Democracy Revised: Democratic Imaginary and Emerging Autocracy in Post-Soviet Russia

IF 2.3 2区 文学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Yulia Prozorova
{"title":"Democracy Revised: Democratic Imaginary and Emerging Autocracy in Post-Soviet Russia","authors":"Yulia Prozorova","doi":"10.1177/00027642241267937","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Contemporary autocracies often maintain a connection with democracy. They do not entirely dismantle the democratic structures established within unfinished modernization projects. Instead, they emerge as “electoral autocracies” and manipulate the concept of democracy offering alternative interpretations and meanings to further their illiberal agenda. The paper delves into the revision of democracy and how the democratic imaginary is utilized in the context of emerging autocracy in post-Soviet Russia. While the post-Soviet Russian autocracy adjusted democratic institutions for its own objectives, it also intended to appropriate the concept of democracy at the semantic and symbolic levels. The rise of Putin’s autocracy is characterized by the radicalization of cultural-civilizational particularism endorsing anti-democratic illiberal arguments. Through this adaptable hermeneutic framework, the Russian authorities tend to relativize the concept of democracy, criticizing, and dismissing the relevance of liberal democracy. Simultaneously, they articulate a distinct “sovereign” version of democracy and claim that non-liberal regimes are legitimate forms of political modernity. The autocratic political discourse on democracy is intrinsically non-democratic, as the lack of intellectual autonomy, control, and closure of discourse constrain the scope of meaning. The resulting heteronomous conception of democracy presents a static and ahistorical society predestined to (re)produce a single pro-authoritarian cultural-political pattern.","PeriodicalId":48360,"journal":{"name":"American Behavioral Scientist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Behavioral Scientist","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642241267937","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Contemporary autocracies often maintain a connection with democracy. They do not entirely dismantle the democratic structures established within unfinished modernization projects. Instead, they emerge as “electoral autocracies” and manipulate the concept of democracy offering alternative interpretations and meanings to further their illiberal agenda. The paper delves into the revision of democracy and how the democratic imaginary is utilized in the context of emerging autocracy in post-Soviet Russia. While the post-Soviet Russian autocracy adjusted democratic institutions for its own objectives, it also intended to appropriate the concept of democracy at the semantic and symbolic levels. The rise of Putin’s autocracy is characterized by the radicalization of cultural-civilizational particularism endorsing anti-democratic illiberal arguments. Through this adaptable hermeneutic framework, the Russian authorities tend to relativize the concept of democracy, criticizing, and dismissing the relevance of liberal democracy. Simultaneously, they articulate a distinct “sovereign” version of democracy and claim that non-liberal regimes are legitimate forms of political modernity. The autocratic political discourse on democracy is intrinsically non-democratic, as the lack of intellectual autonomy, control, and closure of discourse constrain the scope of meaning. The resulting heteronomous conception of democracy presents a static and ahistorical society predestined to (re)produce a single pro-authoritarian cultural-political pattern.
民主修订版:后苏联俄罗斯的民主想象与新兴专制制度
当代专制国家往往与民主保持联系。它们并没有完全摧毁在未完成的现代化项目中建立起来的民主结构。相反,它们以 "选举型专制国家 "的面目出现,并操纵民主的概念,提供不同的解释和含义,以推进其不自由的议程。本文深入探讨了民主的修正以及民主想象如何在后苏联俄罗斯新兴专制背景下被利用。苏联解体后的俄罗斯专制国家在调整民主制度以实现自身目标的同时,也有意在语义和象征层面上对民主概念进行挪用。普京专制主义的崛起以文化-文明特殊主义的激进化为特征,赞同反民主的非自由论点。通过这一适应性强的诠释学框架,俄罗斯当局倾向于将民主概念相对化,批评和否定自由民主的相关性。与此同时,他们阐述了一种独特的 "主权 "民主,并声称非自由主义政权是政治现代性的合法形式。关于民主的专制政治话语本质上是非民主的,因为缺乏思想自主、控制和话语封闭限制了意义的范围。由此产生的异质性民主概念呈现出一个静态的、非历史性的社会,注定要(重新)产生单一的亲专制文化政治模式。
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
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
190
期刊介绍: American Behavioral Scientist has been a valuable source of information for scholars, researchers, professionals, and students, providing in-depth perspectives on intriguing contemporary topics throughout the social and behavioral sciences. Each issue offers comprehensive analysis of a single topic, examining such important and diverse arenas as sociology, international and U.S. politics, behavioral sciences, communication and media, economics, education, ethnic and racial studies, terrorism, and public service. The journal"s interdisciplinary approach stimulates creativity and occasionally, controversy within the emerging frontiers of the social sciences, exploring the critical issues that affect our world and challenge our thinking.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信