Political Accountability and Real Authority of Government Bureaucracy
The article is devoted to state machinery reforming in Russia, to search of new model of mutual relations of the state and the citizen. Stages of reforms, the reasons of an inefficiency of acts are analyzed.
The article concerns the problem of the Russian absolutist monarchy of the XVIII - the beginning of XX-th centuries in a comparative perspective. The social function of absolutism consisted in national integration, cultural unification and social transformation of traditional society by using of legal and coercive measures. The crucial problem is the changing role of the bureaucracy which could be the main protagonist of reforms or, just the opposite – its main opponent. From this point of view the author summarizes positive and negative aspects of absolutist reforms making outlook on the comparative experience of other absolutist empires of Europe and Asia.
How do Russian leaders balance the need to decentralize governance in a socially and politically complex country with the need to guarantee political control of the state?
Since the early 2000’s Russian federal authorities have arranged a system of political control on regional elites and their leaders providing a ‘police control’ of special bodies subordinated by the federal centre on policy implementation in the regions. Different mechanisms of fiscal federalism and investment policy were used to ensure regional elites’ loyalty and a politically centralized but administratively decentralized system was created.
Asking clear, direct and theoretically informed questions about the relationship between federalism, decentralisation and authoritarianism, this book explores the political survival of authoritarian leaders, the determinants of policy formulation and theories of federalism and decentralization, to reach a new understanding of territorial governance in contemporary Russia. An important work for students and researchers in Russian studies and regional and federal studies.
At the turn of the 1850-60s Moscow agricultural society, the biggest one in Russia, developed from an extremely loyal institution into a bulwark of resistance against bureaucracy. Having not received a privilege to participate actively in the preparation of the agrarian reform, it rose against the key role of governmental officials in this process and in defense of its legal rights as a public organization. The struggle under the leadership of A.Koshelev lasted for several years, but didn’t result in the liquidation of the society, in contrast with the fate of the Agricultural society in the Kingdom of Poland, the existence of which finished in 1861.
The author considers the hypothesis that under certain circumstances mistrust acts as the driving force for political development whereas trust, especially in its essential paternalistic forms, preserves the unsatisfactory status quo. The problem analyses as a part of general trend in the contemporary world towards declining prestige of public institutions and taking into account the Russian specifics.