DOI: 10.25136/2409-7144.2023.9.29838

EDN: YVLVQN

Abstract: The genesis of the development of Russian sociology is a process whose complexity was caused by the political and ideological collisions of the Soviet period. At the same time, starting from the middle of the twentieth century, a qualitatively new stage begins in the development of sociology, which is called the "golden age" of Russian sociological thought. During these years, not only theoretical and applied methods of the pre-war period are revived, but also a powerful theoretical and methodological scientific base is being created, which laid the foundation of sociology as an independent science. One of the important moments was the activity of the Institute of Concrete Social Research (ICSI) of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Within the framework of ICSI activities, multi-scale work was carried out, including on the problems of the social structure of Soviet society. The development of sociological science in the Soviet period can be called the most ambiguous and, to some extent, tragic page in the history of scientific thought in Russia. On the one hand, sociological research, especially regarding the social structure of Soviet society, has become in demand from both a political and an economic point of view since the emergence of the Soviet state. In a relatively short period in the young Soviet state, an extensive network of sociological laboratories was created, in which large-scale research was conducted in various directions. The activities of ICSI and its predecessors - the Sector of Research on New Forms of Work and Life and the Department of Sociological Research of the Institute of Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences – allowed Soviet sociologists to unite into a team of like-minded people, and, despite ideological prohibitions and sanctions, to formalize sociological research into a multi-scale and complex theoretical and methodological basis of sociology.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-7144.2022.7.38266

EDN: MBDAEP

Abstract: This article is devoted to the search for primary ideas concerning the theoretical origins of the concept of microfascism and determining its connection with the topic of subjectivation and desubjectivation. The author suggests looking at these problems from the perspective of the French philosopher J. Deleuze and the German sociologist T. Adorno. The author pays special attention to the comparison of the ideas of both thinkers, analyzing not only the concepts mentioned by them to clarify the problematic field of microfascism, but also those social phenomena that have become the object of criticism of both authors. The article examines how their views have historically developed and transformed. The main conclusions of the study are following : 1) in both authors views, the problems of microfascism are connected with their criticism of modern capitalist society, which has adopted the fundamental features of historical fascism; 2) desubjectivation in the interpretation of J. Deleuze is defined as the dominance of the inhumane "logic of capital" over all possible ways of asserting the desire of the subject, and T. Adorno is defined as the displacement by culture of all opportunities to show non-stereotypical and unconventional ways of self-expression of the individual; 3) both authors cannot give an exact recipe for overcoming the prevailing social problems and the subsequent disintegration of human subjectivity and insist on the need to change the ways of understanding and the perception of culture.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-7144.2017.8.23740

Abstract: The subject of this research is the category of dignity in the British political philosophy. The object of this research is the British individualism. The article examines the relation of representatives of the British political philosophy to the category of dignity. Ethical component, which was present throughout the historical evolution of the British political philosophy (a common factor in establishment of the British individualism), can be exemplified by views of the judge and philosopher J. F. Stephen (1829-1894). Stephen will be of interest to the Russian audience as a representative figure of intellectual climate existed during the bloom of entrepreneurial society. The article presents a brief history and complex analysis of the British individualism. The views of J. F. Stephen are analyzed in the context of Britain's most prominent thinkers. Among the main conclusions are the following statements: 1) the category of dignity holds an important place in the British political philosophy and leans on the two related categories – “freedom” and “ownership”; 2) ethical component of the British political philosophy can be demonstrated through the views of the judge and philosopher J. F. Stephen (1829-1894); 3) the value of British political philosophy as a whole, and Stephen's ideas in particular, for the Russian and European political science consists in the ability to adopt and reconsider the proven experience in area of political ethics, axiology, and teleology. The scientific novelty is defined by the fact that this article is the first within the Russian science to carry out a systemic analysis of intellectual heritage of the British philosopher J. F. Stephen, as well as provide assessment of the parallel development of British individualism and attitude to dignity within the British political philosophy.

DOI: 10.7256/2306-0158.2014.2.10696

Abstract: The article includes analysis of the materials of Communist Party and Komsomols meetings and conferences during the first years of the Soviet rule, speeches of the Communist leaders, providing the basis for the inclusion of the Communist Youth Leagues (Komsomol) into the system of Soviet political control. It is quite indicative for understanding of the fact that Komsomol was regarded both as a subject and object of political control, that the directive of the X Conference of the Russian Communist (Bolshevik) Party required that the Komsomol involves the Komsomol members into discussion of general political issues of Soviet and Party formation, but it should be done in the open hearings of party organizations, meetings of delegates, conferences and meetings, rather than  in its separate meetings.  By this decision the Communist Party has shown that Komsomol could have its political activities under the control of the Communist Party and within the limits defined by it.  The authors attempted to overcome ideological stereotypes in the studies of Soviet reality and the methods of historical criticism, in order to get over the non-objective provision of information in the official documents. The authors took into account the specific features of each of the sub-periods within the studied period. The text was formed based upon the chronological problem-oriented principle.  The scientific novelty of the article has to do with the fact that it is the first specialized study, which is devoted to the complex studies of theoretical prerequisites of inclusion of the Komsomol within the system of Soviet political control. The authors uncovered theoretical bases for both external and hidden internal political control over the Komsomol.  It is shown that from the very beginning of existence of the RCYL, it was regarded as an object of control by the Communist Party. However, at the early stage of relations between the Communist Party and the Komsomol, there was some independency of the Youth League, when the New Economic Policy was introduced, the decisions of the conferences of the Party and the Komsomol prescribe much stricter control of youth leagues.  In the late 1920s the theoretical basis was substantiated for stricter internal control in the All-Union Leninist Young Communist League.

DOI: 10.7256/2306-0158.2014.9.13216

Abstract: In article the political project of the famous domestic religious philosopher and theologian P. A. Florensky "Predicted state system in the future" which still wasn't discussed in serious political and philosophical literature is considered. Global contradictions of the modern world do the similar analysis especially actual especially as at the heart of work of the father Pavel there is a concept of creation of the ideal state by means of stage-by-stage social reforming. The developed world order carries on the negative tradition which is sharply criticized at the beginning of a prolshy century.When writing work as authors the comparative-historical method allowing to shed light on the political circumstances promoting emergence of this brilliant historico-philosophical document is used. In particular, conclusions of P. A. Florensky and L. M. Lapshin, L. P. Karsavin and prominent hierarches of Russian Orthodox Church of the beginning of the last century are compared. In article the assessment of teoretiko-political conclusions of the uncommon thinker and theologian is given. The problem of a ratio of private and public interest, in the course of adoption of political decisions, a problem of the accounting of group and nation-wide needs for practice of the legislator is discussed. The analysis of work of the father Pavel is attached to the solution of the current problems of political and social construction in our country.