conceptualization of the most radical representatives of the Right and Left political thought and explain it through the merge of legal and sacral in concept of sovereignty and perception of the power’s technic as independent political value.
In this exploratory study, we examined several interethnic ideologies held by individuals (assimilation, colorblindness, multiculturalism, and polyculturalism) from a social ecological perspective. We examined moderation effects of neighborhood ethnic density (ED) on relationships between interethnic ideologies and intergroup bias towards various minority ethnic groups in the Russian context. Intergroup bias was assessed as a composite score of bias toward four ethnic groups who have different cultural distances from the Russian mainstream population: Chechens, Belarusians, Uzbeks, and Chinese. We obtained a gender balanced sample of ethnic Russians from the Central Federal District of Russia (N = 359) comprising of 47% women and 53% men. The measures were used in a Russian translation by an adaptation using the back-translation and cognitive interviews. Multiple regression analysis was used to test the relationships. The results showed that high perceived neighborhood non-Russian ED weakened negative relations between intergroup bias and ideologies that purportedly accept cultural diversity (multiculturalism and polyculturalism). On the other hand, for interethnic ideologies those purportedly reject cultural diversity, high perceived neighborhood non-Russian ED weakened the positive relations between intergroup bias and assimilation and strengthened the negative relations between intergroup bias and colorblindness. The pattern of results suggests that the relationship between attitudes and intergroup bias may change based on the perceived ethnic composition of the local area and frequency of contacts. Although our findings are relatively novel they support the emerging view that attitudes and intergroup relations need to be studied from a social ecological context.
The scientific periodical journal "Power and Elites" has been published since 2014. The current Volume 6, Issue 2 is devoted to the issues of political integration, the recruitment of elites, career paths, elites in the space of discourse and symbolic, problems of morality in politics.
During the 14th and 15th October 2017, a conference organized by Ben Eklof (Indiana University), Igor Fedyukin (Higher School of Economics (Moscow), Tatiana Saburova (Higher School of Economics, Indiana University), Elena Vishlenkova (Higher School of Economics, Moscow) has been held at the Indiana University Europe Gateway at CIEE Global Institute (Berlin) with the aim to discuss new narratives about the history of Russian education, aroused by James C. Scott’s books, Seeking like a State. How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed (1998), in particular on the basis of the concept of “high modernism” in its effort to redesign society and of the role of knowledge in the context of social and economic changes.