Critical Dimensions of the ‘Legal Culture’ Approach: the Case of Classical Eurasianism and Eurasia’s Legal Union
This paper refers to the accurate usage of the word “Eurasian”, which is tightly
connected with Russian Eurasianism, an intellectual movement that existed in the Interwar period,
in the years 1921–1939.
Nowadays, the concept of “Legal Culture” is rendered banal by comparative legal thinkers,
who reduce it to legal tradition or even the legal system as a social system. In contrast to these
theories, the Eurasianist jural project was mostly culture-oriented. For instance, the Eurasianist idea
of Language Union, provided by Nikolai Trubetzkoy and the famous linguist Roman Jakobson,
could be useful for developing a new concept of Legal Union instead of the idea of legal family. Piotr
Savitzky’s notion of “Mestorazvitie”, Jakobson’s “method of linking”, and Nickolai Alekseev’s idea
of “Right-Duty” could be very fruitful concepts for establishing cultural jurisprudence.
The book discusses a little-studied aspect of the history of the Russian émigré Eurasianist movement of the 1920s and 1930s: namely, an attempt to develop holistic “Eurasianist” jurisprudence and political theory. The task proved to be much more complex than merely applying Eurasianist ideology to the field of law, as the latter was not a single phenomenon, and had different institutional and especially conceptual dimensions. Eurasianists themselves differed in their approaches to law and state. These distinctions were based on metalegal grounds, whether in phenomenological sources of the works of Nikolai Alekseev, who argued for legal individualism, or alleinheit theory in the writings of Leo Karsavin, or positivist theory informing the approach by Nikolai Dunaev. Based on Eurasianists’ published works and unpublished archival materials, this book argues for the fundamentally contradictory legal and political views by members of the Eurasianist movement. These contradictions suggest that it was impossible to create a particular “Eurasianist” legal and political theory on the basis of their writings.
I consider it necessary to formulate the problems in a way that avoids applying a narrow political science approach, which comes down to calculating the number of parties in a country, counting of votes in elections, and so on. A different formulation of the same set of problems allows a much more serious context for analysis. I think that this analysis should start with the answer to the question of what actually a modern African state is, where human rights are or aren’t respected, the concept of human rights does or does not exist, so on and so forth. Although since the end of the 1980s, when the Cold War came to an end and a wave of democratization started in Africa, from a formal point of view, the vast majority of the countries on the continent have established themselves as multi-party democracies, including legal recognition of human rights in their Western interpretation, in many of these countries democracy is in varying degrees of ephemerality up to now. As before, there are problems with human rights, in particular, with the ability to effectively defend them in court. Nevertheless, Africa’s actual achievements in this regard should not be underestimated: nowadays there are, in fact, fewer and fewer odious regimes, which were so typical for the continent until the end of the 1980s. Today, most of Africa’s regimes can be described as more or less “soft” authoritarian.
The article is devoted to a particular form of freedom of assembly — the right to counter-demonstrate. The author underlines the value of this right as an element of democratic society, but also acknowledges the risk of violent actions among participants of opposing demonstrations. Due to this risk, the government may adopt adequate measures restricting the right to counter-demonstrate, certain types of which are analyzed in this paper.
Development of standards of international controllability is reviewed in the article. Institutional approach is applied to development of international legal regime of Energy Charter. Definition of controllability is connected to development of international standards of dispute settlement, which are described in the article in detail. In connection with controllability, Russian interest, defense of investment in European Union and ecological investment encouragement, is reviewed in the article.
мировое управление и управляемость, Мировая экономика, международное экономическое право, энергетическая хартия, International control and controllability, International economics, international economic law, Energy Charter
международное частное право; недвижимость; ; школа бартолистов; бартолисты; теория статутов; статуарная теория/