Within the Walls of Civitas and Cities: On Some Issues of Self-Organization of Communities and the Construction of Organized Space

The article offers an assessment of the process of self-organization of communities and the formation of their living space through the use of grad models (civitas, cités), consideration of the practices of strategic and tactical symbolic construction of the reality of localities (cities). The urgency of the problem is dictated by the need to understand the mechanisms of self-organization of communities in the context of the processes of the Western model of globalization, the implementation of resource flows outside the regulatory administrative boundaries of territories, the development of information and communication capabilities of interested participation. An attempt is made to explain the processes of self-organization of communities and the construction of space in the vector of development and maximization using theoretical models of rent-orientation, as well as the justification of the integrating political platform of the civitas is proposed. Examples of interaction of civitas as models of justification of justice and legitimacy, their synthesis as conditions for obtaining a competitive advantage of individual and collective actors of the political processes of the city are considered. In modern conditions, the dominance of the Market civitas as a universal platform for community self-organization and organization of physical, communicative, symbolic spaces is noted. An approach is proposed to determine the status of a full-fledged subject of the community and the nature of its positioning in space by analyzing the application of political practices of objectification, the organization of structured personal and public spaces of vital activity. In the context of self-organization, the article touches on the mechanisms of interested individual and group exploration of space, the use of the “name — define — involve” algorithm. The practices of self-organization of local communities and the formation of spaces using a symbolic resource and a complex of other intangible and material resources are considered. The study also touched upon the problem of the foundations of citizenship in modern communities, the circumstances of the use of inclusion and exclusion practices by communities.

References

Althusser, L. “Idéologie et appareils idéologiques d’Etat,” Althusser, L. Positions (1964–1975). Paris: Les Éditions sociales, 1976, pp. 67–125.
Arendt, H. Vita activa, ili O deiatel’noi zhizni, transl. V. V. Bibikhin. St. Petersburg: Aleteiia, 2000.
Augustine. O grade Bozhiem. Moscow: Kharvest: AST, 2000.
Barthes, R. Imperiia znakov, transl. Ia. G. Brazhnikova. Moscow: Praksis, 2004.
Boltanski, L., and Chiapello, È. Novyi dukh kapitalizma, transl. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2011.
Boltanski, L., and Theveno, L. Kritika i obosnovanie spravedlivosti: Ocherki sotsiologii gradov, transl. O. V. Kovenevoi. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2013.
Bourdieu, P. “Simvolicheskoe prostranstvo i vlast’,” THESIS, No. 2, 1993, pp. 137–150.
Buchanan, J. “Eticheskie pravila, ozhidaemye otsenki i bol’shie gruppy,” Istoki: sotsiokul’turnaia sreda ekonomicheskoi deiatel’nosti i ekonomicheskogo poznaniia, ed. Ia. I. Kuz’minov. Moscow: HSE University Press, 2011, pp. 90–112.
Butler, J. Psikhika vlasti: teorii sub”ektsii, transl. Z. Babloian. Khar’kov: KhTsGI; St. Petersburg: Aleteiia, 2002.
Fukuyama, F. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Free Press, 1992.
Goffman, E. Geschlecht und Werbung, transl. T. Lindquist. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1981.
Golovina, K. V. “Material’naia kul’tura i brikolazh: kak russkoiazychnye migranty v Iaponii sozdaiut i priobretaiut veshchi, ”Antropologicheskii forum, No. 34, 2017, pp. 179–210.
Harvey, D. Sotsial’naia spravedlivost’ i gorod, transl. E. Iu. Gerasimova. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2018.
Iudin, G. B. “Retsenziia na knigu: Liuk Boltanski, Loran Teveno. Kritika i obosnovanie spravedlivosti: Ocherki sotsiologii gradov, ”Laboratorium: Zhurnal sotsial’nykh issledovanii, No. 3, 2014, pp. 126–129.
Kharkhordin, O. V. “Pragmaticheskii povorot: sotsiologiia L. Boltanski i L. Theveno, ”Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, No. 1, 2007, pp. 32–41.
Khondzinskii, P., prot. “ ‘Grad ili khram’? — k voprosu o kliuchevykh poniatiiakh ekklesiologicheskikh kontseptsii blazhennogo Avgustina i sviatitelia Filareta Moskovskogo, ”Vestnik Ekaterinburgskoi dukhovnoi seminarii, No. 2, 2018, pp. 81–96.
Koveneva, O. V. “Frantsuzskaia pragmaticheskaia sotsiologiia: ot modeli ‘gradov’ k teorii ‘mnozhestvennykh rezhimov vovlechennosti’,” Sotsiologicheskii zhurnal, No. 1, 2008, pp. 5–21.
Miasnikova, L. A., and Drozdova, A. V. “Teoretiko-metodologicheskie podkhody k izucheniiu povsednevnosti v sovremennom kul’turologicheskom znanii,” Izvestiia Ural’skogo federal’nogo universiteta. Seriia 1. Problemy obrazovaniia, nauki i kul’tury, No. 3, 2015, pp. 86–95.
Naumova, E. “Sotsiologiia ‘gradov’ L. Boltanskii L. Theveno i ‘rezhimy vovlechennosti’ v kapitalizm,” Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie, Vol. 13, No. 3, 2014, pp. 246–251.
Ratzinger, J. Volk und Haus Gottes in Augustinus Lehre von der Kirche. München: Karl Zink-Verlag, 1954.
Schütz, A. “O mnozhestvennosti real’nostei, ”Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2003, pp. 3–34.
Solntsev, N. V. “Problema ponimaniia proshlogo: germenevticheskii opyt,” Uchenye zapiski Rossiiskogo gosudarstvennogo sotsial’nogo universiteta, No. 1, 2009, pp. 77–85.
Sorokin, P. A. Sistema sotsiologii, Vol. 1: Sotsial’naia analitika, P. 1: Uchenie o stroenii prosteishego (rodovogo) sotsial’nogo iavleniia. Petrograd: Kolos, 1920.
Tul’chinskii, G. L. “Spravedlivost’ i spravedlivosti: tipy spravedlivosti, vlasti i sootvetstvuiushchikh konfliktov,” Chelovek. Kul’tura. Obrazovanie, No. 2, 2015, pp. 52–75.
Zamiatina, N. Iu. “Kreativnyi klass, simvolicheskii kapital i territoriia, ”Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost’, No. 4, 2013, pp. 130–139.