.jpg)
printPower and Politics. Polemic Notes about “Damned Questions” of Political Science
Solovyov A.I.,
Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia, solovyev@spa.msu.ru
elibrary_id: 75920 |
DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2020.06.10
Rubric: Reflecting on Matters in Print
For citation:
Solovyov A.I. Power and Politics. Polemic Notes about “Damned Questions” of Political Science. – Polis. Political Studies. 2020. No. 6. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2020.06.10
Abstract
The article attempts to polemically challenge the main methodological approaches to the specification of politics and power, developed and promoted by the authors of the monograph “Domination versus politics: the Russian case. The effectiveness of the institutional structure and the potential of strategies for political change”, published in 2019 by the “Political Encyclopedia Publishers”. The assessment of this work is generally positive. At the same time, the authors of the monograph use the Aristotelian-Arendian paradigm, which carries visible signs of historical and theoretical fatigue, as a cognitive basis for characterizing the modern space of politics and power. As part of the polemic with the authors of the monograph, the article notes that the colonization of official structures and institutions of power in a modern state by informal networks of the ruling elite increasingly limits the tools of public policy in making state decisions. Assumptions are made about the main trends in the evolution of relations between the elite and non-elite strata in the modern state, and about the further narrowing of the social space for “citizens’ politics”.
Keywords
power, politics, management, government decision-making, the ruling elite, the policy of citizens.
References
McClurg S.D., Lazer D. 2014. Political Network. – Social Network. An International Journal of Structural Analysis. Vol. 36. No 1. P. 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2013.09.001
Gel’man V.Ya. 2010, “Disruptive” Institutions and Informal Governance in Modern Russia. – Politeia. No. 2. P. 6-24. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2010-57-2-6-24
Gospodstvo protiv politiki: rossiiskii sluchai. Ehffektivnost’ institutsional’noi struktury i potentsial strategii politicheskikh izmenenii [Domination versus Politics: the Russian Case. The Effectiveness of the Institutional Structure and the Potential of Strategies for Political Changes]. 2019. Ed. by S.V. Patrushev, L.E. Filippova. Moscow: Political Encyclopedia Publishers. 319 p. (In Russ.)
Higley J. 2011. Ehlity, vneehlitnye gruppy i predely politiki: teoreticheskii rakurs [Elites, Non-Elite Groups and the Limits of Politics: A Theoretical Perspective]. – Ehlity i obshchestvo v sravnitel’nom izmerenii [Elites and society in a comparative dimension] Ed. by O.V. Gaman-Golutvina. Moscow: ROSSPEN. P. 294-304. (In Russ.)
Jessop B. 2019. The State: Past, Present, Future. (Russ. ed.: Jessop B. Gosudarstvo: proshloe, nastoyashchee i budushchee. Moscow: Delo Publishing House (RANEPA). 504 p.
Sergeyev V.M. 2013. Narodovlastiye na sluzhbe elit [Democracy in the Service of the Elites]. Moscow: MGIMO University Publishing House. 264 p. (In Russ.)
Content No. 6, 2020
See also:
Ratz M.V.,
Policy, management, power: a conceptual project of the system of (the state’s) organizational/managerial activities. – Polis. Political Studies. 2013. No2
Solovyov A.I.,
Government Decisions: the Conceptual Space and Dead Ends of Theorization. – Polis. Political Studies. 2015. No3
Solovyov A.I.,
Agents and mechanisms of political domination, or how a “winning coalition” rules. – Polis. Political Studies. 2024. No2
Kochetkov A.P., Mamychev A.Yu.,
Digital elite: trends of formation and development. – Polis. Political Studies. 2024. No4
Ratz M.V., Kotelnikov S.I.,
G.P. Schedrovitsky’s ideas in Russian socio-political thought (in commemoration of the 85th anniversary). – Polis. Political Studies. 2014. No3
.jpg)
.jpg)