American Revolution: Sociocultural Discourse
Rozin Vadim
DOI: 10.17212/2075-0862-2021-13.3.1-133-152
Abstract:

The article analyzes two approaches to explaining the American Revolution. The first belongs to Irina Zhezhko-Braun, who in her works examines the features and formation of social technologies created by the left in the United States, their application in the struggle for power, the transformation of the consciousness and behavior of social subjects, the emasculation of the original democratic principles and other social processes. Vadim Rozin, being not only a methodologist, but also a culturologist, outlines another explanation - culturological. At the same time, he puts forward a hypothesis according to which modernity is a complex double process of a parallel crisis of the culture of modernity and the emergence of “postculture”, which for the time being is manifested for researchers in the trends of sociality. The author of the article considers it necessary to consider the American Revolution by combining both approaches (from the point of view of social sciences and cultural studies), that is, to implement a sociocultural approach and discourse. For this, he first characterizes the social and cultural approaches separately. If the selection and characterization of culture presupposes procedures for comparing different cultures, analysis of the integrity of culture and an invariant vision of the world, then sociality is set by the processes of directed social change, management and power. Then, relying on the material of the reconstruction of the modern American revolution, which was proposed by I. Zhezhko-Braun, the author outlines a sociocultural explanation. In particular, he claims that the successes of the quiet and invisible for many “step-by-step American revolution” can be explained not only by effective social technology and the connivance of the ruling class, but also by the fact that guided social changes are taking place against the background of parallel processes of the completion of modernity and the formation of post-culture

Will the USA Face the Fate of the Roman Empire? (Reflections on Irina Zhezhko-Brown’s Articles about the Minority Elite in the USA)
Khanin Grigory
DOI: 10.17212/2075-0862-2021-13.3.1-153-160
Abstract:

The starting point of the paper is the three articles in the journal Ideas and Ideals by Irina Zhezhko-Brown who analyzes the formation of a new ruling class in the USA, which rests on racial and gender minorities. The values proclaimed by the elite are fundamentally different from traditional American values.

The paper shows that any attempt to bring them into life can have devastating consequences for American society and, ultimately, lead to its downfall. Considering the huge role of the USA in the world system, this can be compared to the fall of the Roman Empire.

The author shows that it is possible to escape such an outcome. The obstacle to this escape is the entire social and economic system that has developed in the USA. In the field of economics, the priority in recruiting personnel is given to quotas based on race and gender instead of qualification and business qualities, which will lead to a significant decrease in the financial performance of companies and the wages of employees.

The author analyzes such long-term macroeconomic defects of the American economy as the budget deficit, trade and balance of payments deficit, and the growth of government debt. In the near future, these defects may lead to a deep economic crisis, a stock market crisis, and the US dollar can lose its position as the key currency.

The paper considers economic and political premises and prevention methods of these destructive processes.

Lessons from the Pandemic: Methodological Notes
Ibragimov Radiy
DOI: 10.17212/2075-0862-2021-13.3.1-161-175
Abstract:

Pandemic COVID-19 affected the crisis in many areas of public life – in the economy, politics, family, consumer relations, and culture. It has become a challenge for social sciences, especially for sociology. If in other areas of social research, the meaningful gaps can still be compensated by speculations, the increase in sociological knowledge without empirical research is simply impossible. But in the face of restriction of full-time communications, the use of a number of methods and techniques is either completely impracticable or requires significant procedural correction. In addition, the need to correct the content of sociological representation of the total and local objects becomes obvious. The way, the society as a whole, its subsystems, institutes and cohorts, face the pandemic, requires reformulating the axiomatics, and hypothesis of sociological research. Within the frames of this article, the author focuses on several themes, which relevance is aggravated with shifts in social life caused by the pandemic. The first theoretical and methodological “lesson” is the need to rethink the paradigmatic ratio of illusion / objectivity of social law, since there is no secret that the objective contamination of the population is in close connection with the intensity of generating the spread of various prejudices in the public consciousness. The second “lesson” affects the disciplinary status of sociology of medicine, the significance of which in the regulation of social functioning has immeasurably increased. In this regard, the perception of people as a population is a kind of demand for the paradigm status in terms of the sociology of medicine. The third “lesson” is associated with the problem of the rationality of social behavior of a person, because the social design of the pandemic stroke seriously shakes confidence in the sanity of a man. The fourth “lesson” is an attempt to bring in methodological character into the suspicion of the scenario nature of the unfolding global pandemic. Any scenario has its own scriptwriter who has something to say about social laws in general and about the nature of human capital in particular

The Discussion of the Concept of Progress in the Modern Society
Kondratyeva Maria
DOI: 10.17212/2075-0862-2021-13.3.1-176-187
Abstract:

The article explores the idea of social progress in the context of the history of human society. The author considers the concept of progress in interrelation with the three revolutions. The first revolution was an agrarian one, which established the dominant religious consciousness and dependence on the divine intervention. Accordingly, the idea of progress as opposed to the perfection of God was not dominant. The world of nature is born, develops, and dies. This approach prevailed for about seven thousand years: from the first civilizations to the XV - XVIII centuries. According to the Judeo-Christian tradition, after the fall, the world fell away from God. This understanding corresponds to the primordial approach and is also opposite to the idea of progress. In the Renaissance, the secularization of consciousness and culture begins. Culture and values are formed on the basis of religious Judeo-Christian values, but a man becomes the bearer and guarantor of these values. The ideas of humanism and worshipping of a human being as the main creator are reflected in philosophy, art, and painting. In accordance with this approach, the idea of progress is born. The idea of progress is fully formed and takes possession of the masses in the age of Enlightenment. During this period, the industrial revolution is taking place. In European culture, the primacy of rationality, machine labor and equality is asserted. But at the same time, the industrial revolution entailed many social crises that are still relevant today. The United States and Europe were gradually able to overcome the challenges of the industrial revolution and create a system of “capitalism with a human face”, while partially imposing their system on other countries where production is cheaper. Therefore, the problems of the so-called “wild capitalism” still take place in the third world countries.

By the middle of the XX century, science became the leading factor in manufacturing. Society is changing from industrial to post-industrial. The article focuses on the problems and opportunities of the modern post-industrial society with all the accumulated baggage of the previous stages of development. Humanity has achieved great technological success, and the scientific and technological revolution has brought material benefits to society. But at the same time, the consumer society creates many problems. What is progress in the context of modern discourse? The answer to this question is the purpose of this article.

Conditions of the National Elites Loyalty towards the Central Government in the Soviet Period of Russian History
Filippov Sergey
DOI: 10.17212/2075-0862-2020-12.4.1-230-248
Abstract:

The article deals with the analysis of the Soviet national policy from a historical perspective with a focus on investigating into conditions of the loyalty of national elites towards the central government in the last period of the USSR existence. The indicators of the low level loyalty are as follows: supporting the ideas of national sovereignty and independence, participating in the national movement by ruling cadres, influential intellectuals and population. The author shows low sympathy of both groups of representatives: elites and broad population to nationalist ideas. The analysis is based on comparing contrastive cases – the Soviet elites of the Baltic republics (Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia) and Belorussia in their interactions with the central government as well as local population in the period from 1945 to 1991. These republics, their population and elites were similar regarding some important aspects such as historical and cultural as well as demographic characteristics in the case of Belorussia and Lithuania; some important features of the industry (big export-oriented enterprises) regarding Estonia, Latvia and Belorussia. At the same time, these cases showed a different level of the loyalty towards the Union center, namely, relatively high among the Belorussian Soviet ruling cadres and population and relatively low in the Baltic republics by the end of 1980s.

The important aspect of the Soviet national policy was establishing new national elites, educational and cultural institutions preserving their native languages as well as the promotion of native cadres into the positions of power in the regional administration. In some respects, this policy was similar to the “indirect rule” implemented in the imperial period of Russian history and consisted in the cooperation between the central government and local elites as the main approach to administrating a multinational state. However, in comparison with the previous practice tending to include national elites in the imperial nobility, the post revolutionary approach considered the creation of national elites through promoting local cultural and educational institutions that offer quite prestigious but specific positions occupied mostly by representatives of the respective ethnic group.

Creating local elites reduced the competition for “universal” positions since socialization and career of “national staff” were oriented towards national institutes. However, increasing numbers of “national staff” with limited positions for them had negative social consequences (elite overproduction). Intra-elite tension increased due to the migration from other regions (in the case of Latvia and Estonia). The other reason of this phenomenon was pursuing socialization strategies oriented to the places of origin (in the case of Lithuania). The attractiveness of the Baltic republics both for local population and migrants from other regions of the USSR was caused by a relatively high level of living standards in these union republics.

Location of big export-oriented enterprises in the territory of Belorussia created conditions for preferring socialization strategies oriented towards integration with the Soviet Union economy and, therefore, enhanced loyalty towards the USSR center from both elites and population. Besides, the administrative apparatus of the Soviet Belorussia was recruited extensively among participants of the Soviet partisan movement 1941–1944 what explains the devotion of the Belorussian elite to the Soviet symbols and values. At the same time, the base of the legitimization of the Soviet Lithuanian elite was its ability to control the anti-Soviet (nationalist) movement as well supporting national culture and language.

About “Geography of Rationality”
Smirnov Andrey,  Gerasimova Irina
Abstract:

Is there a universal human mind? The Western European philosophizing paradigm with well-developed methodological tools provides an affirmative answer to this question. It is generally accepted that rationality is the same, and scientific and technological progress that transformed the planet is the fruit of Western European culture. It would be very strange to talk about the “atlas of rationality,” or “the geography of rationality”, about European, Arab, Chinese, or African rationality within the framework of the Western European conceptual philosophizing system. However, with the entry into the socio-political and economic arena of non-Western civilizations, and, accordingly, worldviews and traditions of philosophizing, the question arose of alternative understandings of rationality. The eternal philosophical problem of the universal and the concrete-unique has received a new sound in the context of globalization and the growing complex interaction of cultures. A new planetary world order is being created along with a rethinking of the fundamental problem of nature and the possibilities of the human mind.

Is there a universal human mind in general?

The demands of life and the future world order brought to life the project of the Round Table “Geography of Rationality”, which is annually held at the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Project Manager Director of the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Academician A.V. Smirnov. Moderators: Professor I.A. Gerasimova (Institute of Philosophy, RAS), Professor A.A. Krushinskiy (Institute of the Far East, RAS). You can get acquainted with the heated discussions through the videos of March 20, 2018, April 25 and June 13, 2019.

The meeting of East and West at the Round Table was an attempt to expand the dialogue to professional interdisciplinary cooperation. The discussion was attended, on the one hand, by experts with knowledge of oriental languages ​​and philosophical teachings: Indologists, Arabists, Sinologists, Japanese historians, researchers of the Persian language and culture of Iran. The ancient Russian rational culture, as well as the first geopolitical situation that arose when Europeans appeared in the New World, were not forgotten. The “Westerners” were represented by epistemologists, methodologists of science, logicians, cognitive scientists, and synergetics. With each regular meeting, new specialists join the dialogue.

If at the first meeting the question of the “geography of rationality” arose in general terms, then in the subsequent meetings more specific problems were discussed. Each culture is unique, the system of thinking is directly linked to the realities of the language. There was and remains the problem of the adequacy of translation from one language to another language, and, accordingly, the problem of the transfer of meaning and understanding. At the same time, the exchange of knowledge and practices between cultures has always existed. Historically, people have found opportunities to understand the Other and learn from valuable experience. European philosophy in all its many directions and doctrines has developed a filigree language for discussing the diversity of the problems of cognition of nature, society and man. But the meeting of East and West showed that not everything is embraced by a positively directed philosophical thought. There can be disparate pictures of the world, different linguistic pictures of the world, diametrically opposite value orientations.

How to learn to understand each other? In western and domestic universities, philosophy courses are taught in the Western European paradigm and within the framework of the Western European conceptual system. The attitude to conceptual Eurocentrism is twofold: on the one hand, we understand something in our native language, which is constantly evolving, incorporating the concepts of a different system, and on the other hand, the orientation exclusively on conceptual Eurocentrism often simplifies and distorts real situations. Apparently, mutual understanding of cultures can only be achieved through joint efforts.

Turning to a specifically different one not only leads to a deeper understanding of one's own culture, but also conceals new possibilities of creativity, expanding the horizons of thought. For example, the problem of the procedural ontology of the Arabic language has exacerbated the question of ontologies of Indo-European languages ​​and models of logic that are “supportive” for Western European rationality (Round table from June 13, 2019).

The fourth Round Table “Geography of Rationality” was held in the context of the coronovirus pandemic, but this did not become an obstacle for the project participants. The remote access discussion focused around A.A. Krushinskiy “Subject, space, time: how to read the ancient Chinese text” (Round table on March 31, 2020). If philosophical systems based on Indo-European languages ​​can be considered on the principle of family similarity, then the situation with the Chinese language and mentality is more complicated. Translations of classical ancient texts from Chinese into Russian vary to such an extent that one can doubt the professional qualifications of specialists. But what then should the philosophical community do? How to avoid profanity when introducing eastern philosophies into the general philosophical space? The controversy between the Sinologists touched upon problems that went beyond exclusively historical and philosophical research: the relationship between historical and philosophical studies and philosophical methodologies (S.Yu. Rykov); polysemy of languages, including the Chinese language (M.V. Rubets), the problem of protosubject in the Chinese text (N.V. Pushkarskaya), the question of multilevel meaning generation and specific trajectories of cognitive evolution in the "atlas of rationality" (I.A. Gerasimova), about the values ​​of old texts in the context of modern realities on the example of a pandemic (M.R. Burget Ayala). Through centuries, the dialogue on behalf of Kant, Hegel, and the Sufi sages was conducted in a dispute on the problem of time by two orientalists – R.V. Pskhu and A.V. Paribok whose preferences have diverged.

Philosophical discussions are traditionally famous for posing questions and unexpected coverage of problems. The participants in the discussions on the project “Geography of Rationality” hope for the fruitfulness of their undertakings. The concept of the journal “Ideas and Ideals” contains a call for the development of broad public philosophical discussions on pressing problems of modern life and the future world order. The participants in the discussions of the Round table “The Geography of Rationality” hope for mutual understanding and active participation of readers of the journal “Ideas and Ideals”. The unity of the cultural centers of Moscow and Novosibirsk can be regarded as a landmark event.

Ground wars of the presidential elections in the USA
Zhezhko-Braun Irina
DOI: 10.17212/2075-0862-2020-12.2.1-48-82
Abstract:

The 2020 presidential campaign of the Democratic party surprised both voters and analysts by setting new precedents and showcasing innovations in the art of political campaigning. Several different approaches to the organization of ground game (GG) were used in the campaign. This article aims to describe and analyze the main trends, strategies, and technologies of GG in presidential elections in the last twenty years with the aim of better understanding what is happening in the current one. It also details the main reasons why the attention to GG in presidential campaigns has significantly increased in the last few years: further polarization and even balance of political views in the country, an increase in the number of "independents" with the simultaneous decrease of party membership and influence, the emergence of multiple powerful players: interest groups, social movements and "shadow" (unofficial) parties. All these trends turned the recent presidential campaigns into a ground war in the competitive states and districts. The article deals with the innovations in organization of GG which have taken place in the period from George W. Bush's campaign all the way to Mike Bloomberg's recent attempt to enter the democratic race: multilayered marketing, microtargeting, phone bank programs, distributed or big organizing, philanthropy networking, etc. The main focus is on the organizational structure of GG and the methods of putting together a campaign coalition. The article describes the four basic organizational models of GG: a party infrastructure, a hierarchical network of social organizers, a campaign arranged as a social movement, buying support through sponsorship and philanthropy work. These models are not mutually exclusive. The 2020 primaries are analyzed with the help of these models. The article explains why and how one of the least promising candidates, Biden, became the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party.  Our analysis of failed attempts to replicate the pervious campaigns also allows us to make a confident prediction that, if Biden’s compaign will be made in the mold of 2012 Obama campaign, it will not be successful.

Sociocultural Transformation: Interpretation Options, Diagnostics оf Russian Experience
Popkov Yuri,  Tyugashev Evgeny
DOI: 10.17212/2075-0862-2020-12.1.2-405-421
Abstract:

The article raises the problem of a methodologically correct variable description of sociocultural transformations models as the basis for effective models regulating the corresponding processes. In the paradigmatic field of sociocultural research, there is a whole range of interpretations of the sociocultural approach put forward in connection with the analysis of the socio-cultural dynamics and sociocultural transformations of various world regions. On the basis of highlighting various interpretations of the sociocultural approach, the authors explicate different models of sociocultural transformations. The importance of the methodological heritage of P.A Sorokin for the analysis of this process is emphasized. The authors offer their vision of this prominent Russian-American sociologist’s research on the description of sociocultural transformations, and an assessment of its possible use in relation to contemporary Russia.

According to the authors, in the terminology of P.A. Sorokin pre-revolutionary Russian and Soviet cultures should be identified as ideational cultures that developed in the paradigm of Orthodoxy and its reformation. The history of Russia can be viewed as a series of successive and growing tides of ideational culture that were occasionally held back by the temporary rise of sensual culture. The post-Soviet period is viewed as a controversial process of planting sensual culture. In the future, another tide of ideational culture is possible.

It is concluded that in the diagnosis of the sociocultural dynamics of modern Russia, it is possible to use various interpretations that provide an empirically-specific description of the course of sociocultural transformations. The use of competing methodological interpretations and model typologies can provide a diverse and panoramic analysis of sociocultural dynamics, which is an important theoretical prerequisite for determining the optimal models for its regulation at different levels of social organization in the perspective of sociocultural integration of Russia. Taking into account its wide regional and ethnocultural diversity, it is possible to implement various phase models of sociocultural transformations depending on the type of region, characteristics of the ethnocultural and ethno-confessional landscape.