In November 2013, some amendments to the Federal electoral legislation were adopted. In particular, they changed the minimal share of PR deputies in the regional legislative bodies from 50 to 25 percent. The article argues that adoption of these amendments was caused the purpose of strengthening the positions of United Russia on the level of the Russian regions. It shows that mainly majoritarian systems are more beneficial to the ‘party of power’ than mixed ones with the approximately equal ratio between majoritarian and proportional elements or pure proportional systems
Review of book: Musikhin G.I. Essays on the Ideology Theory. M.: Publish. House of Higher School of Economics, 2013. 288 p.
The article continues the author’s previous research project about framing the collective memory about “the 1990s” in Russian political discourse. It is devoted to the most dramatic event of the post-Soviet transition in Russia – the political crisis of 1993 that led to adoption of the Constitution that formally functions till now. The author analyzes constructing the conflicting interpretations of the crisis by studying mass media publications in the post-Yeltsin period. To reveal the evolution of competing public narratives, the article focuses at three jubilee periods that reflect different stages of Russia’s political development – the 10th, the 20th and the 25th anniversaries of the events. It demonstrates the significant change in the official discourse after Vladimir Putin’s coming to the presidential office. The narratives about the victory of reformers over counter-reformers and pre-emptive violence aimed to stop a civil war, that were used by Yeltsin, dropped off to be substituted by the story about the Constitution as a historical choice of the Russian people. Putin also tends to use a memory about the 1993 crisis to emphasize “the stability” that is considered the main achievement of his rule. The narratives articulated by the Communists and other successors of the memory of the White House defenders did not change over time. The author explains it by the notice that, in these discourses, the events of 1993 took a shape of the “myth of origin” of Putin’s political regime. On the contrary, the discourse of the Liberals evolved, as, by the 2010s, the apologetic interpretations typical for 2003 gave a way for the critical ones. The tendency for bridging between the narratives about the consequences (though not the reasons) of the crises articulated by the Communists and the Liberals became visible in the recent period. However, it does not prevent the symbolic conflict between them that plays a decisive role in constructing their political identities.
The article presents the results of a comparative research study aimed at identifying the conditions for victories and defeats of radical right populist parties in modern Europe. First, the author provides theoretical justification for why such victories and defeats depend on the strategy of both radical right populists and their competitors from the traditional party families along three problematic dimensions — economic, cultural and European. After that she elaborates a hypothesis that the success of a radical right populist party is a result of its convergent strategy along the economic dimension in conjunction with the prevalence of divergent strategies among the mainstream parties along the cultural and European dimensions and tests it on the data of 12 right populist parties using the qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). The empirical results partially confirm the hypothesis, identifying the link between the success of a radical right populist party and its commitment to a convergent economic strategy combined with the divergent strategies of the mainstream parties along the cultural and/or European dimensions. However, the research did not reveal the conditions for the defeat of such parties and did not explain the cases of Great Britain and France, where the radical right populists achieved notable success despite the fact that most identified conditions were absent. This begs further research with a focus on outliers. Such research may expand the list of success/defeat factors for radical right populists, taking into account the distribution of voters’ preferences in various dimensions of the political space.
The name of Robert Filmer remained in the history of political philosophy largely due to the first of the “Two Treatises of Government” by John Locke, and outside the narrow circle of specialists he is known primarily as Locke’s “punching bag”. Having thoroughly analyzed the content of the main work by Filmer and the context of its creation, A.Mishura and A.Pavlov show that the arguments of the author of “Patriarcha” deserve attention without regard to Locke. However, the analysis of these arguments necessitates taking into account those political goals, for which Filmer built his theoretical schemes. It is in the light of the context in which he wrote “Patriarcha” that Filmer’s thought may appear at least as political journalism relevant to its time, if not as political philosophy.
The article analyzes several development trends of pirate parties in crossnationalperspective. The author studies dynamics of pirates’ political program and conducts a correlation analysis of factors that determine the degree of institutionalization of their organizations. According to Yu.Kabanov’s conclusion,
in most cases pirate parties lack sufficient resources and often a desire
to actively participate in the established party system. Neither popularity of
their ideas nor their electoral results enjoy stability. However, one can already
spot some potential growing points of pirate parties, especially in Europe. According
to the author’s forecast, transformations of the pirate movement will
continue to take place and will become decisive for its future development.
The latter will largely hinge upon the final choice of pirate parties: whether to
retain their radical, anti-elite positions or move toward the median voter and
This article discusses the following insufficiently explored question: what are the immediate and long-term effects of the regional electoral reform of 2003 on regional majoritarian electoral systems and the composition of the plural components of regional legislatures? The article analyzes the transformations related to the number of deputies elected in districts with majoritarian systems before and after the reform and changes in their election process (in the first place, modifications of the systems in the districts). It demonstrates how electoral systems have influenced factors contributing to the success of candidates in elections and the campaign strategies of the candidates in single-mandate districts; it shows those politicians who reached favorable outcomes in elections, and those who ended up left out of regional politics. The article discusses the increased role of federal parties in the regions, and how this contributed to the increasing dependence of regional politicians on the federal government.
The article explores the concept of multitude developed in the writings of T.Hobbes and B.Spinoza — two most profound political philosophers of the 17th century. The authors attempt to conceptualize the multitude by interpreting it as a special part of political reality, the very mode of existence of which turns out to be a problem for political thinkers, rather than by applying the logic of developing a political subject. According to their conclusion, the study of multitude should proceed from ontology to ideology, rather than in the opposite direction. This is the only way to build a common perspective that reflects the real tension between the systems of Hobbes and Spinoza. The first part of the article discusses the views of Hobbes and Spinoza on the essence of multitude. The English philosopher views multitude as a chaotic matter, the movement of which needs to be regulated by concluding “ПОЛИТИЯ” № 4 (95) 2019 23 a social contract and establishing sovereign power. Spinoza, on the one hand, builds upon Hobbes, but on the other hand, opposes him. The authors see the sources of discrepancies between the two approaches to multitude in the difference in ontologies related, in particular, to the concepts of motion, matter and body. The second part of the article is devoted to studying the relationship between the multitude and the state. The Hobbesian construction of sovereignty is interpreted as a means designed to solve the problem of the multitude by giving it a monolithic form of the people. In Spinoza’s ontology, the regulation of matter from the outside is impossible. In order to explain the dynamics of the multitude, he draws upon the concept of power and the theory of affects and formulates the idea of the dual — simultaneously destructive and creative — nature of the multitude. Based on their analysis, the authors conclude that in contrast to modern theorists, Hobbes and Spinoza do not view the multitude as an empirical subject. Rather, they view the multitude as the primary logic of the existence of the many, which must be understood and ultimately overcome (from the Hobbesian point of view) or mastered by politicians in order to maintain the correct composition of institutions (from the point of view of Spinoza)
The concept of the political is a central and yet one of the most controversial categories in the political thought. Despite the long history of reflection about the concept of the political, today there is still a lack of consensus not only about the substantive content of this notion, but also about its very right to exist. The purpose of this article is to clarify the epistemological opportunities of political theory in relation to the concept of the political.
If political theory is part of positive political science and is an autonomous form of knowledge, independent from philosophy, it must also include a special way of thinking about the political. The article gives a brief description of the subject field of political theory, describes the specificity of its view on social and political phenomena, and justifies the statement that the political manifests itself in the form of an event.
By virtue of the immanent bias of political thought, it is impossible to know about a political event beyond its borders. Thus, according to the author, political theory should focus on pre-political situations, in which political events can occur. To identify such situations, it is necessary to shift the focus from the “friend—enemy” formula to the “human—non-human” dichotomy. A political event happens when the fundamental norms of humanity are problematized at the collective level and a space opens up where people involved in the event are forced to take one or the other side. The boundary between human and non-human in a political event is erased, which determines the existential nature of the confrontation between friends and enemies.