Articles

The historical events of May 1968 have a rich intellectual history. A reexamination of the theoretical discussions that preceded the famous slogans allows us not only to explore the socio-cultural context of the student protests but also to critically revisit the foundations of their means and ends. In this article the author reconstructs key premises of the theory of Henri Lefebvre, who actively participated in the intellectual and political life of the Gaullist France. Representing heterodox Marxist philosophy, Lefebvre was also a close ally — as well as a critic — of the Situationist movement. While today Lefebvre is mainly associated with urban studies, the main subject of his interest was always the socio-critical theory that exists without separation from political practice. So the critique of everyday life, the theory of its temporal organization and the reinterpretation of romanticism allowed Lefevre to formulate a critical and positive program in line with “phenomenological Marxism” — a program for changing those historical circumstances, the answer to which was the student revolution.

This article examines the process of political transformation of social movements, the vectors and means of their evolution and the factors that determine the procedures of their changes. In historical perspective, it was the process of development of social movements that ensured the progressive development of society, its transition to a higher level of social development. The study of the problem of transformation of social movements allows us to address the questions of ensuring sustainable social development, of the role of the masses and the leadership in politics, and to determine the vector of further development of the system of social relations. The author examines the issues of internal and external determinants of the development of social movements, as well as potential forms of their further transformation. The article also examines global trends in social development and answers the question of what impact they have on the process of transformation of social movements.

The article examines the philosophical bases and utopian features of transhumanism. Transhumanism is considered by the author as an ideology. The author sees the transhumanism as a kind of late humanism including the characteristics of the secular worldview of Modern times: materialism (immanentism), progressivism, technologism. The article also shows how the birth of transhumanism was promoted by the aesthetic principle that has dominated the culture of the Western world since the Renaissance. The author characterizes the transhumanist utopia, that is used as a motivating force to transforms philosophical ideas of transhumanism into transhumanist ideology. It is noted that the discussions about the realization of the transhumanist utopia is not so important for modern society, because transhumanism at present does not create a world of transhumanoids (beings physically and biologically diff erent from modern people), but a world of transhumanists, i.e. individuals committed to the transhumanist worldview. Like any ideology, transhumanism forms its supporters. Therefore, the study of the infl uence of the ideology of transhumanism on the human worldview should precede the criticism of specifi c “transhuman” technologies and the discussion of bioethics.

This article off ers a comprehensive analysis of the phenomenon of modern populism. The author considers diff erent approaches to the defi nition of populism, analyzes the reasons for its revival in the 21st century and the main forms and typology of populism. The reasons for the emergence of populist movements at the present stage, according to the author, are a number of trends in the sociopolitical development of Western societies: the erosion and decline of traditional party organizations; the deterioration of the middle class; the mediatization of policy; new practices of political participation associated with the development of Internet media; the rise to power of technocrats in a number of states; the growth of protest moods; and so on. The development of populist movements today is moving towards what Colin Crouch has termed post-democracy. This actualizes a discussion of the transformation of forms of democratic representation and participation: populists of various persuasions put forward as an acceptable form of interaction between citizens and the political class such models as “participatory,” “direct” and “transparent” democracy. The author sees a threat to democracy in populism. Yet while the article notes that modern populist movements are a reaction to crisis phenomena in the democratic system itself, the author nevertheless believes that the danger of rising populist sentiments may also serve as an incentive for reforming democracy and further strengthening it.

This article examines the modern crisis of liberal democracy and the phenomenon of new authoritarianism arising fr om it. The current crisis manifests itself in mass support for populist politicians and right-wing political organizations in the Western democratic countries. The author makes a comparative analysis of historical forms of authoritarian systems and their analogues in the 21st century, noting that modern authoritarian systems have democratic legitimization and rarely use violent methods; however, they always seek to lim it the functions of traditional democratic institutions. The article proposes to consider the “new authoritarianism” as a system of concentration of state power that does not respect the principle of separation of powers, the rule of law or constitutional provisions while limiting the rights and freedoms of citizens. The author notes that the frustration of citizens with their socio-economic situation and the growth of nationalism are the main causes of the crisis of democracy. The existing crisis can be overcome, he continues, by reforming traditional democratic institutions, carrying out educational activities and increasing the role of citizens in the political process. The end result of the crisis, the author concludes, may be the strengthening of democratic institutions if the proposed reforms are implemented.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the potential of the video game “People Power” as a means of training civil society activists for the deployment of political campaigns involving the use of the technology of nonviolent struggle. The article’s methodological research is based on the use of descriptive political analysis. The theoretical basis of the work is a synthesis of elements of the concepts of relative deprivation (T. R. Gurr), social identity (Henri Tajfel and John Turner) and the model of mass consciousness (D. V. Olshansky). The authors conclude from analysis of the use of the game that “People Power” has great potential as a means of training civil society activists for the deployment of nonviolent struggle campaigns. It serves simultaneously as an interactive textbook, an instrument for reformatting consciousness, a means of recruiting civil activists potentially capable of forming the core of protest, and the basis for the formation of a constantly functioning “brainstorming” center aimed at improving the technology of nonviolent struggle.

This article is devoted to the study of the problem of ubiquitous informatization and electronization, which has caused the formation of a peculiar virtual reality as an integral part of actual reality. The author analyzes the features of virtual reality and their infl uence on the political space. The term “post-reality” is used to designate the environment created by the features of the virtual space. The article views in detail such phenomena generated by post-reality as the post- truth created by the merging of politics with the virtual environment and the post-values that directly aff ect the political information agenda. In turn, post-values are divided into simulations of popularity and simulations of achievements because of which real personalities and actions, including those related to politics, are devalued. In turn, they are replaced by virtual analogues, which often do not register in actual reality. At the end of the article the author analyzes the reaction generated by the post-reality, off ering examples of this reaction in politics.

The question of the ratio of economic and political freedom is considered in this article through the analysis of the actual values of the Index of Economic Freedom (IEF) and the Democracy Index (DI) for 162 countries. Despite the rather high correlation of both indices, the study reveals a signifi cant degree of their variability: there are enough countries that do not quite fi t into the expected model “countries with a high IEF have a high DI, and countries with low IEF — a low DI.” In countries with equivalent IEF values, the values of the DI can vary 2-3 times; likewise, countries with the same DI can vary signifi cantly in IEF. In practice, it is clear that economic freedom does not always require political freedom (United Arab Emirates), and political freedom can be realized in conditions of limited economic freedom (India). A country’s ability to deviate from the expected global trend line is infl uenced by the size of the population and the size of the territory. Among countries that deviate signifi cantly from the trend, a signifi cant proportion are countries with small populations and small territories. As an alternative to the traditional method of analysis, the article proposes an approach that takes into account the size of the population of countries and is based on the recognition that the subject of political and economic freedoms is not a country, but an individual. This approach shows that only 11 % of the population lives in “ free” countries, and the relationship between economic and political freedoms is less obvious than one would expect in theory.

The article discusses the possibilities of coexistence of democracy and technocracy in technocratic mechanisms of power formation, functioning in democratic and fl awed-democratic political systems and allowing to overcome the existing shortcomings of the democratic way of recruiting the political elite, while preserving such democratic components as election and competition. The main weaknesses in recruiting elites in modern democracies are the risk of coming to power populists, “random” or media personalities, who do not have a suffi cient level of competence and professionalism but are capable of destabilizing the political system; as well as the infl uence of party or personal interests of individual politicians on the adoption of state decisions. The article analyzes such mechanisms of power formation as functional constituencies that simultaneously corresponding to technocratic and democratic criteria, their features of functioning in various political systems and cultures, as well as their advantages and disadvantages.