Публичная сфера и легитимность персоналистской системы власти в России
According to the given article the main basis of the present political regime’s legitimacy in Russia seems to be the absence of institutionalized citizen’s communication across differences. In the absence of effective political competition and social critically media there is not public communication. This, in turn, does not generate the collective form of political change’s internalization. A consequence is the private character of political preference formation which rationality is aimed not at improvement of own political knowledge, but on improvement of own material welfare. For this reason the public sphere institutions/political communication institutions are devaluated as a basis of preference formation in the opinion of most citizens. The exclusion of the democratic institutions from possible ways to improve one’s personal situation does not conflict with interventions of the authoritarianism.
The paper considers linguistic and cross-cultural features of speech strategy and tactics in political texts.
Formation of democratic societies of the Western type presupposes appearance on the historical scene of a new strong actor - the bourgeois class: "No bourgeoisie, no democracy" (Barrington Moore). The articulation and defense of vital interests of that class creates a new social space - "the bourgeois public sphere" which helps to make up "counterbalance" to absolutism of a corporate state - a civil society, the core of which is composed by public opinion. In the confrontation between the authorities and society one of the most important roles is played by the press that provides free debate and discussion of generally valid problems, especially economic and political. The recognition of the mass media role was stamped in its characterization in XIII century as "the fourth power". Technological development of the media incredibly expanded its functions, turning journalists into creating informational analogue of reality, saturating daily life with new meanings. Methods of the representation of reality, the specific nature of political influence of journalists - key members of the reflexive elites (Helmut Shelski), are the themes of this article.
Публичная сфера, журналистика, четвертая власть, порядки знания, Повседневность, научное и повседневное знание, экспертиза, Репрезентация, public sphere, journalism, fourth estate, orders of knowledge, Everyday life, scientific and everyday knowledge, Expertise, representation
This book sheds new light on the continuing debate within political thought as to what constitutes power, and what distinguishes legitimate from illegitimate power. This book concludes by arguing that the Russian experience provides a useful lens through which ideas of power and legitimacy can be re-evaluated and re-interpreted, and through which the idea of “the West” as the ideal model can be questioned.
The author explores the correspondence between the system of political views and values and the system of stylistic means used in public communication. On a material of public images of the Russian politicians this article suggests possible methods of assessment of compliance between the chosen rhetoric and declared political tasks and goals.
The paper deals with the creative works of an outstanding German philosopher-anthropologist Helmut Plessner. He addresses to an existential structure of individuality as to a social existence and considers it as the carrier of roles. He proves that social identification is based on the idea of the person possessing a social role, but not defined by it. Plessner starts with the idea of a duality of the role relation in which the performer identifies himself. Such identification appears as the only condition in the basic relation of a social role and a human nature. On this basis in the structure of duality of the human existence, a role connecting the carrier and its figure, Plessner finds a constant of sociality. Plessner addresses to an ontologic structure of the person, an eccentric pozitionality, within social subject and defines it as “duality structure in which the carrier of a role and a figure of a role are connected”. Plessner believes that what we find exactly in this structure is "a constant" which is the condition of “human generalization”, and considers it in a quality of “the unique constant in the basic relation of a social role and a human nature”.
The article deals with the processes of building the information society and security in the CIS in accordance with modern conditions. The main objective is to review existing mechanisms for the formation of a common information space in the Eurasian region, regarded as one of the essential aspects of international integration. The theoretical significance of the work is to determine the main controls of the regional information infrastructure, improved by the development of communication features in a rapid process.The practical component consists in determining the future policies of the region under consideration in building the information society. The study authors used historical-descriptive approach and factual analysis of events having to do with drawing the contours of today's global information society in the regional refraction.
The main result is the fact that the development of information and communication technologies, and network resources leads to increased threats of destabilization of the socio-political situation in view of the emergence of multiple centers that generate the ideological and psychological background. Keeping focused information policy can not be conceived without the collective participation of States in the first place, members of the group leaders of integration - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Currently, only produced a comprehensive approach to security in the information field in the Eurasian region, but the events in the world, largely thanks to modern technology, make the search for an exit strategy with a much higher speed. The article contributes to the science of international relations, engaging in interdisciplinary thinking that is associated with a transition period in the development of society. A study of current conditions in their relation to the current socio-political patterns of the authors leads to conclusions about the need for cooperation with the network centers of power in the modern information environment, the formation of alternative models of networking, especially in innovation and scientific and technical areas of information policy, and expanding the integration of the field in this region on the information content.
This special publication for the 2012 New Delhi Summit is a collection of articles by government officials from BRICS countries, representatives of international organizations, businessmen and leading researchers.
The list of Russian contributors includes Sergei Lavrov, Foreign Minister of Russia, Maxim Medvedkov, Director of the Trade Negotiations Department of the Russian Ministry of Economic Development, Vladimir Dmitriev, Vnesheconombank Chairman, Alexander Bedritsky, advisor to the Russian President, VadimLukov, Ambassador-at-large of the Russian Foreign Affairs Ministry, and representatives of the academic community.
The publication also features articles by the President of Kazakhstan NursultanNazarbayev and internationally respected economist Jim O’Neil, who coined the term “BRIC”. In his article Jim O’Neil speculates about the future of the BRICS countries and the institution as a whole.
The publication addresses important issues of the global agenda, the priorities of BRICS and the Indian Presidency, the policies and competitive advantages of the participants, as well as BRICS institutionalization, enhancing efficiency and accountability of the forum.