Moscow University Bulletin. Series 12. Political Science. 2020. 6.

The article is dedicated to the “Political journal”, published in Russia from 1790 to 1830. The Journal was fi rst published as a Russian-language version of the German journal “Politisches Journal nebst Anzeige von gelehrten und andern Sachen” and was originally known in Russian as “Political journal with the testimony of scientists and other things, published in Hamburg by the Society of Learned Men, Translated from German”. A distinctive feature of the “Political journal” was its pragmatic perspective on the political situation in the world, which allowed the reader not only to draw a conclusion about a particular event, but also to see the whole picture of what was happening in the world, understanding the causal relationship. Soon after the fi rst publication, the “Political journal” captured the interest of the Russian public, and by the beginning of the 19th century reading the Journal became one of the distinctive elements of the “enlightened” intelligentsia. The “Political journal” can be considered the fi rst publication focusing specifi cally on political science in Russia and one of the most enduring publications of that time. Despite the fact it has changed name over time, it was published for 40 years. Overall, the article reaches the conclusion that the “Political journal” should not be considered as an example of Russian journalism, but rather as an important part of the Russian school of political science.

The article looks at the issue of the role of political actors as subjects of historical responsibility. Based on the communicative approach elaborated by H. Arendt, the authors provide a distinction between the event, which is the subject of historical responsibility, and the act of establishing responsibility in the public space. It is suggested that such an act can be only the result of democratic procedures. Consequently, historical responsibility as a social phenomenon is possible only in a democratic society, even though attempts to establish it may take place under non-democratic regimes. Furthermore, the article claims that the case of Germany as an example of the establishment of negative responsibility cannot be characterized as universal. Indeed, it is also possible to speak about the establishment of positive responsibility as a duty of the community to preserve the memory not of guilt, but of the merits of the collective subject. Therefore, as a rule, the affi rmation of positive responsibility takes place in a context following a political crisis and the consolidation of moral resentment. An example of the constitution of a positive responsibility is the cult of victory in the Great Patriotic War within the Russian society of the 1990s, which followed the experience of the collapse of the USSR and the need for moral compensation. The characteristic features of historical responsibility include performativity, representativeness, normativity, manipulativeness. The role of political actors is not qualitatively shaping diff erent forms of responsibility, but rather aff ecting the specifi c procedures that consolidate it.

The article presents an analysis of the concept of ‘survival’ through the work of Western European philosophers in the fi eld of biopolitics. The goal of the article is threefold: analyzing the idea of ‘survival’ as a concept rooted in the biopolitical fi eld of Western European philosophy of the second part of the 20th — beginning of the 21th century; presenting diff erent directions in the process of conceptualization of the notion; and analyzing the transformation of the concept over the mentioned period. Methodologically, the article combines the historical and the comparative approaches. The research relies as well on a conceptual analysis, helping to defi ne biopolitics as a fi eld of philosophical discourse and to clarify such interconnected notions as “survivor”, “regime of survival” and “global war”. The analysis demonstrates that ‘survival’ is an important notion for the 20th and the 21st centuries Western European philosophers. Moreover, the article shows how the concept of ‘survival’ was incorporated into the biopolitical fi eld mostly by Michel Foucault. The notion of ‘survival’, which characterizes the life within the state of exception in the work of Georgio Agamben, is then transformed into the idea of the ‘survivor’ (based on the example of Elias Canetti’s works) and consequently into the idea of ‘regime of survival’ in conditions of global war, in the works of some of the early 20th century thinkers.

The article presents an analysis of the perceptions of states belonging to the categories of “near” and “ far abroad”. The representation of the “abroad” have been examined in terms of the attractiveness, strength and assertiveness, focusing on both the rationalized assessments and fully verbalized, unconscious representations of the countries. As result of in-depth interviews and projective techniques, the research analyzed the representation of Ukraine, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, the USA, Germany, India, China, Brazil, and Turkey formed in the minds of the respondents. The study shows an unequal perception of these countries, which is infl uenced by a complex set of factors. For countries associated with the “near abroad”, a signifi cant set of factors shaping the perception of the respondents is associated with personal experience, such as living in the specifi c country in the past, or elements of self-identifi cation, such as ethnic, confessional and ethnocultural values. On the other hand, for the perception of countries associated with the “ far-abroad”, important factors are the mutual agreements between the states, the established set of ethnocultural stereotypes, the nature of foreign policy relations and the personal experience of relations with people of the specifi c foreign country. Finally, the perception of both categories, “near” and “ far abroad”, is also infl uenced by the media. Overall, the results of the research show a high impact of the trends in bilateral relations with Russia on a public perception of the specifi c foreign country.

The article provides an analysis of the main role characteristics of a parliamentarian, as well as the theoretical foundations of the political and psychological research dealing with the personality of politicians. Based on these foundations, the research provides a model for a political and psychological analysis of the personal and professional potential of young parliamentarians. Methodologically, the research relies on the biographical analysis hand in hand with content analysis, observation, and in-depth interviews. This methodology has been applied to the analysis of the personality of all young deputies of the State Duma, defi ned by their age (under 35). The study shows that among the main traits of the young legislators prevail those related to achievement and power. On the other hand, affi liation appears as the least developed, indicating the dedication of young deputies in the direction of chosen priorities and emphasizing high ambition among their main leadership qualities. In terms of type of political leadership, the majority of young deputies can be labelled as “administrators”, while the number of extroverts exceeds the number of introverts. Most young legislators appear to have low selfesteem and a complex self-concept, factors that enhance their commitment on the one hand, and manageability by the top management on the other. Two archetypes, “Agitator — Apolitical — Motive of Power” and “Administrator — Pragmatist — Motive of Achievement” identifi ed by the research, confi rm the current request from the federal government for “speaking” and subordinated individuals.

The article discusses the main features of the consolidation of the dialogue between the Russian nuclear industry and public environmental organizations in a situation characterized by the declining appeal of the nuclear industry. The research demonstrates that public environmental organizations, experts and academics, play a signifi cant role in the transformation of the social perception of nuclear energy, from its inadmissibility to a new degree of relevance. The article provides a historical overview of the public activity concerning the environmental protection, from its inception to the recent stage, when public environmental organizations gained some infl uence over the decision-making process concerning the development of some economic sectors (illustrated by the example of the nuclear industry). The author highlights several important types of public ecological organizations activity, from concrete actions of activists (picketing, rallies, protests), to the involvement of citizens in the decision-making process by engaging in a constructive dialogue between the state and the society. The article provides a set of specifi c conditions which are necessary for an eff ective cooperation and work of the expert community, reaching the conclusion that public environmental organizations have exercised signifi cant impact on the decisions of public authorities due to the fact that their leaders are members of intelligentsia and leading experts in the fi eld, namely: military servants, scientists, politicians.

The article is a review of the edited volume “The Past for the Present: History- Memory and Narratives of National Identity”, published in 2020. The monograph represents the new work of the Center of Intellectual History of the Institute of World History at the Russian Academy of Science, edited by Lorina P. Repina, head of the Center. The main topic analyzed in the book is the complex relationship between the concepts of ‘history’ and ‘memory’, and the role of historiography and collective memory in the formation of national and nation-state identity. The volume analyzes the specifi c issue drawing on the examples and evidence from Russia and other countries, comparing the mechanisms of interaction between historical science and collective memory in forming national identity. It should be recognized, indeed, the benefi t and prospects of this approach, emphasizing how history and historical memory are inextricably intertwined and how one of the points of their intersection constitute what we can call national identity. Although history and historical memory may diff er and even take diff erent directions, both these strands play an important role in the formation of national identity. Historical memory is inseparable from the social group that ‘holds’ it, and its meaning is mainly internal, an instrument of self-identifi cation. On the other hand, historical knowledge, which has reached a scientifi c level, has a more orderly, presentable appearance and it is addressed to an external audience. Thus, historical memory forms the foundations of national identity, and historical thought can provide historical memory with original facts and images and help to consolidate national and nation-state identity, primarily through state narratives and educational books.