Our “Wrong” Ruling Class: What to Expect from It?

IF 0.3 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE
L.G. Fishman
{"title":"Our “Wrong” Ruling Class: What to Expect from It?","authors":"L.G. Fishman","doi":"10.30570/2078-5089-2023-110-3-47-66","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article presents an analysis of the double problem that arises in the study of the contemporary Russian ruling class: one aspect of this problem is related to an adequate theoretical description of this class, and the other aspect concerns its self-positioning. The author considers the main paradigms of theoretical understanding of the nature of this class — as bourgeoisie, as bureaucracy, and as nomenklatura. The article demonstrates that, regardless of the adequacy of the description of Russia’s ruling class within the paradigms of bourgeoisie and bureaucracy, in the current situation the class prefers to position itself as the heir to the Soviet nomenklatura. Such a positioning endows the Russian ruling class with a much greater historical subjectivity than it could claim if it positioned itself as bourgeoisie or bureaucracy. The catch, however, is that in reality the Soviet nomenklatura possessed a very limited historical subjectivity and needed an external “editor” (regulator). The modern Russian ruling class has inherited this trait, which caused a number of difficulties that it experienced in the ideological and axiological spheres. Therefore, one should not expect global world-building projects from this class. The maximum that it can offer to other citizens is to increase their share of rent in the form of social payments, a Far Eastern hectare, and salaries to members of the special military operation. Taking populist steps, manifested in the refusal to show off their success, could become another component of the strategy of rapprochement with ordinary citizens. An “ideology” that is being formed around such a strategy will become a design of a new social contract. Today one can only guess what such contract will be about.","PeriodicalId":51996,"journal":{"name":"Politeia-Journal of Political Theory Political Philosophy and Sociology of Politics","volume":"81 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politeia-Journal of Political Theory Political Philosophy and Sociology of Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2023-110-3-47-66","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article presents an analysis of the double problem that arises in the study of the contemporary Russian ruling class: one aspect of this problem is related to an adequate theoretical description of this class, and the other aspect concerns its self-positioning. The author considers the main paradigms of theoretical understanding of the nature of this class — as bourgeoisie, as bureaucracy, and as nomenklatura. The article demonstrates that, regardless of the adequacy of the description of Russia’s ruling class within the paradigms of bourgeoisie and bureaucracy, in the current situation the class prefers to position itself as the heir to the Soviet nomenklatura. Such a positioning endows the Russian ruling class with a much greater historical subjectivity than it could claim if it positioned itself as bourgeoisie or bureaucracy. The catch, however, is that in reality the Soviet nomenklatura possessed a very limited historical subjectivity and needed an external “editor” (regulator). The modern Russian ruling class has inherited this trait, which caused a number of difficulties that it experienced in the ideological and axiological spheres. Therefore, one should not expect global world-building projects from this class. The maximum that it can offer to other citizens is to increase their share of rent in the form of social payments, a Far Eastern hectare, and salaries to members of the special military operation. Taking populist steps, manifested in the refusal to show off their success, could become another component of the strategy of rapprochement with ordinary citizens. An “ideology” that is being formed around such a strategy will become a design of a new social contract. Today one can only guess what such contract will be about.
我们“错误的”统治阶级:对它有什么期待?
本文对当代俄罗斯统治阶级研究中出现的双重问题进行了分析:这个问题的一方面与对这个阶级的充分的理论描述有关,另一方面与它的自我定位有关。作者考虑了对这一阶级性质的理论理解的主要范式——资产阶级、官僚主义和权贵阶级。本文表明,无论在资产阶级和官僚主义范式中对俄罗斯统治阶级的描述是否恰当,在当前形势下,该阶级更倾向于将自己定位为苏联权贵阶层的继承人。这样的定位赋予了俄罗斯统治阶级更大的历史主体性,如果它将自己定位为资产阶级或官僚主义,它就无法宣称。然而,问题在于,在现实中,苏联的权责阶层拥有非常有限的历史主体性,需要一个外部的“编辑”(监管者)。现代俄罗斯统治阶级继承了这一特点,这使其在意识形态和价值论领域经历了一系列困难。因此,人们不应该期望从这门课中获得全球性的世界建设项目。它能向其他公民提供的最大限度是增加他们的租金份额,以社会付款的形式,一公顷远东地区,以及特别军事行动成员的工资。采取民粹主义措施(表现为拒绝炫耀自己的成功),可能成为与普通民众和解战略的另一个组成部分。围绕这种战略形成的“意识形态”将成为一种新的社会契约的设计。今天,人们只能猜测这样的合同将是关于什么的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
25.00%
发文量
20
审稿时长
48 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信