Niccolo Machiavelli is considered to be one of the first thinkers who laid foundations of the “realist” approach inherent in the political theory of Modernity. However this study based on the contextualist approach of intellectual history demonstrates an alternative view. Analyzing several concepts of the language of “The Prince” that very likely allude to the traditions of humoral medicine, astrology, sympathetic magic and alchemy, I argue that in concern to “fox” and “lion” Machiavelli presumes not the imitation of their qualities, but rather elaborate “secret” doctrine or even “technique of the self” in Michel Foucault’s sense. According to my conclusion, “lion” and “fox” are images that a potential reader should have grasped exactly through the interplay of contexts (either more evident or “secret”) that he belonged to as a man of the Renaissance.
Within the article, the author declares a problem of the political language of Medieval Europe and the possibilities of its translation into Russian. In contrast to the modern and actual philosophical texts, where are many techniques of the translation elaborated by the theoretics from Friedrich Schleiermacher and up to date, the medieval texts require another methodological approach. Besides a clarification of the conceptual skeleton of the text (there can be used the methods of Qu. Skinner or R. Koselleck) here is necessary the same operation on the translator's language. As an example of his position, the author has chosen a concept of princeps. He underlines that the translation of princeps by Russian "gosudar" is not correct and proposes as an alternative to the term "knyaz". From another side, the author analyses the use of the "gosudar" concept in the Russian political language and concludes that this word began to use as an equivalent of the princeps only at 18-19th cent., the time of the Russian absolutism's consolidation. In the final part of the article, the author describes some actual practics of the misuse of the princeps concept in Russian political language. From the beginning of 2000, this word was frequently used for describing Vladimir Putin, comparing him with Octavian August.
The article represents some key theoretical and legal aspects of the opposition phenomenon in stable democracies and transitional regimes regarding such items as the formation of political parties, legal regulation, forms and methods of the opposition activity in contemporary Russian political debates.
Criticizing and for the most part rejecting the most common approaches to the connection between the problem of evil and the problem of political in the modern political thought, S.Kaspe is looking for a way to build an operational definition of political evil in a narrow and strict sense. The starting point of his argument is the following: the essence of political evil can be understood from the perspective of a notion of political rather than the concept of evil per se (which should be viewed as an independent variable). Transfiguration of the usual, human evil into political evil (i.e., systemic, structural) is possible due to the deficit of efficiency of political institutions that normally prevent such transformation as well as their hyper-efficiency that transcends the norm in the other direction. In their turn, both of these institutional dysfunctions are generated, according to the author, first and foremost by the attempts to ignore or consciously eliminate ethical criteria that distinguish between good and evil. As a result, ethics is replaced by the very same politics.
The article analyzes how the Russian media cover activities of Alexei Navalny, an opposition politician. On the basis of the data from the company Medialogy, the author examines the intensity and tone of the discussion about Navalny in print and electronic newspapers, blogs, and also on the three largest federal channels — “Channel One”, “Russia-1” and “NTV”. Her research shows that the tendency to ignore Navalny’s activities is almost an exclusive feature of television, which seeks a trade-off between silencing this activity and discrediting the politician, while other types of media cover it quite widely. According to the author’s conclusion, Navalny attracts heightened attention due to both state actions directed against him, as well as his own political and anti-corruption activity. Despite a slight increase in the share of positive messages in the discussion about Navalny, it is predominantly of a critical nature. Curiously, the tone of the discussion depends on the communication channel itself rather than the occurring events. Different types of media cover the politician’s activities in a different way: the same information can trigger criticism of Navalny in the traditional (pro-governmental) media and a campaign in his defense in the Internet publications and blogs.
The article focuses on the comparative biographies of Ukrainian and Novorossiya militia commanders, stressing the importance of their social origin for better understanding the Ukrainian crisis. The comparative description of more than 50 biographies based on the following characteristics - age, education, employment, place of work, supposed income, political and public activities – made clear that commanders are representatives of low or low-middle class. The results of that analysis give us reasons for the critical review of many theories of democratization. On the one hand, it allows underlining the uniqueness of post-soviet political context, where not “angry citizens”, but un privileged social groups play the important role in the transformation of political regime. On the other hand, it allows recognizing the current political process as a part of the global one, taking into account the modern precariat theory and prosperity gap between low and upper classes described by T.Piketty.