Articles

This article explores the profound impact of digital technologies on international relations and geopolitical dynamics. It posits that the digital realm has become a new frontier in global politics, where state and non-state actors engage in both cooperative and antagonistic interactions. The advent of cyber warfare, digital espionage, and the strategic use of social media have introduced novel forms of conflict, challenging traditional notions of sovereignty and national security. Simultaneously, digital platforms offer unprecedented opportunities for cross-border collaboration, fostering diplomatic engagement and facilitating the achievement of shared goals. The article highlights the dual-use nature of digital technologies, serving both as tools for empowerment and instruments of power struggles. It discusses the emergence of digital alliances and networks that transcend national boundaries, reshaping the landscape of international cooperation. However, it also underscores the digital divide and the geopolitical implications of unequal access to technology, which can exacerbate existing tensions and inequalities. The article calls for a multilateral approach to govern the digital sphere, emphasizing the need for international norms and regulations that balance national interests with global digital commons.

The purpose of the work is to identify the features of modern political ideologies associated with digital technological transformations. The remythologizing approach and L. Althusser’s refined approach to ideology are used as a methodological lens. Digital technology corporations are considered as specific intellectual ideological devices that form the conditions for digital transformations of most modern political ideologies. It was discovered that such a polyvalent phenomenon as the ideologization of the meme is becoming important in these changes. An analysis of cybercommunism, cyberlibertarianism, cyberanarchism, cyberfascism and neoreactionism led to the conclusion that the digital environment contributes to the remythologization of political consciousness, in which more flexible mythological constructs, rather than strict ideological dogmas, become popular. On the one hand, the key features of modern political ideologies that are changing under the influence of digital technological transformations are revealed, on the other hand, their similarity with classical ideological constructs is revealed. It is shown that all these ideologies consider digital media and technologies as tools for qualitative socio-political transformations in the future.

The article briefly describes the biography, scientific path and political ideas of Noam Chomsky (born in 1928), a prominent intellectual of our time. Beginning his scientific research in linguistics, but with a keen interest in politics, Chomsky already in the middle of the last century became known as a scientist who made the second cognitive revolution, a political activist condemning the US foreign policy and a political philosopher consistently justifying his political ideal - libertarian socialism. One of the main tasks of the study is to build a holistic image of the scientist, whose political concept is a logical continuation of his discoveries in the field of linguistics, reasoning about the nature of man, about the responsibility of people (ordinary people and intellectuals) for the injustices and iniquities occurring in the world. The methodology of the research includes the use of textual analysis and historical-analytical approach, allowing to present the concept of N. Chomsky in the context of political realities and scientific research in the United States in the last third of the 20th century. As a result of the study, the author concludes that N. Chomsky is a real example of a “responsible intellectual” who consistently defends his unpopular and sometimes dangerous position proving the incompatibility of democracy and capitalism.

The article analyses Russian playwright and philosopher A. Sukhovo-Kobylin’s study about Vsemir (Allworld) from the point of view of its socio-political content. This topic is insufficiently covered in scientific discourse and the article aims to fill that gap. The origins of A. Sukhovo-Kobylin’s ideas are examined through historicalpolitological reconstruction and political-textual analysis and as a result a reconstruction of his socio-political conception is presented. The article demonstrates the evolutionary orientation of the study about Vsemir which makes it close to the ideas of Russian cosmism and highlights the stages of humanity’s development (telluric, solar and sidereal) and the ways of achieving its ideal state described by A. Sukhovo-Kobylin. It considers the ratio of Spirit and Matter in the study about Vsemir and notes the dependence of human evolution on the mode of cognition and the way of interacting with other human beings. In addition, the article demonstrates such important socio-political component of these ideas as the necessity of overcoming individualism and building a unified planetary community.

The article, using the example of two interrelated categories ‘independence’ and ‘service’, which have been constantly present in the domestic spiritual and political discourse for several centuries, traces the process of transformation of the value foundations of Russian civilization in the spiritual and political thought of the 18th century. Analysis of the works by the authors of the 18th century was carried out on the basis of the search database of the National Corpus of the Russian Language. In total more than 600 texts created in 1701–1800 were studied. The main research methods in addition to the general scientific methodological apparatus were content analysis and political-textual analysis. The concepts of ‘independence’ and ‘service’ in the 18th century were largely linked. The concept of ‘independence’ was using in the literature of this period in two meanings: ‘state independence’ (state sovereignty) and ‘personal independence’ (private sovereignty). Personal independence had to be sacrificed by the subjects of the Russian sovereign in favor of state sovereignty. This sacrifice was most often justified by the need for each resident of Russia to serve the sovereign, the state and the Fatherland.

The author of the article proposes a program for studying the language of Nazism by using an analysis of the language codes that define and structure the dominant discourse of Western social thought. The first stage of the study consists of a comparative analysis of the linguistic facts accumulated during the periods of Hitlerism (1930–40s) and late Atlanticism (2020s).
The Atlanticist narrative is defined as representing the ideology of the struggle against world evil for the metaphysically and fatalistically understood progress (“progress of everything”, Progress with a capital letter, which is both its own goal and criterion), while the victims of this struggle are presented as inevitable “collateral damage” in the course of human development.
It is noted that the semantics of the concept “Other” in contemporary Nazi language is split into two meanings: the official, “desirable” Other and the unofficial, “undesirable” Other (otherwise: “the Other Other”), which does not fall into the zone of tolerance, does not succumb to Westernization, and therefore is supposedly “aggressive” and “dangerous” (“patriarchal”, “traditional” or “populist”). The reproduction of ideology in the Atlanticist Nazi language is defined as a four-step process: pluralism — nihilism — Nazism (racism) — splitting of the Nazi discourse, revealing its ambivalence.
The semiotic system of the contemporary Nazi language is described in the article as having a core (generating the semantics of Nazi myths) and a conceptual “protective belt”, which includes, in particular, the “retro-discourse of classical liberalism”, formulas of “liberal war” (“military pacifism”, “humanitarian bombing”, “coercion to peace”, etc.), themes of “new ethics”, “post-material values”, “multiple identities”, a general attitude towards technocracy and digitalization of social relations.

The paper is devoted to the analysis of public speeches by Russian Orthodox Church members on socially significant issues in the late Soviet period. It is shown that, despite serious limitations, the Church continued to play a significant role in the functioning of the semantic foundations of national politics. This role was associated with active patriotic rhetoric, which to a certain extent acquired a pro-Soviet character. Soviet patriotism gave the Orthodox community the opportunity to remain a part of Soviet society in a cultural sense and demonstrate loyalty to the state. In addition, it corresponded to the expanding social demand of believers for a synthesis of Soviet and Orthodox values.

The article explores the problem of transforming military commemorative practices in a contemporary Russian school with the help of a comparative analysis of Soviet practices related to the Great Patriotic War and new ways to perpetuate participants in a special military operation. There are three types of commemorative practices that updated the memory of the Great Patriotic War in the educational space of the Soviet school: nominative and organizational (renaming educational institutions, installing memorial plaques), museum and exhibition (expositions in school museums) and ceremonial (inviting veterans to conduct open lessons). Current commemorations related to the perpetuation of a special military operation rely on those symbolic practices that were developed in Soviet society. At the same time, they do not replace, but prolong existing practices, forming the interpretation of a special military operation as a logical continuation of the struggle of the Soviet people against Nazism. The difficult point of current military commemorations remains the question how memory of local conflicts (for example, the war in Afghanistan) can relate to the indicated continuity of commemorative practices as well as how to define the criteria for the selection of those characters and events that need commemoration.

The article is devoted to the analysis of digital practices of commemoration of a special military operation. The material of the analysis is digital memory, concentrated in telegram channels. It is concluded that the memorialization of a special military operation in the public space is associated with the creation of images of heroes and the types of heroization are distinguished. The classical perception of heroism as extraordinary combat professionalism in a one-against-many situation dominates. A prominent place in commemoration is occupied by the non-combat heroism of martyrs (for example, Darya Dugina and Vladlen Tatarsky), with the help of which the idea of a common pantheon of heroes of the special military operation, Donbass and the Russian world is emphasized in the Russian public space. Digital practices include primarily memorial texts in blogs, as well as a range of digital artefacts, from comics to digital drawings. New forms of digital commemorations are being explored, such as the recording of military operations on video and “digital immortality”. There are different types of comments, divided according to four criteria: traditional and digital, official and unofficial.

Cancel culture is an Internet term of the beginning of the 21st century, which implies the prevention of public communication and public censure of a person who has committed an immoral act in a modern network society. The research methodology involves descriptive, comparative-historical methods. The purpose of the article is to define the concept of cancel culture, to consider its main characteristics and specific examples. Due to changes in modern society, cancel culture has become an important accelerator of many destructive processes. Cancel culture is superimposed on the phenomenon of “cultural wars” that destroys the identity of the United States. The polarization of society on ethical issues and the possibility of automatically discrediting one’s political opponents have created a constantly developing destructive mechanism in society. Within the framework of the network society, the cancel culture actualizes the old institutional contradictions of the United States. Elites use cancel culture to advance a right or left agenda in historical memory. But the polarization of society intensifies the existential crisis, which leads to the collapse of basic institutions. In addition, cancel culture began to manifest itself in both foreign and domestic US policy.