Divided Societies in the Russian Scientific Discourse
Research Article
-
Sergei Pavlovich Arteev
Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences
artsp7@yandex.ru
Elibrary Author_id 862267How to CiteArteev S.P. Divided Societies in the Russian Scientific Discourse. Vlast’ (The Authority). 2021. Vol. 29. No. 6. P. 123-129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31171/vlast.v29i6.8704
Abstract
The modern world is a global world, which at the same time is more divided than ever before. The problems of divided societies began its development in science in the West back in the 1960s and 1970s. The works of Rokkan, Lipset and Lijphart have deservedly become classics of world political science. In the 1990s, the problem of the division of society became relevant for Russia. Like their foreign colleagues, Russian researchers attract cases from various regions of the world. The purpose of the article is to present the prospects for the development of scientific discourse on the problem of divided societies based on the analysis of Russian studies. According to the author, there is a trend towards expanding the interpretation of the concept of divided societies. If the works of the classics focuses on formalized institutions, then Russian research focuses more on informal practices. A serious problem is associated with the lack of a generally accepted definition of the concept of divided society. The subject field of the concept of divided societies also does not have clear boundaries. The current situation encourages political scientists to read the concept of divided societies in a new way in order to develop an updated middle-range theory that will be important not only for science, but also for the political practice of conflict resolution and tension relief in social processes.Keywords:cleavage; science discourse; Russia; Rokkan; Lipset; LijphartReferences
Il'in M.V. 1995. Problemy formirovaniya «ostrova Rossiya» i kontury ego vnutrennei geopolitiki. – Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Ser. 12. Politicheskie nauki. № 1. S. 37-52. (RUS.)
Il'in M.V. 2008. Balto-Chernomorskaya sistema kak faktor formirovaniya gosudarstv v vostochnoi Evrope. – Politicheskaya nauka. № 1. S. 101-131. (RUS.)
Il'in M.V. 2011. Predely gosudarstvennoi sostoyatel'nosti stran mira. – Sravnitel'naya politika. № 3. S. 37-45. (RUS.)
Il'in M.V. 2015. Dialog ob ostrovakh i prolivakh, mezhdumor'yakh i mezhdumir'yakh. – Tetradi po konservatizmu. № 1. S. 128-135. (RUS.)
Il'in M.V., Barsukova A.V. 2019. Kontseptual'naya karta Evropy Steina Rokkana. – Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. № 4. S. 6-21. (RUS.)
Kudryashova I.V. 2016. Kak obustroit' razdelennye obshchestva. – Politicheskaya nauka. № 1. S. 15-33. (RUS.)
Kudryashova I.V. 2018. Religioznyi terrorizm: Kontseptual'nye problemy politicheskogo analiza. – Politicheskaya nauka. № 4. S. 54-68. (RUS.)
Kudryashova I.V., Meleshkina E.Yu. 2009. Etnicheskie men'shinstva i natsional'noe stroitel'stvo na postsovetskom prostranstve: k postanovke issledovatel'skoi problemy. – Vestnik MGIMO–Universiteta. № 2. S. 45-55. (RUS.)
Leipkhart A. 1992. Mnogosostavnye obshchestva i demokraticheskie rezhimy. – Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya. № 1-2. S. 217-225. (RUS.)
Leipkhart A. 1997. Demokratiya v mnogosostavnykh obshchestvakh: sravnitel'noe issledovanie. M.: Aspekt Press. 287 s. (RUS.)
Metamorfozy razdelennykh obshchestv (pod red. I.V. Kudryashovoi, O.G. Kharitonovoi). 2020. M.: MGIMO-Universitet. 284 s. (RUS.)
Panarin A.S. 2003a. Pravoslavnaya tsivilizatsiya v global'nom mire. M.: Eksmo; Algoritm. 541 s. (RUS.)
Panarin A.S. 2003b. Iskushenie globalizmom. M.: Eksmo; Algoritm. 415 s. (RUS.)
Rokkan S., Lipset S. 2004. Struktury razmezhevanii, partiinye sistemy i predpochteniya izbiratelei. Predvaritel'nye zamechaniya. – Politicheskaya nauka. № 4. S. 204-234. (RUS.)
Semenenko I.S., Lapkin V.V., Pantin I.V. 2021. Sotsial'nye razmezhevaniya i politicheskie protivostoyaniya v nauchnom diskurse: kriterii otsenki i klassifikatsii. – Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya. T. 30. № 5. S. 56-77. (RUS.)
Kharitonova O.G., Lavrov I.R. 2020. Sposoby upravleniya etnoreligioznoi raznorodnost'yu: sluchai goroda-gosudarstva Singapur. – Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Ser. Politologiya. № 4. S. 634-646. (RUS.)
Almond G., Verba S. 1963. The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 574 p.
Lijphart A. 1977. Democracy in Plural Societies. A Comparative Exploration. New Haven: Yale University Press. 268 p.
Rokkan S., Lipset M. 1967. Party Systems and Voter Alignments. N.Y.: Free Press. 570 p.ArticleReceived: 21.12.2021
Citation FormatsOther cite formats:
APAArteev, S. P. (2021). Divided Societies in the Russian Scientific Discourse. Vlast’ (The Authority), 29(6), 123-129. https://doi.org/10.31171/vlast.v29i6.8704IssueSectionPOLITICAL PROCESSES AND PRACTICES
Following the submission of the manuscript to the Publisher, the author binds oneself not to publish it somewhere else without permission of the Publisher.
