In this paper, an analysis is carried out of the concept "revolt", are used in various discourses. The concept of revolt is the repository of a sufficiently large number of values, sometimes unexpected and difficult to identify and political relationship. Despite the existence of initially non-political connotations of "revolt", with time, this concept becomes a political sense, figuring in the discourse of power. Senseless and merciless revolt differently objectified in a particular culture and have different chances of reproduction and legitimation. This ontological character revolt no doubt. The necessity of resisting the authorities, there are constantly presented in various forms and subjects.
The objectives of the study are to examine the regimes of governmentality in accounting practices and to find whether they influence the trust in society. Accounting is considered as a set of institutional practices, governmentality is understood as organized practices through which actors are governed, a way of existence of relationship management and the subordinate actors in social spaces. The interference between accounting practices and governmentality regimes is discussed. A scenario was developed for study of technical, visual, epistemic and professional dimension of accounting practices. It is shown that the technical dimension opens ways to manage space and time, the epistemic dimension provides means for total control, visual one - to openness and transparency in the society. Professional dimension shows the changes of values in the accounting profession and the penetration of accounting into other professional practices. Based upon the accounting practices, governmentality changed the character of trust in society. It is shown that total diffusion of quantification, ranking, estimation and audit techniques can be considered as a new paradigm of trust (trust to rituals but not personal skills) in modern regimes of governmentality.
The paper introduces Russian term “vlastomentalnost” for the governmentality concept. Linguo-cultural analysis is applied to this term: a semantic space is defined, the scenario for the governmentality regimes analysis is offered.
The article considers the problem of retunt to political stage logic and phraseology of geopolitical behavior. He streses that politization of geographical and ethnical factors is quite dangerous. The ideology of the "separate way" and "peculiar democracy" transforms^ according the author opinion, in the way for justification of authoritarian regimes.
The article suggests the original concept of political role of public trust and distrust. Differently from generally accepted interpretation of any distrust as unconditionally negative phenomenon, the author considers the political distrust towards wrong authority as an important factor of development and political progress. The reasonably grounded distrust to state is one of foundation for liberal ideology.
This article describes how political institutions can be seen in the texts of the Russian philosopher V. Rozanov. Contradictory thoughts by V. Rozanov can be refuted on closer acquaintance with its political figures. Despite the existing stereotype about Rozanov nervous and ragged manner of writing, the arguments about intellectual political institutions are fairly consistent, and political position - a clear and definite. Almost everywhere V. Rozanov has positioned itself as a man of state and his faithful guardian intelligent. The attitude of V. Rozanov to any political institutions built up or reduced, depending on the position of the institution in the political system.
The article analyzes the historical specifics of transformations of the Russian society and the state. As the starting point, the author of the article accepts the differences between dynamically developing and stagnant cultures proposed by Lawrence Harrison. In the author's opinion, to date, all the necessary prerequisites for Russian subjectness have emerged - territory, political mechanisms, etc. However, to overcome the stagnation of Russian society and elites, this is not enough. The way out of the vicious circle is possible only through deep institutional transformation.