The article represents the results of a study of new youth solidarities based of the research of the “Polit-gramota”. The club is analyzed as an alternative public space of young people that provides the members with opportunities for professional socialization as politicians, journalists and activists. It also can be viewed as a collective strategy of overcoming the barriers on the entry to the ‘adult’ politics and journalism. By creating this alternative space the ‘Polit-gramota’ members reinterpret the traditional political institutions and make the voice of the youth be heard, whereas in the dominating discourse young people are not actively represented and are viewed as a passive subject of policies.
The article examines the social cohesion of the habitants of the Russian village, the features of which are closely related to the social transformations of recent years. Based on the analysis of the results of qualimetric (social cohesion) and qualitative (life-style) research, the authors assess the level and character of the social cohesion, and offer the explanations for the low integration of the rural community into Russian society at the societal level. The analysis of the interview transcripts is made with the emphasis on the subjective aspects of transformational and integrative processes in the countryside, which are examined through the analysis of villagers’ experience. Based on interviews with rural habitants, the authors examine the nature of their cohesion, which makes it possible to partially explain the feeling of hopelessness, narrowness of the time perspective, social fatigue, nostalgia for the past and behavioral passivity, low civil and protest activity, preventing the integration of the rural community into the new economic and social relations and strengthening general solidarity of Russian society. The authors conclude that "minimalistic" expectations, "the traditionalist" labor attitudes and the tendency to isolation of the peasant make up a coherent ethical system developed on the basis of the crisis of social and personal identity, the narrowing of time perspective, feelings of low self-efficacy.
In the paper main trends in contemporary theory of entrepreneurship, a multidisciplinary field of research rapidly developing in last 20-25 years in the West, are shown. It contains a short overview of first results achieved in this field by Russian scientists in the 1990-2000, with a special focus on sociologically driven papers. Reasons of a gap between Russian researchers and the international state of the theory as well as possible steps to improve the situations are formulated. Most actual subjects for home country researchers are characterized.
The article discusses the processes of precarization, developing rapidly in Russian society, have affected by now a significant portion of the country's population. It is also noted that the formation of precariat raises the question of a possible change in the very grounds (criteria) for distinguishing classes in Russian society, and the nature of employment and degree of social security. A scheme of a possible 5-class structure of Russian society using an approach is offered.
Article is devoted to studying of the precariat and precarization in the Russian society. The theoretical scheme of identification of the precariat in social structure is developed. The evaluation of number of the precariat and its comparison with other social groups of the Russian society is given on empirical data during 1994-2013.
This article addresses traditional for social thought question of “structure/agency” relations in the context of current problems of socio-economic development at the global and national levels. The focus is more on general social theory. The key thesis of the present paper is that, in the context of negative trends in socio-economic dynamics and significant increase in the pace of social and technological change, the phenomenon of “de-structuration” takes place implying that in various domains of social life (economic, political, cultural e.a.) structures are more and more subject to change thus opening opportunities for “transformative agency” and creating new institutions that may potentially contribute to positive change in socioeconomic development. However, authors suggest that dominating approach in sociological research is insufficient to address these issues. It is demonstrated that human capital theory and, in particular, the T. Schultz’s idea about the “entrepreneurial element” of human capital, may be useful for theoretical elaborations and practical solutions responsive to challenges in socioeconomic development. Rich heritage of the Russian sociological tradition may help renovate theoretical and methodological toolbox of sociology.