“强力之手”的终结?俄罗斯人民政治文化结盟的批判性话语分析

Q3 Social Sciences
A. Zemtsov
{"title":"“强力之手”的终结?俄罗斯人民政治文化结盟的批判性话语分析","authors":"A. Zemtsov","doi":"10.19181/socjour.2020.26.4.7645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper is dedicated to studying the subjective meanings and motivations which modern Russians attribute to the normative view on the role of the “strong hand”. It was explored as one of the key characteristics of authoritarianism in the Russian people’s political culture. The author studies its internal structure, to what extent this view is in demand, how exactly this notion is reproduced and rationalized at a discourse level. This view was investigated using critical discourse analysis, while identifying the implicit power balance based on data from semi-structured in-depth interviews with respondents from regional and district centers as well as from rural areas – these were people from the most conservative social groups (according to quantitative study findings based on data from the “Levada-Center”). Upon investigation it turns out that the “strong hand” discourse structure is extremely contradictory and heterogeneous. On one hand, at an abstract value level, it is very popular and continuously being reproduced. The “strong hand” consists of seven essential elements, subjective meanings: “continuity”, “order”, “rigidity”, “no alternative”, “personification”, “anti-establishment”, “folk character”. On the other hand, at a personal level, such an orientation can lose a significant amount of its potency when the context is broadened, supplemented with institutional alternatives etc. However stable alternatives do not seem to be appearing in the field of discourse.\nThe author concludes that the demand for a strong hand is not an effect of a “special” political culture, but rather a combination of many factors: preserving the authoritarian regime’s institutions, citizens` rational strategies for adapting to them, a failed democratic transition, the painful reforms of the 1990’s, the intentional exploitation of this orientation by the political elite, etc. However, there are reasons to assume that this authoritarian orientation is in a severe state of crisis. It has no effect on the political regime’s legitimization for which the “strong hand” is the most important symbolic resource.","PeriodicalId":35261,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The end of the “Strong Hand”? Critical Discourse-Analysis of the Alignment in the Political Culture of the Russian People\",\"authors\":\"A. Zemtsov\",\"doi\":\"10.19181/socjour.2020.26.4.7645\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper is dedicated to studying the subjective meanings and motivations which modern Russians attribute to the normative view on the role of the “strong hand”. It was explored as one of the key characteristics of authoritarianism in the Russian people’s political culture. The author studies its internal structure, to what extent this view is in demand, how exactly this notion is reproduced and rationalized at a discourse level. This view was investigated using critical discourse analysis, while identifying the implicit power balance based on data from semi-structured in-depth interviews with respondents from regional and district centers as well as from rural areas – these were people from the most conservative social groups (according to quantitative study findings based on data from the “Levada-Center”). Upon investigation it turns out that the “strong hand” discourse structure is extremely contradictory and heterogeneous. On one hand, at an abstract value level, it is very popular and continuously being reproduced. The “strong hand” consists of seven essential elements, subjective meanings: “continuity”, “order”, “rigidity”, “no alternative”, “personification”, “anti-establishment”, “folk character”. On the other hand, at a personal level, such an orientation can lose a significant amount of its potency when the context is broadened, supplemented with institutional alternatives etc. However stable alternatives do not seem to be appearing in the field of discourse.\\nThe author concludes that the demand for a strong hand is not an effect of a “special” political culture, but rather a combination of many factors: preserving the authoritarian regime’s institutions, citizens` rational strategies for adapting to them, a failed democratic transition, the painful reforms of the 1990’s, the intentional exploitation of this orientation by the political elite, etc. However, there are reasons to assume that this authoritarian orientation is in a severe state of crisis. It has no effect on the political regime’s legitimization for which the “strong hand” is the most important symbolic resource.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35261,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2020.26.4.7645\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2020.26.4.7645","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文致力于研究现代俄罗斯人对“强者”角色的规范观所赋予的主观意义和动机。它被认为是俄罗斯人民政治文化中威权主义的主要特征之一。作者研究了它的内部结构,在多大程度上需要这种观点,以及在话语层面上如何准确地再现和合理化这一概念。这一观点是使用批判性话语分析进行调查的,同时根据对来自地区和地区中心以及农村地区的受访者进行的半结构化深入采访的数据来确定隐性权力平衡——这些人来自最保守的社会群体(根据基于“Levada中心”数据的定量研究结果)。研究发现,“强有力的手”话语结构是极其矛盾和异质的。一方面,在抽象的价值层面上,它非常受欢迎,并不断被复制。“强有力的手”由七个基本要素组成,主观含义是:“连续性”、“秩序”、“刚性”、“别无选择”、“人格化”、“反建制”、“民间性”。另一方面,在个人层面上,当背景扩大,并辅以制度替代方案等时,这种取向可能会失去很大的效力。然而,稳定的替代方案似乎没有出现在话语领域。作者得出的结论是,对强有力的手的需求不是“特殊”政治文化的影响,而是多种因素的结合:维护威权政权的制度、公民适应这些制度的理性战略、失败的民主过渡、20世纪90年代痛苦的改革、政治精英有意利用这种取向、,然而,有理由认为这种威权主义取向正处于严重的危机状态。它对政治政权的合法化没有影响,而“强有力的手”是政治政权最重要的象征资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The end of the “Strong Hand”? Critical Discourse-Analysis of the Alignment in the Political Culture of the Russian People
This paper is dedicated to studying the subjective meanings and motivations which modern Russians attribute to the normative view on the role of the “strong hand”. It was explored as one of the key characteristics of authoritarianism in the Russian people’s political culture. The author studies its internal structure, to what extent this view is in demand, how exactly this notion is reproduced and rationalized at a discourse level. This view was investigated using critical discourse analysis, while identifying the implicit power balance based on data from semi-structured in-depth interviews with respondents from regional and district centers as well as from rural areas – these were people from the most conservative social groups (according to quantitative study findings based on data from the “Levada-Center”). Upon investigation it turns out that the “strong hand” discourse structure is extremely contradictory and heterogeneous. On one hand, at an abstract value level, it is very popular and continuously being reproduced. The “strong hand” consists of seven essential elements, subjective meanings: “continuity”, “order”, “rigidity”, “no alternative”, “personification”, “anti-establishment”, “folk character”. On the other hand, at a personal level, such an orientation can lose a significant amount of its potency when the context is broadened, supplemented with institutional alternatives etc. However stable alternatives do not seem to be appearing in the field of discourse. The author concludes that the demand for a strong hand is not an effect of a “special” political culture, but rather a combination of many factors: preserving the authoritarian regime’s institutions, citizens` rational strategies for adapting to them, a failed democratic transition, the painful reforms of the 1990’s, the intentional exploitation of this orientation by the political elite, etc. However, there are reasons to assume that this authoritarian orientation is in a severe state of crisis. It has no effect on the political regime’s legitimization for which the “strong hand” is the most important symbolic resource.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal
Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
37 weeks
期刊介绍: “Sotsiologicheskij Zhurnal” publishes the articles on sociological disciplines. Interdisciplinary studies in sociology and related disciplines, such as social psychology, cultural studies, anthropology, ethnography, etc. — are also welcomed. The main emphasis is on the fundamental research in the field of theory, methodology and history of sociology. The regular rubric highlights the results of mass surveys and case studies. The rubric “Discussion”, which debated the controversial issues of sociological research, is regular as well. The journal publishes book reviews, and summaries, as well as lists of new books in Russian and English, which represent the main areas of interdisciplinary research in the social sciences. The journal aims to not only play samples of knowledge, considered regulatory and standards of internal expertise in the professional community, but also aims for opportunities to improve them. These rules, a tough selection and decision to print only a small portion of incoming materials allow “Sotsiologicheskij Zhurnal” contribute to improving the quality of sociological research. Submitted manuscripts should show a high integrity in problem setting, problem analysis and correspond to the journal’s thematic profile and its scientific priorities.
×
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