Moscow University Bulletin. Series 12. Political Science. 2016. 3.

This article presents a special case study of the one of the basic models of electoral management, in which elections are conducted by executive authorities. The theoretical concept of the governmental model of electoral management is reviewed by the author, who makes adjustments to the current scholarly assessment of the spread of the phenomenon based on cross-case analysis. The article demonstrates that the concept of the governmental model is being applied excessively broadly in contemporary political science, with clear violations of the concept’s defi nitions. The author maintains that a reduction in the role of the cabinet in electoral governance is an observed phenomenon, and that his is the fi rst analysis to characterize the conducting of elections by executives independent of the cabinet. The article concludes that this form of electoral management could pass away in the foreseeable future, as the governmental model is in confl ict with contemporary trends in the development of public policy and management of the electoral process.

This article deals with the causes and sources of risks and crises in election campaigns. The author analyzes the internal and external risks of election campaigns, their types, the standard models of interaction between the employer, campaign manager and the team, and the particular features of political communication in the process of management decision-making in a developing crisis. Special attention is paid to the analysis of the competitive environment of the election campaign as the main source of risk and crisis situations. The article further describes the relationship of internal and external risk types in election campaigns — due to a number of objective and subjective factors of the electoral process — and the management of real election campaigns. The author presents a concept that reflects both current conditions and the possibility of preventing or limiting manifestations of crisis situations in election campaigns.

This article introduces the concept of the “democratization trap.” Democratization can be considered as a process with an autonomous logic of development that cannot be fully grasped by standard “actor-oriented” and “structural” approaches. The autonomous logic of democratization is formalized via a game-theoretical model with “politicians” and “voters” as players. They interact under conditions that are inherent to all young democracies. The model predicts that certain types of linkages between politicians and voters emerge endogenously; the emphasis is on the observation that these types of linkages are defective in the context of “liberal democracy.” Moreover, these defective linkages may arise even if elections are free, honest and competitive. Empirical evidence underpins the main predictions of the model. The concept of the “democratization trap” may have several interesting implications which call for further research, from factors that cause democratic transitions to “ freeze up” to contradictions between “liberal” and “democratic” components of liberal democracy.

This article considers the application of methods of online campaigning in the Russian political sphere in the period 2000–2015. The informational activity of citizens on the Internet shows new prospects for the development of existing methods of Internet technologies in the process of the election campaigning. Modern online tools enable political actors to become closer to voters and confi gure active interaction with the electorate. The rapid development of these technologies now allows politicians and voters to communicate in an online mode. In this context, the current methods of agitation during the election campaign have begun to change. Political actors are beginning to pay more attention to the Internet as the most effective way to influence the modern electorate. The author believes that the use of such methods is important for the Russian policy-making segment, effective in the current political situation and shows great potential for further development.

This article documents the sources, character and impact of political polarization on the U.S. Congress and American politics generally. Partisan polarization among the public, activists, and elected officials characterizes American politics in the 21st century, and it is often seen as the major source of our governing problems, especially in Congress. In the 2016 election, Republicans and Democrats are further apart ideologically than at any point in recent history, expressing highly negative views of the opposing party. This deleterious impact of partisan polarization cannot be exaggerated. It discourages compromise, produces gridlock, fosters mistrust, and ultimately hinders the functioning of governmental institutions. Lawmaking, representing, overseeing, executing laws, and adjudicating legal and constitutional disputes requires that individuals who might otherwise disagree come together and serve interests that go beyond their own. Failure to compromise results in gridlock, dysfunction, and partisan warfare as we see in 2016 and likely beyond with a new Congress and President.

In this article the authors examine political culture as a legitimate constituent of a political system in which the actors within an existing stable structure are able to initiate and effi ciently realize changes needed to maintain adaptive capacity — thus making political culture an important factor in political stability. The importance of cultural elements in relation to this status is connected to examples of political behavior and different orientations expressed within the community that are able to either facilitate or hinder the achievement of stability.
The article discusses the validity of the terms “stability” and “stabilization” in relation to authoritarian and totalitarian systems. Certain factors mitigate against such validity: the suppression of political participation, the “imposed consensus”, the falsifi cation of preferences, the presence of an imposed ideology associated with the prospect of its own “hypernormalization,” etc. Particular attention is paid to different scenarios of interaction between a political system and political culture, using specifi c historical examples.

A round table staged by the Political Science Department of Lomonosov Moscow State University during the Lomonosov Readings Conference of 2016 outlined the theoretical and practical aspects of political system stability in the modern world. The discussion began with an elaboration of current Russian and Western approaches to the concept of political stability, which included a suggestion that there was a need to consider both the internal and external factors of such stability. In subsequent discourse, the problem of sustainability was examined in the context of political practice. More specifi cally, stability was interpreted as a frame of mass consciousness, and various models capable of taking this factor into account in public opinion research were suggested. The discussion also treated the relationship between sustainability and the cyclical nature of the political process. Attention was likewise drawn to the role of the historical policy of the state and of civic education in ensuring the stability of the political system.