Цивилизация и империя как способ воображения культурно-политического сообщества в концепциях В.Л.Цымбурского и В.К.Кантора
This article analyzes “civilization” and “empire” as imagined political communities in the concepts and V.L.Tsymbursky V.K.Kantor. Civilizational model of V.Tsymbursky as well as an imperial model of V.K.Kantor are shown as important steps towards overcoming the model of ethno-national community. However, the article reveals "duality" of these authors attempt to combine and civilization, and a national model of collective identity in relation to modern Russia.
Until a method is found in Russia for generating a non-Soviet (different from the restoration of the pre-Soviet) central system of values, democratic institutions and practices will remain weak. Moreover, the vectors of movement for post-Soviet polities, which twenty years ago were labeled as a “democratic transition” in a burst of overly audacious hope, will remain forking paths.
The volume present papers on different aspects of the history of Russian Empire.
The article concerns the problem of the Russian absolutist monarchy of the XVIII - the beginning of XX-th centuries in a comparative perspective. The social function of absolutism consisted in national integration, cultural unification and social transformation of traditional society by using of legal and coercive measures. The crucial problem is the changing role of the bureaucracy which could be the main protagonist of reforms or, just the opposite – its main opponent. From this point of view the author summarizes positive and negative aspects of absolutist reforms making outlook on the comparative experience of other absolutist empires of Europe and Asia.
There were two equivalent geniuses in the history of nineteenth centuries thought, the period when all main meanings of Russian mentality were being organized and reflections about possible destiny of Russia in the context of world history were being established. Their names are Konstantin Leontiev and Vladimir Solovyov. The both have their backgrounds in Slavyanofil's ideas, which both thinkers had overcome in their own unique way. Despite the fact, that they have had completely different points of views, Leontiev was fascinated by Solovyov. Solovyov and Leontiev were trying to create their own historiosophical projects, which were destined to change the course of the history. Both philosophers were called utopists, but actually they didn’t think about the utopism of their projects. They had chosen the different ways, but at the end they had come to the same conclusion: the world history is closed to its own end, and the most important thing for every person is to find his own place in the oncoming eschatological crisis.
We address the external effects on public sector efficiency measures acquired using Data Envelopment Analysis. We use the health care system in Russian regions in 2011 to evaluate modern approaches to accounting for external effects. We propose a promising method of correcting DEA efficiency measures. Despite the multiple advantages DEA offers, the usage of this approach carries with it a number of methodological difficulties. Accounting for multiple factors of efficiency calls for more complex methods, among which the most promising are DMU clustering and calculating local production possibility frontiers. Using regression models for estimate correction requires further study due to possible systematic errors during estimation. A mixture of data correction and DMU clustering together with multi-stage DEA seems most promising at the moment. Analyzing several stages of transforming society’s resources into social welfare will allow for picking out the weak points in a state agency’s work.