Жить в двух мирах. Переосмысляя транснационализм и транслокальность
The article summarizes theoretical and practical aspects of the phenomenon
of a transnational identity. Our analytical framework focuses on two themes.
The first part of the article gives a brief history of the concept of «transnational», as
well as a description of factors that actualize transnational model of self-identification
in the modern world. The second part of the article focuses on transnational model in
the context of «the paradox of Westphalia» and asymmetrical globalization.
This paper explores the history of migration studies in the USA and in Europe, starting from Chicago school (1910 – 1920-s) and coming to current trends in this scientific field. I cover historical development of assimilation theory, the framework of the “Melting Pot”, then get to 1960-s and the rise of its criticism due to ethnocentric approach. I also show later developments of this concept into revised assimilation theory (Verba, Nee, Moravska), and into segmented assimilation concept (Portes, Rumbaut, Zhou, Waters). I see multiculturalism as a global trend that changed the way of thinking about ethnicity on the both continents and brought to life new theories, like transnationalism in European sociology (Glick Schiller, Foner, Vertovec). I also point at some contradictions of European and American approaches in migration theory in certain aspects, such as the effect of religiosity on integration success (Foner and Alba, Van Tubergen). Russian studies in this field that became numerous in the recent years are disregarded intentionally as they get covered in many other works, while the most recent trends of the international migration theory are not profoundly utilized in Russian sociology yet. Another reason is that they still lack broader theoretical perspective and stay more empirical.
Article reviews results of the inaugural conference «Beyond Crisis: Visions for the New Humanities», organized by Centre for Humanities Innovation (CHI), Durham University, UK at 2014. Design of the article is the following: a) considered the question how genre of Manifesto suit for development of new humanities in the context of bio-, techno- and post-secular society; b) provided short summaries of intellectuals’ creative reflections on actual aspects of social and humanitarian disciplines; c) presented author’ post-scriptum manifesto, focused on conditions and perspectives for political science development.
Globalization is a process of not unification but rapprochement of cultures, formation of a global civilization as a «federation» of local civilizations. In connection with transformations of the phenomenon of nation in the post-colonial period, its tendency to transform from a «supraethnic» into «interethnic» phenomenon, a global transnational culture is forming. With respect to this process, it makes sense to speak about not degradation, but a change in the place of ethnic cultures and even an increase in their role in the time of intensive globalization.
The chapter examines the evolution of political identity in the Russian Federation since Perestroika period and up to the present time. Emphasis is made on the study of aspects of transnational identity formation and analysis of a new generation of Russians - so called generation "T".
Some may claim that since multiculturalism has never been adopted as an official policy in Russia, the Russian case has no right to be presented in a cross-national book on multiculturalism. In this chapter I would like to show, however, that Russian historic experience of ethnic diversity management is unique and can be of great importance to a comparative analysis of multiculturalism. In addition, Russian society and Russian identity today are facing challenges similar to those found in other European – and Western – countries: economic and cultural globalization; massive migration; weakening of citizens’ exclusive attachment to one nation state; the danger of nationalism; and the rise of extremists. Russia may not have immigration-based multiculturalism if immigration is restricted to the movement of peoples between sovereign states. But it does have a growing multiculturalism based in internal migration across an extraordinarily diverse and expansive territory.
The manuscript examines the process of formation and development of the idea of transnationalism on the material of Russian political philosophy of the 20th century. Taking into account the processes of political and cultural globalization, the author examines the causes and nature of the formation of transnational identities and transnational intellectual networks and communities.
The volume also examines such issues as the role of «transnational intellectuals» in overcoming of the xenophobia and images of «political enemy», it focuses on the evolution of the phenomena of cosmopolitanism, patriotism and nationalism under the globalization, the intellectual practices of desecuritization of political discourse. The author researches formation of flexible transnational identities and transnational epistemic communities as means to overcome the crisis of multiculturalism. In a comparative historical perspective and in the dialogue between Russian, European and American authors, the book offers a case study of political ideas by S. Frank, M. Mamardashvili, M. Epstein and several other thinkers whose works can be regarded as contributions to the emergence of transnational intellectual cooperation in the 20th century.
The monograph may be of interest to students in the field of political theory, international relations and philosophy, as well as a wide range of readers interested in the problem of the construction of political identities in the era of globalization.
Several approaches to the concept of fatherhood present in Western sociological tradition are analyzed and compared: biological determinism, social constructivism and biosocial theory. The problematics of fatherhood and men’s parental practices is marginalized in modern Russian social research devoted to family and this fact makes the traditional inequality in family relations, when the father’s role is considered secondary compared to that of mother, even stronger. However, in Western critical men’s studies several stages can be outlined: the development of “sex roles” paradigm (biological determinism), the emergence of the hegemonic masculinity concept, inter-disciplinary stage (biosocial theory). According to the approach of biological determinism, the role of a father is that of the patriarch, he continues the family line and serves as a model for his ascendants. Social constructivism looks into man’s functions in the family from the point of view of masculine pressure and establishing hegemony over a woman and children. Biosocial theory aims to unite the biological determinacy of fatherhood with social, cultural and personal context. It is shown that these approaches are directly connected with the level of the society development, marriage and family perceptions, the level of egality of gender order.