|
Political Philosophy
|
9–32
|
The article offers an extended analysis of a research program outlined by Michel Foucault in his lectures at the Collège de France during the close of the 1970s. This program was focused on the society that was influenced by the practices of the absolutist state within the framework of a specific “governmentality” discourse. The introduction puts forward the basic problem of insufficient interest displayed by sociology towards particular historical forms in which the state monopoly on violence was realized. The first part of the article considers the “immanent” theory of power introduced by Foucault. The core of this theory relies on his thesis that relations between domination and subjugation pervade the entire social fabric, and results in the microphysical dimension of power coming out on top in social and political analysis. The central part of the article proposes a reconstruction of Michel Foucault’s views on such discursive phenomena of Modernity as the police, the science of policing and the police state (Polizeistaat). The article concludes with the declaration of the huge heuristic potential of concepts elaborated by Foucault in his analysis of power techniques in early Modern times for the general theory of Modernity and for the historical and sociological reconstruction of Russian imperial modernization in 18th to the 20th centuries as well, including the efforts taken by Peter I and Catherine the Great to use the police as a tool to govern Russia’s lagging westernization. |
Russian Atlantis
|
33–63
|
The paper analyses the worldviews of Vyacheslav (Vaclav) Lypynsky, (1882–1931), who was an outstanding intellectual of Ukrainian conservative thought of the 1900–1930’s. Particular attention is paid to his views of the 1920’s when he completed the construction of his theory, and revised his earlier writings. Under the influence of the early sociological writings of Vilfredo Parto and Robert Michels, he developed a typology of the origins of aristocracy and corresponding types of state and society, these being classocratic, ochlocratic, and democratic. The paper looks at the similarities of Lypynsky’s views compared with some approaches typical of “conservative revolution”. Lypynsky’s argument is transitional, and comes from the necessity to reflect upon and respond to the core transformations of European societies as a result of, and post World War One. He completely rejected borrowing methods and attitudes of “mass politics” and use them in conservatism. In defining the term “nation”, Lypynsky consistently kept the framework of its political interpretation. At the same time, he understood that the Ukrainian national project was feasible only as political and anti-colonial (as in the USA). Thus, he tried to fit his understanding of ‘nation’ within monarchism and legitimism. Overall, Lypynsky’s ideas are far removed from any restorative intentions. It was a question of how to “restore the past”, since he was critical of the pre-World War One and pre-revolutionary status quo. He remained critical of this status quo when it was destroyed, and did not idealize it. The question is, however, if a new political action is possible, and if a new political order based on conservative ideas can be achieved. |
Papers and essays
|
64–88
|
The paper is aimed at the analysis of the emerging subcategories of socio-human derivatives of globalization, unfamiliar to humanity throughout its earlier historic experience. These subcategories are regarded as to be bolstered by increasing international migration and human mobility generated by globalization. The paper regards them in terms of their gender effect, and casts light on the following processes; feminization of international migration caused by the growing share of independently traveling women; globalization of care, incited by the new gendered division of reproductive labour and the growth of world cities requiring a labour market of low-skilled jobs recruited mainly from the third world “new poor”; globalization of waged domestic care work brought about by “care deficit” in households of the Global North and a respective demand in waged care labour of women, performed mainly by migrant workers; globalization of motherhood, resulting from the feminization of poverty and the concurrent feminization of international migration; globalization of personal life, intimacy, and love stemming from the effect of increasing human mobility on family bonds and kinship relationship; globalization of desire as a “Pandora box” of the post-industrial era insofar as it is incited by the “affluence syndrome”, and is pinned on the “chase for lures”; globalization of childhood, covering such processes as international adoption of orphans, child-sex, labor trafficking and domestic slavery, child-soldiers, refugees or asylum claimants, and globalization of risk, generated by the “world war on terror”, and global uncertainty of “high modernity”. |
Études ricoeuriennes
Translations
|
94–125
|
In now classic article, James Clifford offers a novel perspective on ethnographic texts. Inspired by literary studies (e.g. Jacques Derrida’s grammatology) he uses contemporary ethnographic works to question ethnography’s claims of scientific objectivity and a clear distinction between allegorical and factual. If ethnography aims to keep its contemporary relevance, it should specifically focus on allegory as an intrinsic quality of ethnographic texts This kind of analysis may assume that any ethnographic text accounts for facts and events but at the same time it tackles the moral, ideological or even cosmological issues. According to Clifford, ethnography has been dominated by a “pastoral” allegorical register which allowed an ethnographer to occupy a privileged position to interpret other, non-writing cultures. Clifford notices that this register is loosing support in the modern world since the difference between illiterate and literate cultures is not relevant anymore. Ethnographic pastoral is now replaced with self-reflexive and dialogical forms of ethnographic writing, analyzed by Clifford by the example of Marjorie Shostak’s book Nisa: The Life and Words of a !Kung Woman. |
|
126–135
|
The introductory part of the article is dedicated to the analysis of the external structure of the lecture on the ecclesiastical power. Are describing the date of the lecture, its place among others relectiones of Vitoria, the lists of the authorities and adversaries of the Dominican Theologist. In the principal part of the article are analyzing the crucial pillars of the theory of Church Power elaborated by Francisco de Vitoria. The theory of power formulated by this thinker had represented a new stage in the development of European Political Thought of Modernity. First of all, Vitoria denies the identity of the concepts of potestas and potentia and declares that the potestas consists from potentia, some preeminence and the auctoritas. Thus, the auctoritas became to be considered as a principal part of the potestas or, at times, its complete synonyms. The next crucial point marked in the article is the idea of the separation of Church and State. Vitoria considered the Church as an autonomous system (he said, “the Christian Commonwealth”), which had the same rights and privileges as the State. At the same time, when the State enters in the political collapse, is the Church (or, more precisely, a Pope) who should take the power and lead the State to its normal position. The State, in its turn, can rule the clergy in the causes concerning the civil administration, because the king “is the king not only for laymen but also for a clergy”. |
|
136–192
|
In his first relection on the ecclesiatical power (I DPE), delivered in 1532, Vitoria posed the set of problems of the origin, essence, and juridical foundations of ecclesiastical authority. In the introduction to his text, he defined the notion of a church as an assembly of faithful Christians, or, and this is extremely important, as a Christian Commonwealth (Respublica christiana). The first part of the relection was dedicated to the definition of the essence of the ecclesiastical authority. According to Dominican Theologist, the Church, besides possessing civil power (potestas), has another type of authority (auctoritas) which is concentrated and located in the Church keys. These keys, passed by Jesus Christ to his apostles, have the exceptional force of giving the complete absolution of sins, and to open the doors of Heaven’s Reign. The next questions of the I DPE were dedicated to the juridical origins of ecclesiastical power and to its limits in respect to civil authority. As well, Vitoria described some of the peculiarities of the Church’s jurisdiction. |
Academic Life
|
193–218
|
Plagiarism in student papers and theses, nowadays widespread in Russia, undermines the scientificand educational system, discredits the institutions, and envenoms the moral atmosphere. Legal, ethical, and practical aspects of the struggle against this evil were discussed at a roundtable atthe Russian State University for the Humanities on June 11, 2014. Scholars from Moscow’s mainuniversities and members of the free community Dissernet took part in the discussion. Some ofthe material from this discussion is published in this issue of the Sociological Review. |
Book reviews
|
223–237
|
Review: Mezhdu proshlym i budushhim: vosem' uprazhnenij v politicheskoj mysli [Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought] (Moscow: Izdatelstvo Instituta Gajdara, 2014) by Hannah Arendt (in Russian) |
|
238–245
|
Review: Politische Kommunikation in der Diktatur: Deutschland und die Sowjetunion im Vergleich (Göttingen: Wallstein, 2012) by Stephan Merl (in German) |
|
246–251
|
Review: Kritika i obosnovanie spravedlivosti: ocherki sociologii gradov [Critique and Justification of Justice: An Essays on the Sociology of Worlds] (Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2013) by Luc Boltanski and Laurent Thévenot (in Russian) |
|
252–265
|
Review: Agrarniki, vlast' i selo: ot proshlogo k nastojashhemu [Agriculturists, Power and Village: From Past to Present] (Moscow: Delo, 2014) by Alexander Nikulin (in Russian) |
In memoriam
|